From soltakss at yahoo.com Sun Oct 1 08:17:51 2006 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (Simon Phipp) Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2006 23:17:51 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Introduction: What do you do with a newbie group In-Reply-To: <20060930061814.BF55AC9F647@mini.thinbits.net> Message-ID: <20060930221751.82865.qmail@web51006.mail.yahoo.com> > Which leads me to where I am now; Trying to make an introductory adventure that > will allow people to learn the RQ system and not be overwhelmed. So far I have the > following ideas. > > 1) Pre-Gen Characters. This is a one-shot, and will be more like a tournament. Pre > Gen characters will give me a better control over the game. And you don't spend half the session rolling up characters. > SO ? the question to people here is, what rules would people recommend or NOT > recommend for a newbie RQ group? What variants of rules do you think make > things easier? (Especially in the realm of fatigue or magic). What things do you > think would be particularly fun/useful to do with (or to) a newbie RQ group. Keep it simple and keep it quick. Don't get bogged down in rules or combats. Don't have too many opponents in a battle. Start off with half as many opponents as PCs, that makes it quick. Don't bother with NPC magic, unless you want to show off a spell. Any encounter should take between 5 and 10 minitues to run, any longer and they'll feel lost. Mix things up, have a cross-country chase where they have to ride, jump, climb and even swim. Give them things to spot or listen to. Let them track. Make it quick and exciting. Don't bother with complex plots or detective stories. If you're starting in a slave pen, give them something to do rather than just escape. Let them rescue someone who has been taken away by the slavers. They can break out of their ropes (STR vs STR), break out of the cage (Pick Locks/Devise), overpower the guards (unarmed combat), climb a fence (climb), jump over a ditch (jump), cast a spell at someone (POW vs POW), find where their companion is (track), fight the slavers (combat) and so on. Give them targets and things they need to do, but let them work out how to do it. Don't introduce too much of the setting to them. If you're playing in Glorantha, don't bother with cults, descriptions of the towns, who Lunars are and so on. Let that come later on if they are interested in playing again. Keep it very generic. If they ask why the soldier is carrying a scimitar not a sword, tell them they are Lunars and Lunars carry scimitars, but don't elaborate. > Well ? that's a lot to write to start out with. It tells you where I am coming from so > future posts might make more sense. Good luck with it and let us know how you got on. > I also have a couple more general RQ rules questions, but I will save those for later. Ask away - we haven't anything better to do :-) See Ya Simon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20060930/91d11dce/attachment.html From gianni at basicrps.com Sun Oct 1 08:47:31 2006 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 00:47:31 +0200 Subject: [Rq-rules] Introduction: What do you do with a newbie group Message-ID: <20060930224811.A2054CA614C@mini.thinbits.net> Hi > Which leads me to where I am now; Trying to make an introductory adventure > that will allow people to learn the RQ system and not be overwhelmed. Actually I'd advise you to use Mongoose RuneQuest -- my experience is that newbies like in-print games more than they do out-of-print games. You may download the MRQ SRD and free scenarios (in _Signs & Portents_, Mongoose's on-line house magazine) from Mongoose's web-site at mongoosepublishing.com. Gianni (a fan of RQII myself) From tiggermb at verizon.net Mon Oct 2 07:25:57 2006 From: tiggermb at verizon.net (tiggermb at verizon.net) Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 16:25:57 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] Re Introduction: What do you do with a newbie group Message-ID: <7545955.6346931159737957698.JavaMail.root@vms076.mailsrvcs.net> ---------- Peter Maranci wrote------------------------ It's on my website - pre-gens, maps, the works - at http://www.runequest.org/tkam.htm . Or you can download the whole thing zipped into a single package from http://www.runequest.org/tkam.zip . -------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks Peter!. I have visited your site recently ? when you do a google search for Runequest sites yours is one of the first to come up! . It might have even been where I first found out about the list. I will check out your introductory adventure, and give see if it gives me any ideas on introducing people to runequest. -----------------------------Simon Phillip Wrote-------------------- If you're starting in a slave pen, give them something to do rather than just escape. Let them rescue someone who has been taken away by the slavers. They can break out of their ropes (STR vs STR), break out of the cage (Pick Locks/Devise), overpower the guards (unarmed combat), climb a fence (climb), jump over a ditch (jump), cast a spell at someone (POW vs POW), find where their companion is (track), fight the slavers (combat) and so on. Give them targets and things they need to do, but let them work out how to do it. ------------------------------------------------------------------ You?ve been reading my game notes haven?t you? I?m starting out with 4 players, but with six Pre-Gen PC?s to choose from. One of the unchosen PC characters will become an NPC that will eventually fall into the slavers hands and need a bit of rescuing. While I have the RQ basic set I have not had any of the expansions, so my Glorantha knowledge is non-existent. I have set my RQ games in my own world setting, From tiggermb at verizon.net Mon Oct 2 07:39:44 2006 From: tiggermb at verizon.net (tiggermb at verizon.net) Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 16:39:44 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ III Supplements Message-ID: <28369570.6349211159738784885.JavaMail.root@vms076.mailsrvcs.net> Should my introduction of RQ to my D+D group prove sucessful I was thinking about the future. The times I have played RQ, we have always played it in our own settings,not in Glorantha. Most of the supplements have seemed to be very Glorantha oriented, but I have never looked at the supplements themselves. So I have a couple of questionds for the more knowledgeable. Did any of the RQ III supplements expand on the magic system or on the numder of spells in the Deluxe box set? Was there any supplements that people feel are essential, even if you are running non-Glorantha adventures? I know the sets are out of print, but I see lots of old gaming stuff on ebay that sell for a reasonable amount These topics have most likely been discussed before, but now you can rehash it all over again for my benefit! (I have been on a number of mailing lists, so I know what happens when a new person joins and starts asking questions that have dominated the list in the past!) MB From tiggermb at verizon.net Mon Oct 2 07:40:05 2006 From: tiggermb at verizon.net (tiggermb at verizon.net) Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 16:40:05 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ III Supplements Message-ID: <30929553.6349301159738805910.JavaMail.root@vms076.mailsrvcs.net> Should my introduction of RQ to my D+D group prove sucessful I was thinking about the future. The times I have played RQ, we have always played it in our own settings,not in Glorantha. Most of the supplements have seemed to be very Glorantha oriented, but I have never looked at the supplements themselves. So I have a couple of questionds for the more knowledgeable. Did any of the RQ III supplements expand on the magic system or on the numder of spells in the Deluxe box set? Was there any supplements that people feel are essential, even if you are running non-Glorantha adventures? I know the sets are out of print, but I see lots of old gaming stuff on ebay that sell for a reasonable amount These topics have most likely been discussed before, but now you can rehash it all over again for my benefit! (I have been on a number of mailing lists, so I know what happens when a new person joins and starts asking questions that have dominated the list in the past!) MB From jurrubin at gmail.com Mon Oct 2 09:02:25 2006 From: jurrubin at gmail.com (David Smart) Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2006 18:02:25 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ III Supplements In-Reply-To: <28369570.6349211159738784885.JavaMail.root@vms076.mailsrvcs.net> References: <28369570.6349211159738784885.JavaMail.root@vms076.mailsrvcs.net> Message-ID: <1c92296e0610011602g437bb807m1cb5e6eb5c31c3a2@mail.gmail.com> In response to your first question, "yes, lots". Right of the top of my head, the big ones I use are "Gods of Glorantha", "Elder Secrets", and "Land of Ninja". Oh, and "Vikings". For information to use in non-Gloranthan campaigns, the Alternate Earth-related boxed supplements work well. The best ones, IMO, are "Land of the Ninja" and "Griffin Island", with "Vikings" running a close third. My current campaign uses spells and background elements of all the supplements I've mentioned and has for years (I've run it multiple times over the last two decades). I've also gleaned spells from various old Dragon magazine issues, in addition to all the RQ published supplements and the websites of other RQ fans, compiling quite a list. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061001/37f5ddfe/attachment.html From leonbk at yahoo.com Mon Oct 2 09:04:18 2006 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2006 16:04:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ III Supplements In-Reply-To: <30929553.6349301159738805910.JavaMail.root@vms076.mailsrvcs.net> Message-ID: <20061001230418.76041.qmail@web31210.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Take a look here. http://www.godlearner.d2g.com/main.asp Leon --- tiggermb at verizon.net wrote: > Should my introduction of RQ to my D+D group prove > sucessful I was thinking about the future. > > The times I have played RQ, we have always played it > in our own settings,not in Glorantha. Most of the > supplements have seemed to be very Glorantha > oriented, but I have never looked at the supplements > themselves. So I have a couple of questionds for the > more knowledgeable. > > Did any of the RQ III supplements expand on the > magic system or on the numder of spells in the > Deluxe box set? > > Was there any supplements that people feel are > essential, even if you are running non-Glorantha > adventures? > > I know the sets are out of print, but I see lots of > old gaming stuff on ebay that sell for a reasonable > amount > > These topics have most likely been discussed before, > but now you can rehash it all over again for my > benefit! (I have been on a number of mailing lists, > so I know what happens when a new person joins and > starts asking questions that have dominated the list > in the past!) > > MB > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From postmaster at runequest.za.org Mon Oct 2 17:29:38 2006 From: postmaster at runequest.za.org (postmaster at runequest.za.org) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 09:29:38 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [Rq-rules] Re Introduction: What do you do with a newbie group In-Reply-To: <7545955.6346931159737957698.JavaMail.root@vms076.mailsrvcs.net> References: <7545955.6346931159737957698.JavaMail.root@vms076.mailsrvcs.net> Message-ID: <65040.196.8.104.31.1159774178.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> Hi MB, welcome. My advice for that sort of start would be to make sure the characters understand the grapple rules. Perhaps once they survive a few rounds they can obtain additional equipment liek in Conan The Barbarina movie when he is in the fighting pit. I also wrote a nasty little hack and slash which features a bit of this style of setting, maybe it may give you some ideas. http://www.runequest.za.org/article/articleview/124/1/35/ Re magic, hey, Divine is actually the easiest, give the lads some one off spells as if they were initiates, like heal wounds etc, or alternatly have a friendly ally available who just happens to be good at first aid plus have a few heal type spel;ls up his sleeve. Hope this helps Tony > ---------- Peter Maranci wrote------------------------ > It's on my website - pre-gens, maps, the works - at > http://www.runequest.org/tkam.htm . Or you can download the whole thing > zipped into a single package from http://www.runequest.org/tkam.zip . > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > Thanks Peter!. I have visited your site recently ? when you do a google > search for Runequest sites yours is one of the first to come up! . It > might have even been where I first found out about the list. I will check > out your introductory adventure, and give see if it gives me any ideas on > introducing people to runequest. > > -----------------------------Simon Phillip Wrote-------------------- > If you're starting in a slave pen, give them something to do rather than > just escape. Let them rescue someone who has been taken away by the > slavers. They can break out of their ropes (STR vs STR), break out of the > cage (Pick Locks/Devise), overpower the guards (unarmed combat), climb a > fence (climb), jump over a ditch (jump), cast a spell at someone (POW vs > POW), find where their companion is (track), fight the slavers (combat) > and so on. Give them targets and things they need to do, but let them work > out how to do it. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > You?ve been reading my game notes haven?t you? I?m starting out with 4 > players, but with six Pre-Gen PC?s to choose from. One of the unchosen PC > characters will become an NPC that will eventually fall into the slavers > hands and need a bit of rescuing. While I have the RQ basic set I have not > had any of the expansions, so my Glorantha knowledge is non-existent. I > have set my RQ games in my own world setting, > > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From postmaster at runequest.za.org Mon Oct 2 17:34:21 2006 From: postmaster at runequest.za.org (postmaster at runequest.za.org) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 09:34:21 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ III Supplements In-Reply-To: <28369570.6349211159738784885.JavaMail.root@vms076.mailsrvcs.net> References: <28369570.6349211159738784885.JavaMail.root@vms076.mailsrvcs.net> Message-ID: <6897.196.8.104.31.1159774461.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> MB wrote: > Should my introduction of RQ to my D+D group prove sucessful I was > thinking about the future. > > The times I have played RQ, we have always played it in our own > settings,not in Glorantha. Most of the supplements have seemed to be very > Glorantha oriented, but I have never looked at the supplements themselves. > So I have a couple of questionds for the more knowledgeable. > > Did any of the RQ III supplements expand on the magic system or on the > numder of spells in the Deluxe box set? > > Was there any supplements that people feel are essential, even if you are > running non-Glorantha adventures? > > I know the sets are out of print, but I see lots of old gaming stuff on > ebay that sell for a reasonable amount > > These topics have most likely been discussed before, but now you can > rehash it all over again for my benefit! (I have been on a number of > mailing lists, so I know what happens when a new person joins and starts > asking questions that have dominated the list in the past!) > You are opening a can of worms here as everyone is likley to have their own opinion. IMO the Vikings box had use, extra spells etc. Glorantha bestiary is good because it has plenty extra beasties. For spells (Divine) you can't go wrong with Gods of Glorantha. Otherwise in terms of speels look up Leon's spell database (he uses a funny port so peopely using work internet usually can't access it). Check in the links on my page www.runequest.za.org What else.... I enjoyed Trollpack and Shadows on the borderland was a pretty good set of adventures. Hope this helps Tony From postmaster at runequest.za.org Mon Oct 2 17:48:30 2006 From: postmaster at runequest.za.org (postmaster at runequest.za.org) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 09:48:30 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ III Supplements In-Reply-To: <1c92296e0610011602g437bb807m1cb5e6eb5c31c3a2@mail.gmail.com> References: <28369570.6349211159738784885.JavaMail.root@vms076.mailsrvcs.net> <1c92296e0610011602g437bb807m1cb5e6eb5c31c3a2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <25270.196.8.104.31.1159775310.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> Very true, how could I forget Griffin Island. I have never played my Land of Ninja Box but from all the recent talk I hear it is really good. Also try the modules Snakepipe Hollow, Haunted Ruins and Into the troll realms. Re Dragin magazines, the two with the best spells IMO were issues 129 and 172 - each had an article on RQ spells, Sorcery and Spirit respectively. Tony > In response to your first question, "yes, lots". > > Right of the top of my head, the big ones I use are "Gods of Glorantha", > "Elder Secrets", and "Land of Ninja". Oh, and "Vikings". > > For information to use in non-Gloranthan campaigns, the Alternate > Earth-related boxed supplements work well. The best ones, IMO, are "Land > of > the Ninja" and "Griffin Island", with "Vikings" running a close third. My > current campaign uses spells and background elements of all the > supplements > I've mentioned and has for years (I've run it multiple times over the last > two decades). > > I've also gleaned spells from various old Dragon magazine issues, in > addition to all the RQ published supplements and the websites of other RQ > fans, compiling quite a list. > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Mon Oct 2 17:55:57 2006 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 08:55:57 +0100 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ III Supplements In-Reply-To: <30929553.6349301159738805910.JavaMail.root@vms076.mailsrvcs.net> Message-ID: >Should my introduction of RQ to my D+D group prove sucessful I was thinking about the future. > >The times I have played RQ, we have always played it in our own settings,not in Glorantha. Most of the supplements have seemed to be very Glorantha >oriented, but I have never looked at the supplements themselves. So I have a couple of questionds for the more knowledgeable. > >Did any of the RQ III supplements expand on the magic system or on the numder of spells in the Deluxe box set? Yes - especially Gods of Glorantha, but also the non-Gloranthan Land of Ninja and Vikings. Othe r Gloranthan supplements had some additional Magic in them as well IIRC. >Was there any supplements that people feel are essential, even if you are running non-Glorantha adventures? Essential? Gods of Glorantha (it really does expand the "standard" Magic a LOT), Land of Ninja (the Ki Skills stuff is VERY useful) and arguably Griffin Island: not only is it a complete self-contained gobbet of setting but it also demonstrates various aspects of the game that might otherwise be a bit obscure. It sets out what high powered Sorcerer's are like rather well for example. I ran RQIII for many years with the five Games Workshop hardbacks, which was effectively the AH Deluxe Boxed set, Grifffin island and Land of Ninja (plus some stuff from Monster Coliseum, but that's not essential I'd say). The rest are nice to have but really not essential. Shadow on the Borderlands has three cracking scenarios that can relatively easily b e transplanted OUT of Glorantha, River of Cradles or Sun County would require more work but it's doable. The other AH Glorantha boxes are IMO very Glorantha-centric, so whilst there's usable stuff in all of them it's a diminishing return. The gateway stuff (Daughters of Darkness and Eldarad) are pretty dire, but Eldarad is really no worse than an amateurs house notes on their version of Pavis and the Rubble so can be cannibalised for stats etc. Daughters of Darkness is truly awful however... If you can pick up a cheap, Monster Coliseum is nice (some stuff on Chariots and Coliseums/gladiatorial games, plus lots of stats) but not essential as I said. If you can get it at a reasonable price, the Chaosium Thieves' World and Thieves' World Companion are worth it as a cracking "city on the fringe". >I know the sets are out of print, but I see lots of old gaming stuff on ebay that sell for a reasonable amount > >These topics have most likely been discussed before, but now you can rehash it all over again for my benefit! (I have been on a number of mailing >lists, so I know what happens when a new person joins and starts asking questions that have dominated the list in the past!) Don't worry about! The list does have an archive at http://www.thinbits.net/pipermail/rq-rules/ but it is the nature of mailing lists that certain topics recur - if it happens often enough, we'd make a FAQ but then would have to go the effort of maintaining it ;-) If someone remembers a previous discussion that they think is relevant I'm sure they'll post a link. In fact (since I got distracted in to ferreting about in the archive), you might find these threads of interest from 2004: http://www.thinbits.net/pipermail/rq-rules/2004-June/003948.html which subsequently morphed in to: http://www.thinbits.net/pipermail/rq-rules/2004-June/003999.html Cheers, Nick Middleton From pmj at comhem.se Tue Oct 3 03:58:12 2006 From: pmj at comhem.se (Peter Johansson) Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2006 19:58:12 +0200 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re Introduction: What do you do with a newbie group In-Reply-To: <65040.196.8.104.31.1159774178.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> References: <7545955.6346931159737957698.JavaMail.root@vms076.mailsrvcs.net> <65040.196.8.104.31.1159774178.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> Message-ID: <45215334.4060803@comhem.se> "Conan The Barbarina" - sounds kind of indecent. Sorry couldn't help myself. ;-) /Peter J postmaster at runequest.za.org wrote: > Hi MB, welcome. > > My advice for that sort of start would be to make sure the characters > understand the grapple rules. Perhaps once they survive a few rounds they > can obtain additional equipment liek in Conan The Barbarina movie when he > is in the fighting pit. I also wrote a nasty little hack and slash which > features a bit of this style of setting, maybe it may give you some ideas. > http://www.runequest.za.org/article/articleview/124/1/35/ > > Re magic, hey, Divine is actually the easiest, give the lads some one off > spells as if they were initiates, like heal wounds etc, or alternatly have > a friendly ally available who just happens to be good at first aid plus > have a few heal type spel;ls up his sleeve. > Hope this helps > Tony > > > >> ---------- Peter Maranci wrote------------------------ >> It's on my website - pre-gens, maps, the works - at >> http://www.runequest.org/tkam.htm . Or you can download the whole thing >> zipped into a single package from http://www.runequest.org/tkam.zip . >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Thanks Peter!. I have visited your site recently ? when you do a google >> search for Runequest sites yours is one of the first to come up! . It >> might have even been where I first found out about the list. I will check >> out your introductory adventure, and give see if it gives me any ideas on >> introducing people to runequest. >> >> -----------------------------Simon Phillip Wrote-------------------- >> If you're starting in a slave pen, give them something to do rather than >> just escape. Let them rescue someone who has been taken away by the >> slavers. They can break out of their ropes (STR vs STR), break out of the >> cage (Pick Locks/Devise), overpower the guards (unarmed combat), climb a >> fence (climb), jump over a ditch (jump), cast a spell at someone (POW vs >> POW), find where their companion is (track), fight the slavers (combat) >> and so on. Give them targets and things they need to do, but let them work >> out how to do it. >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> You?ve been reading my game notes haven?t you? I?m starting out with 4 >> players, but with six Pre-Gen PC?s to choose from. One of the unchosen PC >> characters will become an NPC that will eventually fall into the slavers >> hands and need a bit of rescuing. While I have the RQ basic set I have not >> had any of the expansions, so my Glorantha knowledge is non-existent. I >> have set my RQ games in my own world setting, >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> RQ-Rules mailing list >> RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >> http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > From clive.wickens at btopenworld.com Tue Oct 3 04:53:39 2006 From: clive.wickens at btopenworld.com (Clive Wickens) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 19:53:39 +0100 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ III supplements Message-ID: <000601c6e654$12eef790$acde8e56@sickboy> Re: The Eldarad supplement, it is rather pants, but not as bad as originally painted ( in my opinion ). It has a bevy of usable tombs/barrowmounds etc which could be easily transplanted into most settings, and I always rather liked the barter based economic system ( The Barter class ) a neat idea that got lost amidst much mediocrity. Daughters of Darkness on the other hand is truly dire. If you get a chance pick up a copy of the Meints Index to Glorantha, it's a sort of spotters guide to RQ products both Gloranthan and non Gloranthan, not just books but magazine articles etc etc. Doesn't cover Hero Wars, just RQ and associated stuff. Chaosium also did a number of generic products that could easily be adapted to a non Gloranthan setting. Thieves world has already been mentioned and a lot of people reckon City of Carse is quite good ( I don't own it so I couldn't comment ) Tulan of the Isles is a nice little supplement: basically a border town based around a series of small islands in the bend of a river - I rather like it. There may be others out there as well. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061002/34b5b20c/attachment.html From postmaster at runequest.za.org Tue Oct 3 16:30:51 2006 From: postmaster at runequest.za.org (postmaster at runequest.za.org) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2006 08:30:51 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [Fwd: Re: [Rq-rules] RQ III Supplements] Message-ID: <29975.196.8.104.37.1159857051.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Very true, how could I forget Griffin Island. I have never played my Land of Ninja Box but from all the recent talk I hear it is really good. Also try the modules Snakepipe Hollow, Haunted Ruins and Into the troll realms. Re Dragin magazines, the two with the best spells IMO were issues 129 and 172 - each had an article on RQ spells, Sorcery and Spirit respectively. Tony > In response to your first question, "yes, lots". > > Right of the top of my head, the big ones I use are "Gods of Glorantha", > "Elder Secrets", and "Land of Ninja". Oh, and "Vikings". > > For information to use in non-Gloranthan campaigns, the Alternate > Earth-related boxed supplements work well. The best ones, IMO, are "Land > of > the Ninja" and "Griffin Island", with "Vikings" running a close third. My > current campaign uses spells and background elements of all the > supplements > I've mentioned and has for years (I've run it multiple times over the last > two decades). > > I've also gleaned spells from various old Dragon magazine issues, in > addition to all the RQ published supplements and the websites of other RQ > fans, compiling quite a list. > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From postmaster at runequest.za.org Tue Oct 3 16:31:10 2006 From: postmaster at runequest.za.org (postmaster at runequest.za.org) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2006 08:31:10 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [Fwd: Re: [Rq-rules] RQ III Supplements] Message-ID: <30352.196.8.104.37.1159857070.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- MB wrote: > Should my introduction of RQ to my D+D group prove sucessful I was > thinking about the future. > > The times I have played RQ, we have always played it in our own > settings,not in Glorantha. Most of the supplements have seemed to be very > Glorantha oriented, but I have never looked at the supplements themselves. > So I have a couple of questionds for the more knowledgeable. > > Did any of the RQ III supplements expand on the magic system or on the > numder of spells in the Deluxe box set? > > Was there any supplements that people feel are essential, even if you are > running non-Glorantha adventures? > > I know the sets are out of print, but I see lots of old gaming stuff on > ebay that sell for a reasonable amount > > These topics have most likely been discussed before, but now you can > rehash it all over again for my benefit! (I have been on a number of > mailing lists, so I know what happens when a new person joins and starts > asking questions that have dominated the list in the past!) > You are opening a can of worms here as everyone is likley to have their own opinion. IMO the Vikings box had use, extra spells etc. Glorantha bestiary is good because it has plenty extra beasties. For spells (Divine) you can't go wrong with Gods of Glorantha. Otherwise in terms of speels look up Leon's spell database (he uses a funny port so peopely using work internet usually can't access it). Check in the links on my page www.runequest.za.org What else.... I enjoyed Trollpack and Shadows on the borderland was a pretty good set of adventures. Hope this helps Tony _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From postmaster at runequest.za.org Tue Oct 3 16:32:08 2006 From: postmaster at runequest.za.org (postmaster at runequest.za.org) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2006 08:32:08 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [Rq-rules] Re Introduction: What do you do with a newbie group In-Reply-To: <45215334.4060803@comhem.se> References: <7545955.6346931159737957698.JavaMail.root@vms076.mailsrvcs.net> <65040.196.8.104.31.1159774178.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> <45215334.4060803@comhem.se> Message-ID: <31608.196.8.104.37.1159857128.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> Ah my typing gets worse like my writing the older I get...... > "Conan The Barbarina" - sounds kind of indecent. Sorry couldn't help > myself. ;-) > > /Peter J > > From slposey at slposey.cnc.net Wed Oct 4 03:59:23 2006 From: slposey at slposey.cnc.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2006 11:59:23 -0600 (MDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] Re Introduction: What do you do with a newbie group In-Reply-To: <7545955.6346931159737957698.JavaMail.root@vms076.mailsrvcs.net> <65040.196.8.104.31.1159774178.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> <45215334.4060803@comhem.se> Message-ID: <200610031759.NAA24736@centaur.cnc.net> ---- Discussion of RuneQuest rules. wrote: I had visions of a young John Travolta in a loin cloth singing "Ba-Ba-Ba--Ba-Barbarina". (it's an old "Welcome Back Kotter" reference for you young'uns out there). Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net > Ah my typing gets worse like my writing the older I get...... > > > > "Conan The Barbarina" - sounds kind of indecent. Sorry couldn't help > > myself. ;-) > > > > /Peter J > > > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > From vikingjarl at gmail.com Wed Oct 4 04:22:49 2006 From: vikingjarl at gmail.com (Sven Lugar) Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2006 11:22:49 -0700 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re Introduction: What do you do with a newbie group In-Reply-To: <200610031759.NAA24736@centaur.cnc.net> References: <200610031759.NAA24736@centaur.cnc.net> Message-ID: <4522AA79.9030907@gmail.com> Which is an even older reference to a Beach Boys song Barbara Ann --- Ba-Ba-Bah---Bar-barian. Who is obviously makes you a young'un, LOL Sven Stephen Posey wrote: > ---- Discussion of RuneQuest rules. wrote: > > I had visions of a young John Travolta in a loin cloth singing "Ba-Ba-Ba--Ba-Barbarina". > > (it's an old "Welcome Back Kotter" reference for you young'uns out there). > > Stephen Posey > slposey at concentric.net > > >> Ah my typing gets worse like my writing the older I get...... >> >> >> >>> "Conan The Barbarina" - sounds kind of indecent. Sorry couldn't help >>> myself. ;-) >>> >>> /Peter J >>> >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> RQ-Rules mailing list >> RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >> http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061003/d2d05821/attachment.html From andyl at azaal.plus.com Wed Oct 4 05:58:14 2006 From: andyl at azaal.plus.com (Andy Leighton) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2006 20:58:14 +0100 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re Introduction: What do you do with a newbie group In-Reply-To: <4522AA79.9030907@gmail.com> References: <200610031759.NAA24736@centaur.cnc.net> <4522AA79.9030907@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20061003195814.GA23966@azaal.plus.com> On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 11:22:49AM -0700, Sven Lugar wrote: > Stephen Posey wrote: > >---- Discussion of RuneQuest rules. wrote: > > > >I had visions of a young John Travolta in a loin cloth singing > >"Ba-Ba-Ba--Ba-Barbarina". > > > >(it's an old "Welcome Back Kotter" reference for you young'uns out there). > Which is an even older reference to a Beach Boys song Barbara Ann --- > Ba-Ba-Bah---Bar-barian. Who is obviously makes you a young'un, LOL There is also Bob Calvert's The Lay Of The Surfers which is on the Lucky Leif And The Longships album. It was a concept album about an alternate USA founded by Norse explorers. The song is a Beach Boys surf music parody and is sung by fictional viking raiders - "I guess you could call us Barbarians, Bar-bar-barbarians, Bar-bar-barbarians. -- Andy Leighton => andyl at azaal.plus.com "The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials" - Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_ From soltakss at yahoo.com Sun Oct 8 05:40:26 2006 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (Simon Phipp) Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2006 20:40:26 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Rq-rules] RuneQuest Wiki... In-Reply-To: <20061003062918.090B3CBEE2F@mini.thinbits.net> Message-ID: <20061007194026.19104.qmail@web51014.mail.yahoo.com> On the Mongoose RQ Forum Tim Huntley posted the folowing message in this forum http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=22149 In another thread, canology said: Quote: We should set up an RQ Wiki! I'm a fan of wikis, so I went ahead and set one up. It's at: http://mrqwiki.pbwiki.com Feel free to use it to post your house rules, NPCs, monsters, spells, legendary abilites, whatever. I'm in the process of uploading and formatting the SRD, so it will be on there for easy reference. The site-level password is "runequest" -- this will allow you to edit pages online and add your own content. Enjoy! _________________ Tim Huntley Seraphim Guard http://www.seraphim-guard.com/ The game is FAR from up! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061007/732eba54/attachment.html From tiggermb at verizon.net Mon Oct 9 03:22:00 2006 From: tiggermb at verizon.net (tiggermb at verizon.net) Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2006 12:22:00 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] I get knocked down - but I get up again... Message-ID: <20737577.2999371160328120587.JavaMail.root@vms074.mailsrvcs.net> In the RQ III rules, there is a lot about knockbacks and being knocked down, but I cannot find nearly so much on getting back up. (maybe I have missed it, but I thought I looked pretty well) I was thinking of handling it as DEXSR + 3SR in order to get up, during which time you can do nothing else - no dodge, no attack, no parry, zip.. Did I miss something? how do others handle standing up after a knockdown? MB From slposey at concentric.net Mon Oct 9 07:08:54 2006 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2006 15:08:54 -0600 Subject: [Rq-rules] Heresy: D&D concepts in RQ? In-Reply-To: <200609291549.LAA27717@centaur.cnc.net> References: <200609291549.LAA27717@centaur.cnc.net> Message-ID: <452968E6.1060300@concentric.net> Stephen Posey wrote: > ---- Discussion of RuneQuest rules. > wrote: >> On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 17:17:30 -0600 (MDT) Stephen Posey >> wrote: >>> Out of curiosity, what is it about Eberron that you like? >>> >> I like the good level of consistant detail, the basic urban >> orientation of the human culture, and the fact that I can >> play a robot. > > I didn't realize from the descriptions I'd seen that there was > a "techno" angle to it. > >> And no, I may have seen Sandy's EPT RQ, but I don't recall >> it at this \ date. Is there a web soruce for it? > > Sure, you can pick a recent version on Tekumel.com: > > http://www.tekumel.com/gaming_unofficialrules.html > > Someone on one of the BRP related lists (sorry, I'm drawing a > blank on whom just now) recently sent me some additional > BRP-Tekumel related stuff. I'll forward all that to you > sometime soon also. Heh, it was actually David Smart, on THIS list . Sorry it took so long for me to get around to this, I've been a bit busy starting night school. Anyways, David, if you're listening: you forwarded some EPT-RQ stuff to me a couple of weeks back; can you please also forward that to Anders? Thanks! Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From anders at california.com Mon Oct 9 11:40:35 2006 From: anders at california.com (Anders Swenson) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2006 18:40:35 -0700 Subject: [Rq-rules] Heresy: D&D concepts in RQ? References: <200609291549.LAA27717@centaur.cnc.net> <452968E6.1060300@concentric.net> Message-ID: <002401c6eb43$eac43060$0902a8c0@anders04q4sqc7> Oh, that would be nice, and tell me what you would want to work on to extend the text. --Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen Posey" To: "Discussion of RuneQuest rules." Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2006 2:08 PM Subject: Re: [Rq-rules] Heresy: D&D concepts in RQ? > Stephen Posey wrote: > > ---- Discussion of RuneQuest rules. > > wrote: > >> On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 17:17:30 -0600 (MDT) Stephen Posey > >> wrote: > >>> Out of curiosity, what is it about Eberron that you like? > >>> > >> I like the good level of consistant detail, the basic urban > >> orientation of the human culture, and the fact that I can > >> play a robot. > > > > I didn't realize from the descriptions I'd seen that there was > > a "techno" angle to it. > > > >> And no, I may have seen Sandy's EPT RQ, but I don't recall > >> it at this \ date. Is there a web soruce for it? > > > > Sure, you can pick a recent version on Tekumel.com: > > > > http://www.tekumel.com/gaming_unofficialrules.html > > > > Someone on one of the BRP related lists (sorry, I'm drawing a > > blank on whom just now) recently sent me some additional > > BRP-Tekumel related stuff. I'll forward all that to you > > sometime soon also. > > Heh, it was actually David Smart, on THIS list . > > Sorry it took so long for me to get around to this, I've been a > bit busy starting night school. > > Anyways, David, if you're listening: you forwarded some EPT-RQ > stuff to me a couple of weeks back; can you please also forward > that to Anders? > > Thanks! > > Stephen Posey > slposey at concentric.net > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From jurrubin at gmail.com Tue Oct 10 02:19:10 2006 From: jurrubin at gmail.com (David Smart) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2006 11:19:10 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] I get knocked down - but I get up again... In-Reply-To: <20737577.2999371160328120587.JavaMail.root@vms074.mailsrvcs.net> References: <20737577.2999371160328120587.JavaMail.root@vms074.mailsrvcs.net> Message-ID: <1c92296e0610090919j2bb6868fmc05b9ab663b3ee8f@mail.gmail.com> That's pretty much how I handle it, though I allow someone with the Tumbling skill to get up faster depending on the level of success of the skill roll. Normal success = 2SR + DEX SR Special = 1SR + DEX SR Crit = DEX SR On 10/8/06, tiggermb at verizon.net wrote: > > In the RQ III rules, there is a lot about knockbacks and being knocked > down, but I cannot find nearly so much on getting back up. (maybe I have > missed it, but I thought I looked pretty well) > > I was thinking of handling it as DEXSR + 3SR in order to get up, during > which time you can do nothing else - no dodge, no attack, no parry, zip.. > > Did I miss something? how do others handle standing up after a knockdown? > > MB > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061009/3dcedb01/attachment.html From tcantine at incentre.net Mon Oct 9 10:05:42 2006 From: tcantine at incentre.net (Tom Cantine) Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2006 18:05:42 -0600 Subject: [Rq-rules] I get knocked down - but I get up again... In-Reply-To: <20737577.2999371160328120587.JavaMail.root@vms074.mailsrvcs.net> References: <20737577.2999371160328120587.JavaMail.root@vms074.mailsrvcs.net> Message-ID: That sounds reasonable to me. My only objection is that it feeds a hard reading of Strike Ranks as sequential units of time, which is I think is a little to easy to get trapped by. SR can represent the linear passage of time to some extent, but they also should be seen as an abstraction of net tactical advantages as well. Someone who hits on SR6 is not necessarily striking BEFORE his opponent who rolls on SR7; he just has statistical priority when calculating who gets hit that round. Generally speaking, a parry happens on whatever SR the opponent attacks; it takes no SR to parry (or dodge). Even if one is carrying out an attack that takes 9 SR, one can still parry before that. The main drawback to having a high SR is that one may not live long enough to roll the attack. (Oh, and one has less tactical flexibility.) So I propose to modify your suggestion thusly: Standing up is an action, just like an attack. (Recall that an adventurer may perform up to two actions per round.) One may attempt to parry or attack while standing up, but of course until one has actually completed standing up, one is still down and thus suffers the situational penalty -20%, and the opponent enjoys +20%. Oh, okay, I just thought of another objection: Why only the DEX SRM? Shouldn't SIZ play a role, in the sense that a bigger opponent has longer to go to get up? Also, how easy it is to get up depends on how one fell: is one prone or supine? So, how about if it takes 1d6 + DEX SRM - SIZ SRM to stand up? Or is that too complicated? On 8-Oct-06, at 11:22 AM, wrote: > In the RQ III rules, there is a lot about knockbacks and being knocked > down, but I cannot find nearly so much on getting back up. (maybe I > have missed it, but I thought I looked pretty well) > > I was thinking of handling it as DEXSR + 3SR in order to get up, > during which time you can do nothing else - no dodge, no attack, no > parry, zip.. > > Did I miss something? how do others handle standing up after a > knockdown? > > MB > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From styopa1 at gmail.com Tue Oct 10 04:25:35 2006 From: styopa1 at gmail.com (Styopa) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2006 13:25:35 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] I get knocked down - but I get up again... In-Reply-To: References: <20737577.2999371160328120587.JavaMail.root@vms074.mailsrvcs.net> Message-ID: <56e64e7a0610091125i59103e94v8dc670df611d23ff@mail.gmail.com> On 10/8/06, Tom Cantine wrote: > > Oh, okay, I just thought of another objection: Why only the DEX SRM? > Shouldn't SIZ play a role, in the sense that a bigger opponent has > longer to go to get up? Also, how easy it is to get up depends on how > one fell: is one prone or supine? So, how about if it takes 1d6 + DEX > SRM - SIZ SRM to stand up? Or is that too complicated? > > I think that's definitely arguable, but I'd go against it in terms of game speed as too complicated. It's the one penetrating flaw I've found in RQ's 'simulationist' combat system. Those of us (like myself) who are always considering details of systems can be paralyzed by adding a morass of accurate but trivial details; death by navel-contemplation, if you will. {if you want to go whole-hog, you shouldn't use simply SIZ, but also penalize people that are heavily encumbered. And if they have either a head wound or have lost more than 25% of their hp by slashing/bleeding attacks, they should have a CONx3% chance to be able to recover their feet, or go prone again from dizziness...} Or you could just bag it and say that it's just DEX SR as generally representative enough. :) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061009/10dd5cae/attachment.html From soltakss at yahoo.com Mon Oct 9 19:51:43 2006 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (Simon Phipp) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2006 10:51:43 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Rq-rules] Indlas Somer In-Reply-To: <20061009014139.568F2D02A93@mini.thinbits.net> Message-ID: <20061009095143.77770.qmail@web51006.mail.yahoo.com> Has anybody got a copy of the Indlas Somer cult writeup from Different Worlds? I want to do some odds and ends with it, but seem to have sold my copy off years ago. If someone could email me a scan to soltakss at yahoo.com I would appreciate it. Thanks See Ya Simon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061009/01d5f530/attachment.html From jurrubin at gmail.com Tue Oct 10 07:06:56 2006 From: jurrubin at gmail.com (David Smart) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2006 16:06:56 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] Heresy: D&D concepts in RQ? In-Reply-To: <002401c6eb43$eac43060$0902a8c0@anders04q4sqc7> References: <200609291549.LAA27717@centaur.cnc.net> <452968E6.1060300@concentric.net> <002401c6eb43$eac43060$0902a8c0@anders04q4sqc7> Message-ID: <1c92296e0610091406p36b0c39fi67a7c0bddfd4f2b3@mail.gmail.com> I've just dumped all the files to Anders so you two should have quite a bit to discuss. *grin* Enjoy! David On 10/8/06, Anders Swenson wrote: > > Oh, that would be nice, and tell me what you would want to work on to > extend > the text. > --Anders > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Stephen Posey" > To: "Discussion of RuneQuest rules." > Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2006 2:08 PM > Subject: Re: [Rq-rules] Heresy: D&D concepts in RQ? > > > > Stephen Posey wrote: > > > > > Heh, it was actually David Smart, on THIS list . > > > > Sorry it took so long for me to get around to this, I've been a > > bit busy starting night school. > > > > Anyways, David, if you're listening: you forwarded some EPT-RQ > > stuff to me a couple of weeks back; can you please also forward > > that to Anders? > > > > Thanks! > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061009/81af54ba/attachment.html From jurrubin at gmail.com Tue Oct 10 07:15:17 2006 From: jurrubin at gmail.com (David Smart) Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2006 16:15:17 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] I get knocked down - but I get up again... In-Reply-To: <56e64e7a0610091125i59103e94v8dc670df611d23ff@mail.gmail.com> References: <20737577.2999371160328120587.JavaMail.root@vms074.mailsrvcs.net> <56e64e7a0610091125i59103e94v8dc670df611d23ff@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1c92296e0610091415l2163d5ceybaedbe9bfbc92866@mail.gmail.com> I'm with Styopa on this. I use my previously stated method solely because it has provided what I consider to be the right balance between reality and emulation of reality. I used to play Tractics way back in the early '80s and I got more than my fill of simulating reality. In fact, I'm seriously looking at some of the rules in Mongoose's recently published rules to help streamline the chargen calculations in RQIII. So I'm on the fast track to becoming a heretic, I guess. ;-) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061009/4090c26f/attachment.html From slposey at slposey.cnc.net Tue Oct 10 07:35:59 2006 From: slposey at slposey.cnc.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2006 15:35:59 -0600 (MDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] Heresy: D&D concepts in =?UTF-8?Q?RQ=3F?= In-Reply-To: <200609291549.LAA27717@centaur.cnc.net> <452968E6.1060300@concentric.net> <002401c6eb43$eac43060$0902a8c0@anders04q4sqc7> Message-ID: <200610092135.RAA21518@alexander.cnc.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061009/9d37fced/attachment.html From postmaster at runequest.za.org Tue Oct 10 16:39:35 2006 From: postmaster at runequest.za.org (postmaster at runequest.za.org) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 08:39:35 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [Rq-rules] I get knocked down - but I get up again... In-Reply-To: <1c92296e0610090919j2bb6868fmc05b9ab663b3ee8f@mail.gmail.com> References: <20737577.2999371160328120587.JavaMail.root@vms074.mailsrvcs.net> <1c92296e0610090919j2bb6868fmc05b9ab663b3ee8f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <39755.196.8.104.37.1160462375.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> Dave Smart wrote: > That's pretty much how I handle it, though I allow someone with the > Tumbling > skill to get up faster depending on the level of success of the skill > roll. > > Normal success = 2SR + DEX SR > Special = 1SR + DEX SR > Crit = DEX SR > Tumbling 'ey? I take it thats a house rule? My group swiped acrobatics from harnmaster, but suppose its much the same thing. Only thing is now the character who wanted to do acrobatics is coming up with all these wonderful moves in combat, dunno, I am going to have to start ruling whats in and whats out. Either that or just have them fight in an open slippery area (frozen river perchance) where such moves are negated. Tony From soltakss at yahoo.com Tue Oct 10 20:13:02 2006 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (Simon Phipp) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 11:13:02 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Rq-rules] CHA vs APP (Again) In-Reply-To: <20061009213620.6548AD071B5@mini.thinbits.net> Message-ID: <20061010101302.52787.qmail@web51007.mail.yahoo.com> I watched the first episode of BBC's new Robin Hood series on Saturday and it illustrated to me the difference between CHA and APP. The new Robin Hood himself is a good-looking chap, probably APP 16 or 17, but has the charisma of a wet dishcloth, probably CHA 6-8. The way he is at the moment, I can't see a dog following him, let alone a band of merry men. So, it is the perfect example of High APP and Low CHA. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061010/ec29e387/attachment.html From jurrubin at gmail.com Tue Oct 10 21:53:59 2006 From: jurrubin at gmail.com (David Smart) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 06:53:59 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] CHA vs APP (Again) In-Reply-To: <20061010101302.52787.qmail@web51007.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20061009213620.6548AD071B5@mini.thinbits.net> <20061010101302.52787.qmail@web51007.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1c92296e0610100453m4b036ba9p511f22f1d5139fe7@mail.gmail.com> Oh. Pity, that. I had high hopes for the series and was looking forward to its making its way across the Pond. Here's hoping it improves with time. From jurrubin at gmail.com Tue Oct 10 21:57:18 2006 From: jurrubin at gmail.com (David Smart) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 06:57:18 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] I get knocked down - but I get up again... In-Reply-To: <39755.196.8.104.37.1160462375.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> References: <20737577.2999371160328120587.JavaMail.root@vms074.mailsrvcs.net> <1c92296e0610090919j2bb6868fmc05b9ab663b3ee8f@mail.gmail.com> <39755.196.8.104.37.1160462375.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> Message-ID: <1c92296e0610100457q2d15bb53r364ecf1870c940dc@mail.gmail.com> Exactly. I did look at Harn but decided to implement a more limited version, hence Tumbling. It's based more on Judo-type rolls rather than the gymnastics of Hollywood. From slposey at slposey.cnc.net Wed Oct 11 01:38:56 2006 From: slposey at slposey.cnc.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 09:38:56 -0600 (MDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] CHA vs APP (Again) In-Reply-To: <20061010101302.52787.qmail@web51007.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200610101538.LAA00423@arkroyal.cnc.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061010/93c71ef0/attachment.html From IQuinn at surewest.net Wed Oct 11 01:54:40 2006 From: IQuinn at surewest.net (Robert Hoffman) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 08:54:40 -0700 Subject: [Rq-rules] CHA vs APP (Again) In-Reply-To: <200610101538.LAA00423@arkroyal.cnc.net> Message-ID: <002b01c6ec84$68ad1690$6401a8c0@QUINNLAND> I think this aspect of CHA is all about self confidence (even the type inflated by delusional ego); someone who is passionate and driven about a personal belief system is appealing to people who want something to believe in. In history or in a campaign there are certainly times when the population has a greater need for something to believe in, but it takes that passionate orator to inspire them. .at least that's what I believe until someone tells me otherwise. =) -----Original Message----- From: rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com] On Behalf Of Stephen Posey Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 8:39 AM To: Discussion of RuneQuest rules. Subject: Re: [Rq-rules] CHA vs APP (Again) Discussion of RuneQuest rules. wrote: I watched the first episode of BBC's new Robin Hood series on Saturday and it illustrated to me the difference between CHA and APP. The new Robin Hood himself is a good-looking chap, probably APP 16 or 17, but has the charisma of a wet dishcloth, probably CHA 6-8. The way he is at the moment, I can't see a dog following him, let alone a band of merry men. So, it is the perfect example of High APP and Low CHA. Good! Your description actually reminds me of the Kevin Costner Robin Hood. Sure ol' Kev' is a good looking dude (I guess, I don't happen to swing that way myself, but the chicks seem to dig him). Nonetheless, I was hard pressed to accept the laconic and mild mannered Mr. Costner as the charismatic inspirer of men he was supposed to be portraying. I guess a stereotypical converse case (high CHA, low APP) is probably Hitler: a physically unappealing shrimp of a man who somehow inspired a whole country into doing some enormous (though mostly reprehensible) things. How much of CHA is opportunity? Saying the right things to the right people at the right time? Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061010/66018c7f/attachment.html From rog_benham at hotmail.com Wed Oct 11 03:02:23 2006 From: rog_benham at hotmail.com (Roger Benham) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 18:02:23 +0100 Subject: [Rq-rules] I get knocked down - but I get up again... In-Reply-To: <1c92296e0610100457q2d15bb53r364ecf1870c940dc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061010/5c8a7b06/attachment.html From jurrubin at gmail.com Wed Oct 11 04:05:28 2006 From: jurrubin at gmail.com (David Smart) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 13:05:28 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] I get knocked down - but I get up again... In-Reply-To: References: <1c92296e0610100457q2d15bb53r364ecf1870c940dc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1c92296e0610101105r3af128a6xa1dfca0946606819@mail.gmail.com> Absolutely. In fact, I use different styles of Martial Arts and one of them expands upon the Tumbling capabilities, replacing it completely for any character who has studied that style. In my mind, Tumbling is better versus large aggressors while Jumping works better versus small aggressors. Trying to Jump past a 10m tall giant or Tumble past a large gorp are just different synonyms for "suicide". On 10/10/06, Roger Benham wrote: > > I suppose Jump or Martial Arts could be figured in as well instead of > Tumbling? > > ------------------------------ > From: *"David Smart" * > Reply-To: *"Discussion of RuneQuest rules." * > To: *"Discussion of RuneQuest rules." * > Subject: *Re: [Rq-rules] I get knocked down - but I get up again...* > Date: *Tue, 10 Oct 2006 06:57:18 -0500* > >Exactly. I did look at Harn but decided to implement a more limited > >version, hence Tumbling. It's based more on Judo-type rolls rather > >than the gymnastics of Hollywood. > >_______________________________________________ > >RQ-Rules mailing list > >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > >http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > ------------------------------ > Hotmail is evolving - be one of the first to try out the Windows Live? > Mail Beta > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061010/86ecdddc/attachment.html From postmaster at runequest.za.org Wed Oct 11 16:35:46 2006 From: postmaster at runequest.za.org (postmaster at runequest.za.org) Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 08:35:46 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [Rq-rules] I get knocked down - but I get up again... In-Reply-To: <1c92296e0610101105r3af128a6xa1dfca0946606819@mail.gmail.com> References: <1c92296e0610100457q2d15bb53r364ecf1870c940dc@mail.gmail.com> <1c92296e0610101105r3af128a6xa1dfca0946606819@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <62733.196.8.104.37.1160548546.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> Thats my next step with the acrobat in the party. Let her meet an NPC who handles himself in a bar fiught like Jackie Chan - with all the imrpvised weapons and moves. Learn that "style" off him and open up the martial arts skill, thus leaving acrobatics skill for acrobatics and martial arts for combat. My main issue with Jump in combat sitiations is that, well most characters tend to have real shite dodge skills, so sooner or later someone comes up with :"I will jump out the way" and thais leads into a wee argument of the differences between dodge and jump which stuffs up play as someone alweays has to whip out the rules and read the two skill descriptions for all to hear. Well thats my gorup dynamic anyway.... > Absolutely. In fact, I use different styles of Martial Arts and one of > them > expands upon the Tumbling capabilities, replacing it completely for any > character who has studied that style. > > In my mind, Tumbling is better versus large aggressors while Jumping works > better versus small aggressors. Trying to Jump past a 10m tall giant or > Tumble past a large gorp are just different synonyms for "suicide". > > On 10/10/06, Roger Benham wrote: >> >> I suppose Jump or Martial Arts could be figured in as well instead of >> Tumbling? >> >> ------------------------------ >> From: *"David Smart" * >> Reply-To: *"Discussion of RuneQuest rules." * >> To: *"Discussion of RuneQuest rules." * >> Subject: *Re: [Rq-rules] I get knocked down - but I get up again...* >> Date: *Tue, 10 Oct 2006 06:57:18 -0500* >> >Exactly. I did look at Harn but decided to implement a more limited >> >version, hence Tumbling. It's based more on Judo-type rolls rather >> >than the gymnastics of Hollywood. >> >_______________________________________________ >> >RQ-Rules mailing list >> >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >> >http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> Hotmail is evolving - be one of the first to try out the Windows Live? >> Mail Beta >> _______________________________________________ >> RQ-Rules mailing list >> RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >> http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From postmaster at runequest.za.org Thu Oct 12 21:30:29 2006 From: postmaster at runequest.za.org (postmaster at runequest.za.org) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 13:30:29 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [Rq-rules] New Spell on www.runequest.za.org Message-ID: <38750.196.8.104.31.1160652629.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> Hi all I published a new spell on my site. Use it/don't use it, comments welcome. Tony Battle Blade (Battle Club) 2 Points Touch, instant, stackable, reusable War God This spell must be cast on a melee weapon and will only last so long as the caster is holding the weapon. Battle blade will make the weapon look and behave as if it were made of an immediately superior material and quality. Thus a bronze gladius of good quality would behave as if I were an iron sword of excellent quality. The weapons AP are adjusted to match the new quality for so long as the spell runs. AP lost only transfer to the weapons normal AP when the spells wears off if its original AP value was breached. Thus a bronze gladius with 10 normal AP which took on AP of 12 for the duration of the spell would: o Revert to 10 if 0, 1 or two AP were lost. o Revert to 9 if 3 AP were lost, 8 if 4 AP lost etc. Additional quality is simulated through an additional +5% to attack and parry rolls per 2 magic points spent. Superior material is simulated through an additional +1 point of damage per 2 magic points spent. From julian.lord at gmail.com Mon Oct 16 22:32:20 2006 From: julian.lord at gmail.com (Julian Lord) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 14:32:20 +0200 Subject: [Rq-rules] Finally got my copy of MRQ Message-ID: <1e842f7f0610160532p436742a1v8e81a18555ef0dbd@mail.gmail.com> I have been avoiding the MLs since the new edition of RQ was released, and I've had to wait a long time for my copy ; but I've read it now, and well. Interesting new addition to the bibliography... First of all, I was pleasantly surprised with the overall production values, disregarding the actual content that is, and turning a blind eye to the more horribly Dobyski-like illos in the Creatures section ... The paper they used is very pleasant to the touch, it's hardback, and most of all the copy editing per se (although not necessarily the rules editing) is surprisingly good : concise, simple, and elegant, the writing can appeal to teenagers and young non-College-student adults alike, yet with an elegance of expression that leaves the intelligence of the hoariest postgraduate grognard uninsulted (unless he/she studied mathematics or some other exact science of course, in which case these rules will leave him/her screaming blue neuronic murder ... ). Other things I like, and will use in my game if I do start a new one ; I like the gist of the new combat rules. The rules editing in this area is messy, occasionally appearing to be self-contradictory, and with the odd useless paragraph, and the Precise Attack rules are clearly broken --- but the basic system is a clear improvement IMO over the tedious attack/parry attack/parry of RQ3. There are some D&Disms (as was expected, really) as well as some PC game -like stuff that I'm still unsure about, but overall this area alone can justify the publication of the new edition ; all in all, I am also in balance happy with the efforts that have been made into streamlining and simplifying the game system (versus RQ3), even though it is clear from looking at the core rulebook and the online version of the RQC that the starting ToC clearly mirrored the contents of RQ2 and RQ3 a little too slavishly ; I am also glad to see no more Resistance table, even though the rules to replace it do have some dodginess about them ; and to see that Hero Points have been introduced leaving happy leg room for GMs also owning HW/HQ ; and especially I think that whoever came up with the idea of no more general Hit Points deserves some kind of award ! Character creation looks OK, but if I do start a new campaign I plan on using the keywords and the List method of HW/HQ instead, with some stuff thrown in from MRQ. IMO though, all stats for humans should have been 3D6+6 and drop the lowest die, to allow a wider range of subhuman stats for all characteristics, not just SIZ and INT. I also believe that negative damage modifiers for low STR+SIZ are a bad idea. I am also a proponent of the idea that all creatures should have natural armour, equal to the HP of their weakest limb. More House Rule stuff, then I'll get back to the rules as published ; the skill levels paradigm has not been fully analysed IMO. The natural tendency of official RQ (and other FRP RQ-like) publications has been toward greater integration of very high skills into the game system, and this new edition is no exception. However, starting skill levels continue to be defined as very low percentages, which is inconsistent with the observable numbers inflation ; and what's more, and is new to this edition, the games designer has provided rules systems whereby a failure can in fact be a success, which sort of flies in the face of the core principles of Basic roleplaying !! The last published edition of BRP, the French edition by Casus Belli some years back, enshrined OTOH a more mature (IMO) principle that some basic or professional skills, such as the ability to speak your mother tongue or your basic job skill should start in the region of 90%, and that the more important secondary skills should be in the 50-85% zone. In my house rules I will probably use the HW/HQ keyword character generation method, and double the Bonus column results for any skills gained from a keyword, so that a character with Riding from a keyword would have 2x(DEX+POW) (+ possible bonuses from other keywords, character generation points, race, etc) whilst one without Riding in a keyword would start with DEX+POW instead. Et cetera. Skill test rules are OK mainly, except of course for the "whoever rolls lowest wins" nonsense when both characters fail their test, and it is just another artefact of too low basic skill levels having been retained for this edition. Had higher initial skill levels been used instead, this messy spot rule would have been totally unnecessary, and instead the normal fumble/failure/success/critical success structure would have been perfect. Skill halving for very high skills rules : Brute Force and Swimming should be separate skills ; I'm not sure that Persistence and Resilience should be skills at all, and that some other more elegant system should have been designed instead of these D&D Saving Roll throws in disguise... The Rune Magic rules are a walking disaster though, and what I've seen of the magic rules in the RQC doesn't look hopeful either... I have to switch somewhat to a Glorantha-centric POV here, sorry about that for those of you who have given up on Glorantha, but it is however stated that these rules have been written with Glorantha in mind. Rune Magic then would be roughly equivalent to the Common Magic of HeroQuest. So far so good, but unfortunately the description on p. 62 belies this, showing instead that the power of these spells comes via Runes (basically, these are magic items) coming from the gods. Looking at the RQC though, one can see that confusion exists regarding the differences and similarities of gods and spirits. I'm not saying it was necessary to reproduce all the complexities and intricacies of the HQ magic system, in fact better not to do so ; but at least some lip service to that system would have been appreciated... No shamanism rules on the horizon, and ha! no Mysticism rules as usual, but not even a passing mention of HeroQuesting in the core book, which I find to be flabbergasting!! Anyways, arbitrarily attaching the various spells to the various Runes is dubious at best ; it goes against the natural evolution that has been observed in the various incarnations of the game away from the paraphernalia of the 1st and 2nd Edition foci ; most astonishingly though, it seems almost to have been inspired by the roughly similar approach to Runes of RuneQuest:Slayers !!! In that game too, PCs had to go out the front door and Quest for Runes, which were magical items from Beyond that granted magical powers and were the basic source of magic. The mind boggles, I guess RQ Slayers now has to be reclassified in the History of the game as a pro bono unpublished core edition of RuneQuest... >From the online edition of the RQC, Sorcery once again appears to be completely unbalanced (perhaps less so than in RQ3), and Divine Magic to have been seriously wimped down. Anyways, again the rules have been written in apparent ignorance of basic Gloranthan cosmology, so that magicians of all magic systems appear to be able to enter the "Spirit Plane" --- shouldn't this be a shamanic specialist power ??? The Runic Powers lack imagination ; I'll non-randomly pick Water as the one to comment upon -- there is no reason why the follower of the Rain God should have any bonus when swimming, the power is probably inappropriate for members of aquatic races, people living in deserts might instead need/want some other benefit, as might the elves, Water Runes found in and connected with mountain ranges or tropical rainforests might work completely differently, and especially Water Runes associated with various different Water gods might also act according to each god's nature, not just in some such generic and boring manner. It is annoying that not a single Gloranthan cult was presented in the core rulebook. Movement rules are a pet peeve of mine ; daily movement rates are just about OK (although the time to move those distances can vary from 6-12 hours, they are fairly accurate) ; OTOH the hourly movement rates are about 2/3rds to a half of what ordinary 21st century people can actually acheive, and the Minute rate is simply nonsensical. Combat Action movement though is derived from the original SCA rules, and is most certainly accurate. Legendary Abilities are not as bad as I thought they would be ; not that I would ever use them in a game of mine. HeroQuesting abilities for me, thank you very much ... My final disappointment is that there was no new nonsensical creature created for this book as a joke by Greg. Illustrations pages 114 and 122 --- bwwwah hah hah hah hah !!!! --- Having said all that, I still find it (as I may combine it with stuff from HW/HQ, more subtle magic for starters) to be a better starting point for my personal house rules than either RQ2 or RQ3 ; for although MRQ fails to recapture the full design elegance of RQ1 & 2 and also fails to match the mathematical precision of the RQ3 rules, its design failures actually make it a more customizable version to work from, as they (unintentionally?) provide a more modular basic system to work with than those of the previous, more integrated, versions of RuneQuest. Julian Lord -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061016/226335d0/attachment.html From julian.lord at gmail.com Tue Oct 17 01:14:27 2006 From: julian.lord at gmail.com (Julian Lord) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 17:14:27 +0200 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Mongoose SRD Message-ID: <1e842f7f0610160814n18e97500v48cffcec256d920e@mail.gmail.com> Lev Lafayette : > > Strike Rank is based on the average of DEX and ... > > > INT?!? Umm... WTF? Where did *that* come from? > > > > Here's what MRQ had in version 5 (and iirc in earlier > version) of their playtest rules. Much better imo.. > > Strike Rank/Close (SR/c): Take the character's DEX, > add his SIZ and divide the total by two. The result > is the character's Strike Rank ? Close modifier. > > Strike Rank/Ranged (SR/r): Strike Rank ? Ranged is > equal to the character's DEX. > > Strike Rank/Magic (SR/m): Take the character's INT, > add his POW and divide the total by two. The result > is the character's Strike Rank ? Magic modifier. In all cases the division by 2 is unnecessary mathematical paraphernalia, adding nothing to the overall gaming experience, and in fact detracting from it, and should have been scrapped IMO. Julian Lord -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061016/206d4dca/attachment.html From mason.bruce at gmail.com Tue Oct 17 01:29:36 2006 From: mason.bruce at gmail.com (Bruce Mason) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 16:29:36 +0100 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Mongoose SRD In-Reply-To: <1e842f7f0610160814n18e97500v48cffcec256d920e@mail.gmail.com> References: <1e842f7f0610160814n18e97500v48cffcec256d920e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <5f3990080610160829x24245626sd29f4d0733eaa635@mail.gmail.com> On 16/10/06, Julian Lord wrote: > > In all cases the division by 2 is unnecessary > mathematical paraphernalia, adding nothing > to the overall gaming experience, and in fact detracting from > it, and should have been scrapped IMO. Not neccessarily. It depends on the degree of randomness wanted for SRs. With dividing by 2 the potential range of SR modifiers (INT+DEX)/2 for human characters is 6 to 18 +d10. Without division it is 11-36 +d10. The former has a lower spread and, therefore, increases the influence of the random element - the d10. I must confess that I don't like the random element of the initiative determination because it is just one die roll too many for me. I wasn't involved in playtesting but looking at the proposed rules, I'm not surprised they dropped them because they fall apart the minute you think about them. If a character has 3 different strike rank modifiers then what happens if he uses a magic action for his first action and then a combat one for the next one. What about delays or changes of mind? At the very least you have to remember what the d10 roll was so that you can recalculate each time. That and consider having to write three numbers where one can do. There is a niche of roleplayer who looks that level of detail in the rules but it is only a small minority. From julian.lord at gmail.com Tue Oct 17 01:37:59 2006 From: julian.lord at gmail.com (Julian Lord) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 17:37:59 +0200 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 12, Issue 3 In-Reply-To: <20060901150504.8F94AB69D8C@mini.thinbits.net> References: <20060901150504.8F94AB69D8C@mini.thinbits.net> Message-ID: <1e842f7f0610160837l1d584a25hf2d0f4e479d5ca94@mail.gmail.com> Lev : On 9/1/06, rq-rules-request at crashbox.com wrote: > > > Perhaps RQ IV will fall into the sidelines after a few > months and we'll go back to discussing RQ II and III > rules systems. For the time being, given that it has > just been released, it is inevitable that there will > be discussion on RQ IV. Still playing catch-up, so don't know if this has been mentioned, but MRQ is actually RQ6 RQ4 was the aborted and unpublished RQ:AiG RQ5 was the aborted and unpublished RuneQuest:Slayers Ideas from both versions have, as far as I can see, made it into RQ6 Julian Lord -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061016/d7263867/attachment.html From julian.lord at gmail.com Tue Oct 17 02:04:00 2006 From: julian.lord at gmail.com (Julian Lord) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 18:04:00 +0200 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude Message-ID: <1e842f7f0610160904l59934e7he4b15b3fa1c52677@mail.gmail.com> Leon : This is something I been thinking for a while. Same here. :-) One of > the problems in RQ, since it does not have classes, is > that after a while all characters begin to be very > good in all skills. Magic Users quickly gain combat > skills and fighter types quickly gain magic skills. > > There have been several attempts to fix that. One was > to cap certain skills to DEXx5 or DEXx3 for Priests, > Shamans and Sorcerers, but this gives an unfair > advantage to characters with good stats. Another > attempt has been to limit the number of checks a > character can take after an adventure, but that does > not take training into account and penalizes > characters who are engaged in a long adventure. What I found worked best was to simply award multiple experience checks for extensively and/or dramatically used skills, so that for example a warrior who used his sword for whichever emphatic results (either quantitavely or qualitatavely) during an adventure might gain 4 or 5 experience checks for his sword skills. This I found to be enormously helpful to ensure differentiation between PCs according to their actual impact of their skills from game session to game session... Julian Lord -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061016/e96042bd/attachment.html From anders at california.com Tue Oct 17 02:14:17 2006 From: anders at california.com (Anders Swenson) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 09:14:17 -0700 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 12, Issue 3 In-Reply-To: <1e842f7f0610160837l1d584a25hf2d0f4e479d5ca94@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 17:37:59 +0200 "Julian Lord" wrote: > Still playing catch-up, so don't know if this has been mentioned, but > MRQ is actually RQ6 > > RQ4 was the aborted and unpublished RQ:AiG RQ5 was the aborted and > unpublished RuneQuest:Slayers Ideas from both versions have, as far as I > can see, made it into RQ6 > Julian Lord Now, How can I get copies of 4 and 5 for my collection? I have a sort of interest in the history of the game and it's variations. --Anders From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Tue Oct 17 02:15:13 2006 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 17:15:13 +0100 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Mongoose SRD In-Reply-To: <1e842f7f0610160814n18e97500v48cffcec256d920e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: >>> Strike Rank is based on the average of DEX and ... >>> INT?!? Umm... WTF? Where did *that* come from? >> > >Here's what MRQ had in version 5 (and iirc in earlier >version) of their playtest rules. Much better imo.. > >Strike Rank/Close (SR/c):??Take the character's DEX, >add his SIZ and divide the total by two.??The result >is the character's Strike Rank ? Close modifier. > >Strike Rank/Ranged (SR/r):??Strike Rank ? Ranged is >equal to the character's DEX. > >Strike Rank/Magic (SR/m):??Take the character's INT, >add his POW and divide the total by two.??The result >is the character's Strike Rank ? Magic modifier. > >In?all?cases?the?division?by?2?is?unnecessary?mathematical?paraphernalia,?adding?nothing?to?the?overall gaming?experience,?and >in?fact?detracting?from?it,?and?should?have?been?scrapped?IMO. I disagree - it seemed important to me, as it put all three types of action on to the same scale. Removing the division would have automatically made ranged weapons MUCH faster than either close melee attacks or magic. And leaving aside the magic issue, it would jar with many to have a swordsman ALWAYS slower than a Bowman (because trust me, it takes time to draw and loose, even if you have the arrow knocked)... One could of course have doubled the DEX for Ranged and dropped the halving in the other two categories, or added another characteristic to Ranged (INT perhaps) and so also avoided the halving... But the basic principle (that all three types of action should be on the same scale) seemed basically sound... albeit why EVERYTHING couldn't just be timed via DEX (with differing penalties for specific actions / 'technologies') eluded me: but then, that rather sums up the entire open playtest for MRQ really... Cheers, Nick Middleton From julian.lord at gmail.com Tue Oct 17 02:33:54 2006 From: julian.lord at gmail.com (Julian Lord) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 18:33:54 +0200 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 12, Issue 37 In-Reply-To: <20060914101059.18EE8BE6D00@mini.thinbits.net> References: <20060914101059.18EE8BE6D00@mini.thinbits.net> Message-ID: <1e842f7f0610160933m33cdf39am3adb926747840de3@mail.gmail.com> Anders : you all remember that RayQuest > is the highly variant RQ developed by RQ creator Ray Turney for our local > campaign There used to be a public version of RayQuest, few years back, and although I would never play it as a GM, I'd just LOVE to be a player in a RayQuest campaign LOL Julian Lord -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061016/fb7027d9/attachment.html From styopa1 at gmail.com Tue Oct 17 02:40:04 2006 From: styopa1 at gmail.com (Styopa) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 11:40:04 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Mongoose SRD In-Reply-To: <5f3990080610160829x24245626sd29f4d0733eaa635@mail.gmail.com> References: <1e842f7f0610160814n18e97500v48cffcec256d920e@mail.gmail.com> <5f3990080610160829x24245626sd29f4d0733eaa635@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <56e64e7a0610160940u7e8c92fw637d5d8aaa1dc8fb@mail.gmail.com> Actually, I use something similar in my game and it works really well. I have 3 SR ratings: Reach, Quickness, Reaction Reach: SIZ/10 (round 5's down). Quickness: DEX/6 (round 3's down). Reaction: 8 minus (average of Int & Dex, divided by 6) And 2 values for each weapon, reflecting length & speed Init is d20 + Reach + weapon length. Highest goes first (yes, this tends to mean that people with weapons tend to react quicker; personally, I like this) People with quick weapons generally want to close, which then means both combatants substitute quickness for reach, and weapon speed for length. (Essentially, attackers can declare a 'closing' action, giving the defender an automatic 1 category improvement on their attack roll (misses become hits, etc.); defenders can declare 'fending' which REDUCES the category of their hit by 1, and keeps the fighting at 'reach' as long as they can step back one hex. More to it, but that's the simple version.) Want to change an action from what you declared? Declare your new action, and subtract (reaction + 1d6) from your current init. That's your new init. If it's <0, you don't act this round. I use rolling rounds, so you can change your action for free for the next round, or continue and act immediately on 20+(your negative init number). I've even toyed with using different initiative dice (d20's out in the open, and going lower as the space is more constricted, d12 in a tavern, for example, d8 in a tight little cave where there's very little moving about). The players seemed to like it. Init became more important than luck, so (in the couple of times we've done it) seen more 'closing' in tight little fights. And yes, this also means that spells tend to go off near the ends of rounds, which both fits mine and my players' expectations. I have a whiteboard behind me when I DM, so it's an easy matter to keep track of: statement of intent order (reverse by INT) inits for everyone (I don't usually put up the enemy's however) YMMV of course. On 10/16/06, Bruce Mason wrote: > > I wasn't involved in playtesting but looking at the proposed rules, > I'm not surprised they dropped them because they fall apart the minute > you think about them. If a character has 3 different strike rank > modifiers then what happens if he uses a magic action for his first > action and then a combat one for the next one. What about delays or > changes of mind? At the very least you have to remember what the d10 > roll was so that you can recalculate each time. That and consider > having to write three numbers where one can do. There is a niche of > roleplayer who looks that level of detail in the rules but it is only > a small minority. > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061016/0411d753/attachment.html From anders at california.com Tue Oct 17 03:05:03 2006 From: anders at california.com (Anders Swenson) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 10:05:03 -0700 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Mongoose SRD In-Reply-To: <56e64e7a0610160940u7e8c92fw637d5d8aaa1dc8fb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 11:40:04 -0500 In RayQuest, we have 4 phases per round: Missile Movement Melee Magic. Actions are pretty much simultanious within those catetories, unless one has a duelist's weapon which always strikes first. And fights still take forever. --Anders From lorgryt at comcast.net Tue Oct 17 03:42:53 2006 From: lorgryt at comcast.net (Bo Whitten) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 10:42:53 -0700 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 12, Issue 37 In-Reply-To: <1e842f7f0610160933m33cdf39am3adb926747840de3@mail.gmail.co m> References: <20060914101059.18EE8BE6D00@mini.thinbits.net> <1e842f7f0610160933m33cdf39am3adb926747840de3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20061016104152.01d2d820@comcast.net> At 09:33 AM 10/16/2006, you wrote: >Anders : > >you all remember that RayQuest >is the highly variant RQ developed by RQ creator Ray Turney for our local >campaign > > >There used to be a public version of RayQuest, few years back, and although I would never play it as a GM, I'd just LOVE to be a player in a RayQuest campaign LOL > >Julian Lord I would LOVE to see RayQuest. If anyone has an address to the public version I would love to go take a look! Lorgryt http://www.lorgryt.com/gaming/ A forum... like others... ==== If you are so Goth, where were you when we sacked Rome? From lev_lafayette at yahoo.com.au Tue Oct 17 13:35:35 2006 From: lev_lafayette at yahoo.com.au (Lev Lafayette) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 20:35:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Mongoose SRD In-Reply-To: <1e842f7f0610160814n18e97500v48cffcec256d920e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20061017033535.27096.qmail@web33510.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Julian Lord wrote: > Lev Lafayette : > > > > Strike Rank is based on the average of DEX and > ... > > > > INT?!? Umm... WTF? Where did *that* come from? > > > > > > > Here's what MRQ had in version 5 (and iirc in > earlier > > version) of their playtest rules. Much better > imo.. > > > > Strike Rank/Close (SR/c): Take the character's > DEX, > > add his SIZ and divide the total by two. The > result > > is the character's Strike Rank ? Close modifier. > > > > Strike Rank/Ranged (SR/r): Strike Rank ? Ranged > is > > equal to the character's DEX. > > > > Strike Rank/Magic (SR/m): Take the character's > INT, > > add his POW and divide the total by two. The > result > > is the character's Strike Rank ? Magic modifier. > > > In all cases the division by 2 is unnecessary > mathematical > paraphernalia, adding nothing to the overall > gaming experience, and > in fact detracting from it, and should have been > scrapped IMO. > Finding the average of INT and POW is "mathematical paraphernalia"? The reason why it makes perfect sense (and it's not that hard really), is so that other SR modifiers are on the same scale. Do you feel the same way about damage bonus as well? __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From lev_lafayette at yahoo.com.au Tue Oct 17 13:38:23 2006 From: lev_lafayette at yahoo.com.au (Lev Lafayette) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 20:38:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 12, Issue 3 In-Reply-To: <1e842f7f0610160837l1d584a25hf2d0f4e479d5ca94@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20061017033823.44323.qmail@web33514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Julian Lord wrote: > Lev : > > On 9/1/06, rq-rules-request at crashbox.com > > wrote: > > > > > > Perhaps RQ IV will fall into the sidelines after a > few > > months and we'll go back to discussing RQ II and > III > > rules systems. For the time being, given that it > has > > just been released, it is inevitable that there > will > > be discussion on RQ IV. > > > Still playing catch-up, so don't know if this has > been mentioned, but > MRQ is actually RQ6 > > RQ4 was the aborted and unpublished RQ:AiG > > RQ5 was the aborted and unpublished > RuneQuest:Slayers > > Ideas from both versions have, as far as I can see, > made it into RQ6 > RQ: AiG is unpublished and therefore doesn't get a number. Slayers had nothing to do with the game RQ and whilst it is an interesting game it is own right, has never been considered an intrinsic part of RQ discussion groups afiak. (and yes, I have read both RQ: AiG and RQ Slayers) Ergo, I'm sticking with describing Mongoose's publication as RQ IV. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From aescleal at btinternet.com Tue Oct 17 19:19:39 2006 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (Ashley Munday) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 10:19:39 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Mongoose SRD In-Reply-To: <5f3990080610160829x24245626sd29f4d0733eaa635@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20061017091939.6025.qmail@web86110.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Don't divide by 2 and add a d20 if the weight of random versus deterministic worries you. Cheers, Ash --- Bruce Mason wrote: > On 16/10/06, Julian Lord > wrote: > > > > In all cases the division by 2 is unnecessary > > mathematical paraphernalia, adding nothing > > to the overall gaming experience, and in fact > detracting from > > it, and should have been scrapped IMO. > > Not neccessarily. It depends on the degree of > randomness wanted for > SRs. With dividing by 2 the potential range of SR > modifiers > (INT+DEX)/2 for human characters is 6 to 18 +d10. > Without division it > is 11-36 +d10. The former has a lower spread and, > therefore, increases > the influence of the random element - the d10. I > must confess that I > don't like the random element of the initiative > determination because > it is just one die roll too many for me. > > I wasn't involved in playtesting but looking at the > proposed rules, > I'm not surprised they dropped them because they > fall apart the minute > you think about them. If a character has 3 different > strike rank > modifiers then what happens if he uses a magic > action for his first > action and then a combat one for the next one. What > about delays or > changes of mind? At the very least you have to > remember what the d10 > roll was so that you can recalculate each time. That > and consider > having to write three numbers where one can do. > There is a niche of > roleplayer who looks that level of detail in the > rules but it is only > a small minority. > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From pmaranci at gmail.com Tue Oct 17 22:18:07 2006 From: pmaranci at gmail.com (Peter Maranci) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 08:18:07 -0400 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 12, Issue 3 In-Reply-To: <20061017033823.44323.qmail@web33514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <1e842f7f0610160837l1d584a25hf2d0f4e479d5ca94@mail.gmail.com> <20061017033823.44323.qmail@web33514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I hate to disagree with you, Lev. But RQ:AiG had such a wide playtest distribution as RQIV that calling another system "RQIV" only leads to confusion, I think. And Mongoose RQ is arguably different enough from previous editions of RQ to be placed outside the regular numbering sequence - plus, of course, there's the question of its legal connection to the RQ rule family ("the same rules in different words"). So I'm just calling it Mongoose RQ, or MRQ. That avoids all possible confusion. I completely agree with you about RuneQuest: Slayers, though. ->Peter On 10/16/06, Lev Lafayette wrote: > > > --- Julian Lord wrote: > > > Lev : > > > > On 9/1/06, rq-rules-request at crashbox.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Perhaps RQ IV will fall into the sidelines after a > > few > > > months and we'll go back to discussing RQ II and > > III > > > rules systems. For the time being, given that it > > has > > > just been released, it is inevitable that there > > will > > > be discussion on RQ IV. > > > > > > Still playing catch-up, so don't know if this has > > been mentioned, but > > MRQ is actually RQ6 > > > > RQ4 was the aborted and unpublished RQ:AiG > > > > RQ5 was the aborted and unpublished > > RuneQuest:Slayers > > > > Ideas from both versions have, as far as I can see, > > made it into RQ6 > > > > RQ: AiG is unpublished and therefore doesn't get a > number. > > Slayers had nothing to do with the game RQ and whilst > it is an interesting game it is own right, has never > been considered an intrinsic part of RQ discussion > groups afiak. > > (and yes, I have read both RQ: AiG and RQ Slayers) > > Ergo, I'm sticking with describing Mongoose's > publication as RQ IV. > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > -- Peter Maranci - pmaranci at gmail.com Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying! http://www.runequest.org/rq.htm The Diary of An Invisible Man: http://bobquasit.livejournal.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061017/82452fdb/attachment.html From soltakss at yahoo.com Tue Oct 17 22:30:22 2006 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (Simon Phipp) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 13:30:22 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RuneQuest Version In-Reply-To: <20061017121816.4D90ED66C7B@mini.thinbits.net> Message-ID: <20061017123022.89154.qmail@web51009.mail.yahoo.com> Peter Maranci: > So I'm just calling it Mongoose RQ, or MRQ. That avoids all possible > confusion. RQ2, RQ3, RQ4, RQM for consistency and easiness. So, I call it RQM and don't care if I'm the only one ... See Ya Simon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061017/db7d6f8b/attachment.html From darthvogel at hotmail.com Wed Oct 18 03:12:51 2006 From: darthvogel at hotmail.com (Fred Vogel) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 12:12:51 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RuneQuest Version In-Reply-To: <20061017123022.89154.qmail@web51009.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Can someone fill me in on what RQ4 is? Thanks >From: Simon Phipp >Reply-To: "Discussion of RuneQuest rules." >To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RuneQuest Version >Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 13:30:22 +0100 (BST) > >Peter Maranci: > > > > So I'm just calling it Mongoose RQ, or MRQ. That avoids all possible > > confusion. > > RQ2, RQ3, RQ4, RQM for consistency and easiness. So, I call it RQM and >don't care if I'm the only one ... > > See Ya > >Simon > >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules _________________________________________________________________ All-in-one security and maintenance for your PC. Get a free 90-day trial! http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwlo0050000002msn/direct/01/?href=http://www.windowsonecare.com/?sc_cid=msn_hotmail From pmaranci at gmail.com Wed Oct 18 03:35:44 2006 From: pmaranci at gmail.com (Peter Maranci) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 13:35:44 -0400 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RuneQuest Version In-Reply-To: References: <20061017123022.89154.qmail@web51009.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: RQ4 is/was a number of things. Back in the latter days of RQ3, it was the hypothetical next stage of RQ, and a common topic of discussion. "RuneQuest: Adventures in Glorantha" was also often called RQ4. RQ:AiG was never published (Greg killed it), but it was widely playtested and discussed. My article on the history of RQ may be of some use to you: http://www.runequest.org/rqpast.htm ->Peter On 10/17/06, Fred Vogel wrote: > > Can someone fill me in on what RQ4 is? > > Thanks > > > >From: Simon Phipp > >Reply-To: "Discussion of RuneQuest rules." > >To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > >Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RuneQuest Version > >Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 13:30:22 +0100 (BST) > > > >Peter Maranci: > > > > > > > So I'm just calling it Mongoose RQ, or MRQ. That avoids all possible > > > confusion. > > > > RQ2, RQ3, RQ4, RQM for consistency and easiness. So, I call it RQM and > >don't care if I'm the only one ... > > > > See Ya > > > >Simon > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >RQ-Rules mailing list > >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > >http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > _________________________________________________________________ > All-in-one security and maintenance for your PC. Get a free 90-day trial! > > http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwlo0050000002msn/direct/01/?href=http://www.windowsonecare.com/?sc_cid=msn_hotmail > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > -- Peter Maranci - pmaranci at gmail.com Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying! http://www.runequest.org/rq.htm The Diary of An Invisible Man: http://bobquasit.livejournal.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061017/b59fd769/attachment.html From devinc at aol.com Wed Oct 18 04:04:52 2006 From: devinc at aol.com (devinc at aol.com) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 14:04:52 -0400 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RuneQuest Version In-Reply-To: References: <20061017123022.89154.qmail@web51009.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8C8C02DE09D8E6A-850-54E7@FWM-D18.sysops.aol.com> I frankly don't know why people aren't playing and developing RQ:AiG unofficially. I just reread my playtest copy and the system seems really good. -----Original Message----- From: pmaranci at gmail.com To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Sent: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 10:35 AM Subject: Re: [Rq-rules] Re: RuneQuest Version RQ4 is/was a number of things. Back in the latter days of RQ3, it was the hypothetical next stage of RQ, and a common topic of discussion. "RuneQuest: Adventures in Glorantha" was also often called RQ4. RQ:AiG was never published (Greg killed it), but it was widely playtested and discussed. My article on the history of RQ may be of some use to you: http://www.runequest.org/rqpast.htm ->Peter On 10/17/06, Fred Vogel wrote: Can someone fill me in on what RQ4 is? Thanks >From: Simon Phipp < soltakss at yahoo.com> >Reply-To: "Discussion of RuneQuest rules." >To: rq-rules at crashbox.com >Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RuneQuest Version >Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 13:30:22 +0100 (BST) > >Peter Maranci: > > > > So I'm just calling it Mongoose RQ, or MRQ. That avoids all possible > > confusion. > > RQ2, RQ3, RQ4, RQM for consistency and easiness. So, I call it RQM and >don't care if I'm the only one ... > > See Ya > >Simon > >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules _________________________________________________________________ All-in-one security and maintenance for your PC. Get a free 90-day trial! http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwlo0050000002msn/direct/01/?href=http://www.windowsonecare.com/?sc_cid=msn_hotmail _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules -- Peter Maranci - pmaranci at gmail.com Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying! http://www.runequest.org/rq.htm The Diary of An Invisible Man: http://bobquasit.livejournal.com/ _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules ________________________________________________________________________ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061017/6ac6bd57/attachment.html From jurrubin at gmail.com Wed Oct 18 04:18:16 2006 From: jurrubin at gmail.com (David Smart) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 13:18:16 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RuneQuest Version In-Reply-To: <8C8C02DE09D8E6A-850-54E7@FWM-D18.sysops.aol.com> References: <20061017123022.89154.qmail@web51009.mail.yahoo.com> <8C8C02DE09D8E6A-850-54E7@FWM-D18.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <1c92296e0610171118r5da13ee4xaf1532008a66b6a4@mail.gmail.com> Probably because most people don't have a copy of the playtest. *unhappy sigh* On 10/17/06, devinc at aol.com wrote: > > I frankly don't know why people aren't playing and developing RQ:AiG > unofficially. I just reread my playtest copy and the system seems really > good. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: pmaranci at gmail.com > To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > Sent: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 10:35 AM > Subject: Re: [Rq-rules] Re: RuneQuest Version > > RQ4 is/was a number of things. Back in the latter days of RQ3, it was the > hypothetical next stage of RQ, and a common topic of discussion. "RuneQuest: > Adventures in Glorantha" was also often called RQ4. RQ:AiG was never > published (Greg killed it), but it was widely playtested and discussed. > > My article on the history of RQ may be of some use to you: > > http://www.runequest.org/rqpast.htm > > ->Peter > > On 10/17/06, Fred Vogel wrote: > > > > Can someone fill me in on what RQ4 is? > > > > Thanks > > > > > > >From: Simon Phipp < soltakss at yahoo.com> > > >Reply-To: "Discussion of RuneQuest rules." > > >To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > > >Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RuneQuest Version > > >Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 13:30:22 +0100 (BST) > > > > > >Peter Maranci: > > > > > > > > > > So I'm just calling it Mongoose RQ, or MRQ. That avoids all possible > > > > > > confusion. > > > > > > RQ2, RQ3, RQ4, RQM for consistency and easiness. So, I call it RQM > > and > > >don't care if I'm the only one ... > > > > > > See Ya > > > > > >Simon > > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >RQ-Rules mailing list > > >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > >http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > All-in-one security and maintenance for your PC. Get a free 90-day > > trial! > > > > http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwlo0050000002msn/direct/01/?href=http://www.windowsonecare.com/?sc_cid=msn_hotmail > > > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > > > > -- > Peter Maranci - pmaranci at gmail.com > Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying! http://www.runequest.org/rq.htm > The Diary of An Invisible Man: http://bobquasit.livejournal.com/ > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > ------------------------------ > *Check out the new AOL*. > Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to > millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061017/f1f8a44e/attachment.html From jurrubin at gmail.com Wed Oct 18 04:23:48 2006 From: jurrubin at gmail.com (David Smart) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 13:23:48 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] Finally got my copy of MRQ In-Reply-To: <1e842f7f0610160532p436742a1v8e81a18555ef0dbd@mail.gmail.com> References: <1e842f7f0610160532p436742a1v8e81a18555ef0dbd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1c92296e0610171123q24e9a49fw3675553ba5bcb925@mail.gmail.com> I made the same discovery when I picked up MRQ a few weeks back and am using it for the same purpose (streamline my own house rules). I doubt I'll pick up the rest of the publications though. On 10/16/06, Julian Lord wrote: > > > Having said all that, I still find it (as I may combine it with stuff from > HW/HQ, more subtle magic for starters) to be a better starting point for my > personal house > rules than either RQ2 or RQ3 ; for although MRQ fails to recapture the full > design elegance of RQ1 & > 2 and also fails to match the mathematical precision of the RQ3 rules, its design failures actually make it a more customizable version to work from, > > as they (unintentionally?) provide a more modular basic system to work > with than those of the previous, more integrated, versions of RuneQuest. > > Julian Lord > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061017/1ff5a314/attachment.html From grogthing at yahoo.com Wed Oct 18 04:45:50 2006 From: grogthing at yahoo.com (grogthing) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 11:45:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] Finally got my copy of MRQ In-Reply-To: <1c92296e0610171123q24e9a49fw3675553ba5bcb925@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20061017184550.49490.qmail@web32812.mail.mud.yahoo.com> So far I have the Main MRQ, the MRQ COMPANION, MRQ MONSTERS, and MRQ LEGENDS. I really like the monsters book. Greg --- David Smart wrote: > I made the same discovery when I picked up MRQ a few > weeks back and am using > it for the same purpose (streamline my own house > rules). I doubt I'll pick > up the rest of the publications though. > > On 10/16/06, Julian Lord > wrote: > > > > > > Having said all that, I still find it (as I may > combine it with stuff from > > HW/HQ, more subtle magic for starters) to be a > better starting point for my > > personal house > > rules than either RQ2 or RQ3 ; for although MRQ > fails to recapture the full > > design elegance of RQ1 & > > 2 and also fails to match the mathematical > precision of the RQ3 rules, its design failures > actually make it a more customizable version to work > from, > > > > as they (unintentionally?) provide a more modular > basic system to work > > with than those of the previous, more integrated, > versions of RuneQuest. > > > > Julian Lord > > > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/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 From rjmeints at aol.com Wed Oct 18 05:20:14 2006 From: rjmeints at aol.com (rjmeints at aol.com) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:20:14 -0400 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Runequest History and reprint availability In-Reply-To: <20061017181833.77974D6B1CF@mini.thinbits.net> References: <20061017181833.77974D6B1CF@mini.thinbits.net> Message-ID: <8C8C038683C2344-8A8-58DC@FWM-M26.sysops.aol.com> Thanks for the link to your history of Runequest. In your article you mention the avialability of RQ material. You can get high quality reprints (new layout, extra art, etc.) of: Pavis & Big Rubble Griffin Mountain Cult Compendium (combo of Cults of Prax and Cults of Terror, plus other cults) Borderlands & Beyond (Borderlands, Plunder and Runemasters) from my www.glorantha.info website. Peter: Send me your address via private email and I'll send you a copy of the Meints Index to Glorantha. Regards, Rick Meints Moon Design Publications >From: "Peter Maranci" >Subject: Re: [Rq-rules] Re: RuneQuest Version >RQ4 is/was a number of things. Back in the latter days of RQ3, it was the >hypothetical next stage of RQ, and a common topic of discussion. "RuneQuest: >Adventures in Glorantha" was also often called RQ4. RQ:AiG was never >published (Greg killed it), but it was widely playtested and discussed. >My article on the history of RQ may be of some use to you: >http://www.runequest.org/rqpast.htm ________________________________________________________________________ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061017/4eec6822/attachment.html From soltakss at yahoo.com Wed Oct 18 06:17:57 2006 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (Simon Phipp) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 21:17:57 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RuneQuest Version In-Reply-To: <20061017181833.77974D6B1CF@mini.thinbits.net> Message-ID: <20061017201757.27181.qmail@web51003.mail.yahoo.com> Devin: > I frankly don't know why people aren't playing and developing RQ:AiG unofficially. I > just reread my playtest copy and the system seems really good. Possibly because, at least in the version I have, combat was hideously micromanaged to the extent that it was almost a wargame. Hex movement, manoevres, far too many combat options and so on. Spirit combat was OK, but they missed the point. I can't remember much more about it, as my copy is in a folder at least 2 feet away, which is too far to dig out. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061017/97b1d7d2/attachment.html From lorgryt at comcast.net Wed Oct 18 06:47:55 2006 From: lorgryt at comcast.net (Bo Whitten) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 13:47:55 -0700 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RuneQuest Version In-Reply-To: <20061017201757.27181.qmail@web51003.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20061017181833.77974D6B1CF@mini.thinbits.net> <20061017201757.27181.qmail@web51003.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.0.20061017134646.01c6e410@comcast.net> At 01:17 PM 10/17/2006, you wrote: >Devin: > >> I frankly don't know why people aren't playing and developing RQ:AiG unofficially. I >> just reread my playtest copy and the system seems really good. > >Possibly because, at least in the version I have, combat was hideously micromanaged to the extent that it was almost a wargame. Hex movement, manoevres, far too many combat options and so on. Spirit combat was OK, but they missed the point. I can't remember much more about it, as my copy is in a folder at least 2 feet away, which is too far to dig out. I would say that sums it up: because it is 6 feet under. Unpublished means unavailable in the quantities necessary to play the game. Lorgryt http://www.lorgryt.com/gaming/ A forum... like others... ==== If you are so Goth, where were you when we sacked Rome? From julian.lord at gmail.com Wed Oct 18 17:16:50 2006 From: julian.lord at gmail.com (Julian Lord) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 09:16:50 +0200 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 13, Issue 9 In-Reply-To: <20061017181833.77974D6B1CF@mini.thinbits.net> References: <20061017181833.77974D6B1CF@mini.thinbits.net> Message-ID: <1e842f7f0610180016rc5e55a5p9b303ae44426f6c9@mail.gmail.com> Two or three versions of the playtest rules can be discovered online if you look for them, but the fuller version(s), including the proposed publication draft, were only made available to a very small number of people. And whether or not NDA with a defunct games company applies or not, it is unlikely they will ever surface on the net... Julian Lord Probably because most people don't have a copy of the playtest. *unhappy > sigh* > > On 10/17/06, devinc at aol.com wrote: > > > > I frankly don't know why people aren't playing and developing RQ:AiG > > unofficially. I just reread my playtest copy and the system seems really > > good. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: pmaranci at gmail.com > > To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > > Sent: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 10:35 AM > > Subject: Re: [Rq-rules] Re: RuneQuest Version > > > > RQ4 is/was a number of things. Back in the latter days of RQ3, it was > the > > hypothetical next stage of RQ, and a common topic of discussion. > "RuneQuest: > > Adventures in Glorantha" was also often called RQ4. RQ:AiG was never > > published (Greg killed it), but it was widely playtested and discussed. > > > > My article on the history of RQ may be of some use to you: > > > > http://www.runequest.org/rqpast.htm > > > > ->Peter > > > > On 10/17/06, Fred Vogel wrote: > > > > > > Can someone fill me in on what RQ4 is? > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > >From: Simon Phipp < soltakss at yahoo.com> > > > >Reply-To: "Discussion of RuneQuest rules." > > > >To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > > > >Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RuneQuest Version > > > >Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 13:30:22 +0100 (BST) > > > > > > > >Peter Maranci: > > > > > > > > > > > > > So I'm just calling it Mongoose RQ, or MRQ. That avoids all > possible > > > > > > > > confusion. > > > > > > > > RQ2, RQ3, RQ4, RQM for consistency and easiness. So, I call it RQM > > > and > > > >don't care if I'm the only one ... > > > > > > > > See Ya > > > > > > > >Simon > > > > > > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > > >RQ-Rules mailing list > > > >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > > >http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > All-in-one security and maintenance for your PC. Get a free 90-day > > > trial! > > > > > > > http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwlo0050000002msn/direct/01/?href=http://www.windowsonecare.com/?sc_cid=msn_hotmail > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Peter Maranci - pmaranci at gmail.com > > Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying! http://www.runequest.org/rq.htm > > The Diary of An Invisible Man: http://bobquasit.livejournal.com/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > > ------------------------------ > > *Check out the new AOL*< > http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/1615326657x4311227241x4298082137/aol?redir=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eaol%2Ecom%2Fnewaol > >. > > Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to > > millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and > more. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://www.thinbits.net/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061017/f1f8a44e/attachment.html > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > End of RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 13, Issue 9 > *************************************** > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061018/23f02815/attachment.html From gianni at basicrps.com Wed Oct 18 22:00:28 2006 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 14:00:28 +0200 Subject: [Rq-rules] Finally got my copy of MRQ Message-ID: <20061018120047.27116D756CA@mini.thinbits.net> Greg, > So far I have the Main MRQ, the MRQ COMPANION, MRQ > MONSTERS, and MRQ LEGENDS. What is your impression of MRQ Legends? Based on the excerpts available on Mongoose's web-site, I have a feeling it is a very D&Desque supplement. Cheers, Gianni From gianni at basicrps.com Wed Oct 18 22:02:33 2006 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 14:02:33 +0200 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 13, Issue 9 Message-ID: <20061018120235.D8B59D75774@mini.thinbits.net> Hi, > Two or three versions of the playtest rules can be discovered online if you > look for them, but the fuller version(s), including the proposed publication > draft, were only made available to a very small number of people. > > And whether or not NDA with a defunct games company applies or not, it is > unlikely they will ever surface on the net... I have a very nicely laid out copy in pdf format I retrieved on a Finnish web-site some years ago. Cheers, Gianni From gianni at basicrps.com Wed Oct 18 22:04:08 2006 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 14:04:08 +0200 Subject: [Rq-rules] Mongoose RQ players in the Paris area? Message-ID: <20061018120409.DBF42D757F9@mini.thinbits.net> Hi, I was wondering if there were any MRQ players in the ?le-de-France area. I'd love to play (as a player; unfortunately I don't have enough time to prepare games myself). Cheers, Gianni (Cergy) From pascal.dury at fr.unisys.com Wed Oct 18 22:57:10 2006 From: pascal.dury at fr.unisys.com (Dury, Pascal) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 13:57:10 +0100 Subject: [Rq-rules] Mongoose RQ players in the Paris area? In-Reply-To: <20061018120409.DBF42D757F9@mini.thinbits.net> Message-ID: <8A272B526CFFC04F9F920A28986EECD6895165@GBMK-EXCH4.eu.uis.unisys.com> I don't have the game myself so that would not be to GM, but I would be happy to join if a group forms. Personnaly I'm in the south part of l'?le de france (which is quite big actually, isn't it ?) Pascal "Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss-----Message d'origine----- De?: rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com] De la part de Gianni Envoy??: mercredi 18 octobre 2006 14:04 ??: rq-rules at crashbox.com Objet?: [Rq-rules] Mongoose RQ players in the Paris area? Hi, I was wondering if there were any MRQ players in the ?le-de-France area. I'd love to play (as a player; unfortunately I don't have enough time to prepare games myself). Cheers, Gianni (Cergy)_______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From jurrubin at gmail.com Wed Oct 18 23:18:52 2006 From: jurrubin at gmail.com (David Smart) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 08:18:52 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude In-Reply-To: <1e842f7f0610160904l59934e7he4b15b3fa1c52677@mail.gmail.com> References: <1e842f7f0610160904l59934e7he4b15b3fa1c52677@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1c92296e0610180618r6d24e521kf49c24c50b50ea3c@mail.gmail.com> Exactly, Julian. I've altered the experience check rules to provide a single check for a basic success, two checks for a special success, and three checks for a critical success. My players may make experience rolls for each of their character's skills that has accumulated one or more experience checks since the last set of experience rolls. Usually this is about once an in-game month unless the action has been truly intense. To make an experience roll, the player rolls d100 and adds the character's skill bonus and the number of experience checks the character has accumulated. If the total is less than the character's current skill, nothing happens. The character keeps the accumulated experience checks and the player may try again next month if the character gains another experience check in that month. If the player succeeds in the roll, the character loses all of the experience checks in the skill being tested and increases the skill by 1/10 of the difference between the modified roll and the character's skill level. Round all fractions up. If an character accumulates greater than his (Current Skill - Category Bonus) number of experience checks, he immediately gains a bonus of 1d10 in the skill and loses all experience checks, whatever he's doing, even if in the middle of an adventure. This all has the effect of certain skills improving quite a bit faster than those that are less used. The improvement may seem to be too rapid to some but my group meets only twice a month, if that, so it doesn't have that great of an unbalancing effect for us. On 10/16/06, Julian Lord wrote: > > > What I found worked best was to simply award multiple experience checks > for extensively and/or dramatically used skills, so that for example a > warrior who used his sword for whichever emphatic results (either > quantitavely or qualitatavely) during an adventure might gain 4 or 5 > experience checks for his sword skills. This I found to be enormously > helpful to ensure differentiation between PCs according to their actual > impact of their skills from game session to game session... > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061018/98465c66/attachment.html From grogthing at yahoo.com Thu Oct 19 01:21:21 2006 From: grogthing at yahoo.com (grogthing) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 08:21:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] Finally got my copy of MRQ In-Reply-To: <20061018120047.27116D756CA@mini.thinbits.net> Message-ID: <20061018152121.36568.qmail@web32815.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Just bought that one and Monsters this weekend, have not really had a chance to read through that one yet. It has more "legendary" abilities, rules for mass combat and seiges. I let you all know more after I have delved deeper into it. Greg --- Gianni wrote: > Greg, > > > So far I have the Main MRQ, the MRQ COMPANION, MRQ > > MONSTERS, and MRQ LEGENDS. > > What is your impression of MRQ Legends? Based on the > excerpts available on > Mongoose's web-site, I have a feeling it is a very > D&Desque supplement. > > Cheers, > > Gianni_______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/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 From IQuinn at surewest.net Thu Oct 19 02:43:08 2006 From: IQuinn at surewest.net (Robert Hoffman) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 09:43:08 -0700 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude In-Reply-To: <1c92296e0610180618r6d24e521kf49c24c50b50ea3c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <003701c6f2d4$7e789ca0$6401a8c0@QUINNLAND> "I've altered the experience check rules to provide a single check for a basic success, two checks for a special success, and three checks for a critical success" >>So you mean players actually track EVERY success rolled during the game month? Doesn't that become a bookkeeping issue for every skill on the character sheet (even just the commonly used ones)? -----Original Message----- From: rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com] On Behalf Of David Smart Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 6:19 AM To: Discussion of RuneQuest rules. Subject: Re: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude Exactly, Julian. I've altered the experience check rules to provide a single check for a basic success, two checks for a special success, and three checks for a critical success. My players may make experience rolls for each of their character's skills that has accumulated one or more experience checks since the last set of experience rolls. Usually this is about once an in-game month unless the action has been truly intense. To make an experience roll, the player rolls d100 and adds the character's skill bonus and the number of experience checks the character has accumulated. If the total is less than the character's current skill, nothing happens. The character keeps the accumulated experience checks and the player may try again next month if the character gains another experience check in that month. If the player succeeds in the roll, the character loses all of the experience checks in the skill being tested and increases the skill by 1/10 of the difference between the modified roll and the character's skill level. Round all fractions up. If an character accumulates greater than his (Current Skill - Category Bonus) number of experience checks, he immediately gains a bonus of 1d10 in the skill and loses all experience checks, whatever he's doing, even if in the middle of an adventure. This all has the effect of certain skills improving quite a bit faster than those that are less used. The improvement may seem to be too rapid to some but my group meets only twice a month, if that, so it doesn't have that great of an unbalancing effect for us. On 10/16/06, Julian Lord wrote: What I found worked best was to simply award multiple experience checks for extensively and/or dramatically used skills, so that for example a warrior who used his sword for whichever emphatic results (either quantitavely or qualitatavely) during an adventure might gain 4 or 5 experience checks for his sword skills. This I found to be enormously helpful to ensure differentiation between PCs according to their actual impact of their skills from game session to game session... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061018/7fb885a9/attachment.html From darthvogel at hotmail.com Thu Oct 19 02:59:00 2006 From: darthvogel at hotmail.com (Fred Vogel) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 11:59:00 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude In-Reply-To: <003701c6f2d4$7e789ca0$6401a8c0@QUINNLAND> Message-ID: >From: "Robert Hoffman" > >>So you mean players actually track EVERY success rolled during the >game month? Doesn't that become a bookkeeping issue for every skill on >the character sheet (even just the commonly used ones)? Thus far this has not been a problem. RQ (or at least how we are playing) has a fairly limited number of skills, which I think is a strength of the game. Additionally, the knowledge based skills you don't get checks for; which makes perfect sense. If i succesfully identify something using some lore skill, I'm not going to know any more of that lore as a result. The other thing is, there are no munchkins in our groups so we don't have people doing lame things to improve thier skills, such as the weapon golf bag thing. So overall, I would say that David's application of experience gains, where we track checks for each skill on each successful use, has not been a burden at all. Fred _________________________________________________________________ Find a local pizza place, music store, museum and more?then map the best route! http://local.live.com?FORM=MGA001 From carpgachair at yahoo.com Thu Oct 19 03:46:58 2006 From: carpgachair at yahoo.com (Paul Cardwell) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 10:46:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20061018174658.61423.qmail@web31811.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Even with a large number of skills (Mythworld has over a hundred, plus weapon, trade, and subdivisions such as specific language) it is no big problem. Daily activities (camp, cook, work on a scroll-based skill learning or two, etc.) are often rolled ahead of time and applied at the proper day. Some of our players use a computer with spreadsheet program, so they essentially just check it off and let the program see to the learning. Also the lack of golf-bag munchkins helps. We play the story rather than the rule book, although we do stick to the rules as printed. We have learning rolls of one-point gain for a successful roll, two for a special, and five for a critical, but have not adopted any particular bonus for specials and criticals in the use of the skill itself. My question pertaining to that is does it tend to increase skills to rapidly? This has been our main resistance to using it. A raw beginner gaining knight-priest status in a game year or two is far too fast, and being stuck with nothing but a five year wait for the next level is boring unless there are other factors filling that time period so it doesn't seem so arbitrary. Paul Cardwell --- Fred Vogel wrote: > >From: "Robert Hoffman" > > >>So you mean players actually track EVERY success > rolled during the > >game month? Doesn't that become a bookkeeping > issue for every skill on > >the character sheet (even just the commonly used > ones)? > > Thus far this has not been a problem. RQ (or at > least how we are playing) > has a fairly limited number of skills, which I think > is a strength of the > game. Additionally, the knowledge based skills you > don't get checks for; > which makes perfect sense. If i succesfully > identify something using some > lore skill, I'm not going to know any more of that > lore as a result. > Fred __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From jurrubin at gmail.com Thu Oct 19 05:46:42 2006 From: jurrubin at gmail.com (David Smart) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 14:46:42 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude In-Reply-To: <003701c6f2d4$7e789ca0$6401a8c0@QUINNLAND> References: <1c92296e0610180618r6d24e521kf49c24c50b50ea3c@mail.gmail.com> <003701c6f2d4$7e789ca0$6401a8c0@QUINNLAND> Message-ID: <1c92296e0610181246u789b801bt3c1e55123fc775ad@mail.gmail.com> Not a bookkeeping issue at all. The players merely pencil in a checkmark next to the skill name. And they definitely don't use every skill every session. Only one or two combat skills are used often and other skills are used only when I call for rolls as the GM. Also, skill improvement rolls occur only when the characters can get to a place safe enough to relax..a relatively rare event until just recently. And keep in mind they erase the checkmarks either at each improvement roll or then the # of checkmarks reaches 10. How hard is it to make a little checkmark no more than 10 times (at best)? On 10/18/06, Robert Hoffman wrote: > > "I've altered the experience check rules to provide a single check for a > basic success, two checks for a special success, and three checks for a > critical success" > > >>So you mean players actually track EVERY success rolled during the game > month? Doesn't that become a bookkeeping issue for every skill on the > character sheet (even just the commonly used ones)? > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061018/6ee017e5/attachment.html From jurrubin at gmail.com Thu Oct 19 06:06:40 2006 From: jurrubin at gmail.com (David Smart) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 15:06:40 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Runequest History and reprint availability In-Reply-To: <8C8C038683C2344-8A8-58DC@FWM-M26.sysops.aol.com> References: <20061017181833.77974D6B1CF@mini.thinbits.net> <8C8C038683C2344-8A8-58DC@FWM-M26.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <1c92296e0610181306t5f653534wbd9580a04059a4a0@mail.gmail.com> And I can personally and happily recommend Griffin Mountain. On 10/17/06, rjmeints at aol.com wrote: > > Thanks for the link to your history of Runequest. > > In your article you mention the avialability of RQ material. > You can get high quality reprints (new layout, extra art, etc.) of: > > Pavis & Big Rubble > Griffin Mountain > Cult Compendium (combo of Cults of Prax and Cults of Terror, plus other > cults) > Borderlands & Beyond (Borderlands, Plunder and Runemasters) > > from my www.glorantha.info website. > > Peter: Send me your address via private email and I'll send you a copy of > the Meints Index to Glorantha. > > Regards, > > Rick Meints > Moon Design Publications > > >From: "Peter Maranci" > >Subject : Re: [Rq-rules] Re: RuneQuest > Version > > >RQ4 is/was a number of things. Back in the latter days of RQ3, it was the > >hypothetical next stage of RQ, and a common topic of discussion. > "RuneQuest: > >Adventures in Glorantha" was also often called RQ4. RQ:AiG was never > >published (Greg killed it), but it was widely playtested and discussed. > > >My article on the history of RQ may be of some use to you: > > >http://www.runequest.org/rqpast.htm > ------------------------------ > *Check out the new AOL*. > Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to > millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061018/134fce4f/attachment.html From IQuinn at surewest.net Thu Oct 19 06:25:49 2006 From: IQuinn at surewest.net (Robert Hoffman) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 13:25:49 -0700 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude In-Reply-To: <1c92296e0610181246u789b801bt3c1e55123fc775ad@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <007201c6f2f3$9a60d5d0$6401a8c0@QUINNLAND> "If an character accumulates greater than his (Current Skill - Category Bonus) number of experience checks, he immediately gains a bonus of 1d10 in the skill and loses all experience checks, whatever he's doing, even if in the middle of an adventure" >>Gotcha,. I misunderstood. I took the above to mean that they could potentially receive as many experience checks as their current skill percentage ie as many as 90+. I'm not familiar with the check system,. we still use the basic dot next to a skill to roll for advancement; our only addition is that if you roll an 01 critical you get a "double dot" which means automatic advancement next time they can go up. -----Original Message----- From: rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com] On Behalf Of David Smart Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 12:47 PM To: Discussion of RuneQuest rules. Subject: Re: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude Not a bookkeeping issue at all. The players merely pencil in a checkmark next to the skill name. And they definitely don't use every skill every session. Only one or two combat skills are used often and other skills are used only when I call for rolls as the GM. Also, skill improvement rolls occur only when the characters can get to a place safe enough to relax..a relatively rare event until just recently. And keep in mind they erase the checkmarks either at each improvement roll or then the # of checkmarks reaches 10. How hard is it to make a little checkmark no more than 10 times (at best)? On 10/18/06, Robert Hoffman < IQuinn at surewest.net > wrote: "I've altered the experience check rules to provide a single check for a basic success, two checks for a special success, and three checks for a critical success" >>So you mean players actually track EVERY success rolled during the game month? Doesn't that become a bookkeeping issue for every skill on the character sheet (even just the commonly used ones)? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061018/eb4735e3/attachment.html From jurrubin at gmail.com Thu Oct 19 07:03:39 2006 From: jurrubin at gmail.com (David Smart) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 16:03:39 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude In-Reply-To: <007201c6f2f3$9a60d5d0$6401a8c0@QUINNLAND> References: <1c92296e0610181246u789b801bt3c1e55123fc775ad@mail.gmail.com> <007201c6f2f3$9a60d5d0$6401a8c0@QUINNLAND> Message-ID: <1c92296e0610181403n79da5f3buf8e6e627c705911f@mail.gmail.com> Actually, you didn't misunderstand. The potential is there but, in reality, it's never achieved except with extremely low skills. The largest number of checkmarks I've seen was 10 (or was it 15? Fred?) and then the player just wrote down the number. I leave it to the players to remember unless we haven't met for a few weeks (or months). The actually tracking is simple because the players' memories are jogged every time they reference the skill percentage for a skill roll. Pencils or water-based projector pens on a plastic sleeve make it all very easy. And it can actually help reduce skill check chasing because players are rewarded in the long run if they focus on a few skills rather than chasing checkmarks for every skill. A unforeseen side effect of tracking the number of successful rolls is the players quickly realize just how long they've been adventuring away from a "safe" place. Adds a nice little bit of psychological pressure to the game over time (from my point of view as the GM) as well as a real feeling of mental relief when the characters eventually do find a safe place to relax and wind down. On 10/18/06, Robert Hoffman wrote: > > > "If an character accumulates greater than his (Current Skill - Category > Bonus) number of experience checks, he immediately gains a bonus of 1d10 in > the skill and loses all experience checks, whatever he's doing, even if in > the middle of an adventure" > > >>Gotcha,? I misunderstood. I took the above to mean that they could > potentially receive as many experience checks as their current skill > percentage ie as many as 90+. I'm not familiar with the check system,? we > still use the basic dot next to a skill to roll for advancement; our only > addition is that if you roll an 01 critical you get a "double dot" which > means automatic advancement next time they can go up. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > *From:* rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com [mailto: > rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com] *On Behalf Of *David Smart > *Sent:* Wednesday, October 18, 2006 12:47 PM > *To:* Discussion of RuneQuest rules. > *Subject:* Re: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude > > > > Not a bookkeeping issue at all. The players merely pencil in a checkmark > next to the skill name. And they definitely don't use every skill every > session. Only one or two combat skills are used often and other skills are > used only when I call for rolls as the GM. > > Also, skill improvement rolls occur only when the characters can get to a > place safe enough to relax..a relatively rare event until just recently. And > keep in mind they erase the checkmarks either at each improvement roll or > then the # of checkmarks reaches 10. > > How hard is it to make a little checkmark no more than 10 times (at best)? > > On 10/18/06, *Robert Hoffman* < IQuinn at surewest.net> wrote: > > "I've altered the experience check rules to provide a single check for a > basic success, two checks for a special success, and three checks for a > critical success" > > >>So you mean players actually track EVERY success rolled during the game > month? Doesn't that become a bookkeeping issue for every skill on the > character sheet (even just the commonly used ones)? > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061018/4a5ee3df/attachment.html From pmaranci at gmail.com Thu Oct 19 12:24:47 2006 From: pmaranci at gmail.com (Peter Maranci) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 22:24:47 -0400 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ Play-by-email? Message-ID: I've been getting the urge to do more roleplaying, and since it's impossible to find RQ players in this area, I'm thinking of running a play-by-email (or possibly a game on a LiveJournal community or something). I'd want to use RQ, but obviously there would need to be some modifications, since die-rolling would be difficult at best. I was thinking of possibly trying to incorporate some of the concepts of Amber Diceless into RQ; I remember being impressed by that system many years ago. Basically, skills would represent differences in abilities. For combat, players could decide what general approach they'd take: agressive, defensive, balanced, or all-out in one direction or another. They'd also be able to specify particular action, such as taking advantage of terrain or preparing some sort of trick in advance. Has anyone done anything like that? I'd like to hear about any use of RQ as an online system. Hmm...I think I may have asked the same question here a few years ago... Incidentally, I think I mentioned that I was going to post a new scenario - that one that I got so much advice on here a few weeks ago - for my site's tenth anniversary. Well, the anniversary arrived (today), and I didn't get to it. But I'll try and get it posted before next weekend. -- Peter Maranci - pmaranci at gmail.com Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying! http://www.runequest.org/rq.htm The Diary of An Invisible Man: http://bobquasit.livejournal.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061018/45ea5450/attachment.html From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Oct 19 12:56:41 2006 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 19:56:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ Play-by-email? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20061019025641.65327.qmail@web31208.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Peter Maranci wrote: > I've been getting the urge to do more roleplaying, > and since it's impossible > to find RQ players in this area, I'm thinking of > running a play-by-email (or > possibly a game on a LiveJournal community or > something). This would be the place to do it: http://www.rpol.net I am runing several games there, some RQ and some not, but it has everything (or most) things you need to run a game. Leon __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From tcantine at incentre.net Thu Oct 19 13:59:46 2006 From: tcantine at incentre.net (Tom Cantine) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 21:59:46 -0600 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude In-Reply-To: <20061018174658.61423.qmail@web31811.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20061018174658.61423.qmail@web31811.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <426A2BE0-5F26-11DB-B6CF-000D9334A9EA@incentre.net> Hmmm. I have been allowing experience checks on fumbles (not simple failures), as well, on the assumption that one learns from one's mistakes, and it seems to work pretty well. It just occurs to me that maybe that might be a good idea for knowledge skills, too. Normally, you don't get an experience check in Plant Lore for correctly identifying an edible mushroom, and that makes sense. But making a serious mistake strikes me as the sort of thing that should allow for a skill increase, provided one eventually identifies what went wrong. From steve at perrinworlds.com Thu Oct 19 14:57:09 2006 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 21:57:09 -0700 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude References: <20061018174658.61423.qmail@web31811.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <426A2BE0-5F26-11DB-B6CF-000D9334A9EA@incentre.net> Message-ID: <00a101c6f33b$086e6370$a4407442@chaosce4015e22> Actually, I allow for experience gains for knowledge skills. This is why. If you learn something from training alone, it does not necessarily ground itself in your brain and stay there. I'm sure we're all had that experience from book larnin'. But when you have that information in the deep dark recesses of your mind and you bring it out successfully, then you have imprinted it. You have seen it in action and it works (or is true, or whatever). Thus, your stock of ready knowledge increases, and your percentage goes up. That's how I'm doing it, anyway. Steve Perrin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Cantine" To: "Discussion of RuneQuest rules." Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 8:59 PM Subject: Re: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude > Hmmm. I have been allowing experience checks on fumbles (not simple > failures), as well, on the assumption that one learns from one's mistakes, > and it seems to work pretty well. > > It just occurs to me that maybe that might be a good idea for knowledge > skills, too. Normally, you don't get an experience check in Plant Lore for > correctly identifying an edible mushroom, and that makes sense. But making > a serious mistake strikes me as the sort of thing that should allow for a > skill increase, provided one eventually identifies what went wrong. > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From aescleal at btinternet.com Thu Oct 19 17:18:45 2006 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (Ashley Munday) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 08:18:45 +0100 (BST) Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude In-Reply-To: <20061018174658.61423.qmail@web31811.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20061019071845.90623.qmail@web86105.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Hi Paul, The system David's using can generate middling skill levels very quickly - it gets you up to 75 or so a lot quicker than the ordinary experience rules. One you get over 100 in a skill it actually starts to slow the rate of advancement down. In addition (and it doesn't look like David's using this) there were provisions for skills that weren't used during an adventure to decline if they were 75 of over so more and more training time was taken up practising things you had a high level in rather than developing new skills. http://www.btinternet.com/~aescleal/Experience.htm has got the full monte. Appologies for the colour scheme and typos, it hasn't been modified since 1999. If you don't like a lot of bookeeping in the game it can get rather intrusive. Cheers, Ash --- Paul Cardwell wrote: > Even with a large number of skills (Mythworld has > over > a hundred, plus weapon, trade, and subdivisions such > as specific language) it is no big problem. > > Daily activities (camp, cook, work on a scroll-based > skill learning or two, etc.) are often rolled ahead > of > time and applied at the proper day. Some of our > players use a computer with spreadsheet program, so > they essentially just check it off and let the > program > see to the learning. > > Also the lack of golf-bag munchkins helps. We play > the story rather than the rule book, although we do > stick to the rules as printed. > > We have learning rolls of one-point gain for a > successful roll, two for a special, and five for a > critical, but have not adopted any particular bonus > for specials and criticals in the use of the skill > itself. > > My question pertaining to that is does it tend to > increase skills to rapidly? This has been our main > resistance to using it. A raw beginner gaining > knight-priest status in a game year or two is far > too > fast, and being stuck with nothing but a five year > wait for the next level is boring unless there are > other factors filling that time period so it doesn't > seem so arbitrary. > > Paul Cardwell > > > > --- Fred Vogel wrote: > > > >From: "Robert Hoffman" > > > >>So you mean players actually track EVERY > success > > rolled during the > > >game month? Doesn't that become a bookkeeping > > issue for every skill on > > >the character sheet (even just the commonly used > > ones)? > > > > Thus far this has not been a problem. RQ (or at > > least how we are playing) > > has a fairly limited number of skills, which I > think > > is a strength of the > > game. Additionally, the knowledge based skills > you > > don't get checks for; > > which makes perfect sense. If i succesfully > > identify something using some > > lore skill, I'm not going to know any more of that > > lore as a result. > > Fred > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Thu Oct 19 18:01:21 2006 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 09:01:21 +0100 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude In-Reply-To: <1c92296e0610181403n79da5f3buf8e6e627c705911f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: >Actually, you didn't misunderstand. The potential is there but, in reality, it's never achieved except with extremely low >skills. The largest number of checkmarks I've seen was 10 (or was it 15? Fred?)? and then the player just wrote down the >number. I leave it to the players to remember unless we haven't met for a few weeks (or months). The actually tracking is >simple because the players' memories are jogged every time they reference the skill percentage for a skill roll. > >Pencils or water-based projector pens on a plastic sleeve make it all very easy. And it can actually help reduce skill check >chasing because players are rewarded in the long run if they focus on a few skills rather than chasing checkmarks for every >skill. > >A unforeseen side effect of tracking the number of successful rolls is the players quickly realize just how long they've been >adventuring away from a "safe" place. Adds a nice little bit of psychological pressure to the game over time (from my point >of view as the GM) as well as a real feeling of mental relief when the characters eventually do find a safe place to relax >and wind down. > I used to use a similar system (describe previously here IIRC), but the group did find it too much work all round. These days I just rule that special's automatically earn a tick, and when the PC's hit down time I tell each player they can have a few (typically 3-5) ticks to put in to skills they can justify to me they ought to have improved in - and I do accept "that spectacularly bad fumble that nearly got us all killed" as a justification. Long periods of low level use (e.g. living in a region where one only speaks the native language at 15% and no-one knows yours; living rough somewhere unfamiliar for sixth months with only a 15% Knowledge (Terrain) skill) I generally award a block of "hours" to spend on learning via experimentation or training, depending on whether I think the exposure will have been intensive enough. So living in a foreign country for any length of time will automatically push up certain life skills (Speak Local language, Knowledge Local etc) even if the character is "officially" training in 1h Broadsword, Shield, Long Bow and Brew Poison... Cheers, Nick Middleton From tom at zunder.org.uk Thu Oct 19 20:22:59 2006 From: tom at zunder.org.uk (Thomas Zunder) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 11:22:59 +0100 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude In-Reply-To: <00a101c6f33b$086e6370$a4407442@chaosce4015e22> References: <20061018174658.61423.qmail@web31811.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <426A2BE0-5F26-11DB-B6CF-000D9334A9EA@incentre.net> <00a101c6f33b$086e6370$a4407442@chaosce4015e22> Message-ID: <45375203.2050100@zunder.org.uk> Steve Perrin wrote: > But when you have that information in the deep dark recesses of your > mind and you bring it out successfully, then you have imprinted it. > You have seen it in action and it works (or is true, or whatever). > Thus, your stock of ready knowledge increases, and your percentage > goes up. It is known that some learn best by doing, some by reading, some by seeing etc. I think with a low tech fantasy world then learning by doing will work with knowledge skills, if you assume the roll is in fact the highpoint of chatting, talking, observing, reading etc. In a modern BRP game you could actually ask people to categorise their character into the three groups and allow different skill point increases by type. So, I am a 'learning by doing' person, I get 1d6 for all action based experience rolls, and can learn knowledge skills by training. I am a 'learning by observing', I get 1d6 for all training based increases. I 'learn by reading', I get 1d6 for all research based increases. etc. etc. I know there are some formal terms for these different styles but I cannot remember them right now. -- Tom Zunder http://www.zunder.org.uk AIM: tomzunder Yahoo: tzunder MSN: tom at zunder.org.uk -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: tom.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 250 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061019/1fd0b813/attachment.vcf From jurrubin at gmail.com Fri Oct 20 00:28:30 2006 From: jurrubin at gmail.com (David Smart) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 09:28:30 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude In-Reply-To: <20061019071845.90623.qmail@web86105.mail.ird.yahoo.com> References: <20061018174658.61423.qmail@web31811.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <20061019071845.90623.qmail@web86105.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1c92296e0610190728l3339b9e2uc2d251d1c7a7dcf0@mail.gmail.com> On 10/19/06, Ashley Munday wrote: > > Hi Paul, > > > In addition (and it doesn't look like David's using > this) there were provisions for skills that weren't > used during an adventure to decline if they were 75 of > over so more and more training time was taken up > practising things you had a high level in rather than > developing new skills. You're correct; I don't use skill decline. If my group had more time to play, I'd consider it though. http://www.btinternet.com/~aescleal/Experience.htm has > got the full monte. Appologies for the colour scheme > and typos, it hasn't been modified since 1999. > LOL. And where do you think I grabbed the rules from? This is a writeup on skill use and improvement. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061019/d921ce61/attachment.html From julian.lord at gmail.com Fri Oct 20 03:30:48 2006 From: julian.lord at gmail.com (Julian Lord) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 19:30:48 +0200 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 13, Issue 13 In-Reply-To: <20061019071857.0DD91D8208C@mini.thinbits.net> References: <20061019071857.0DD91D8208C@mini.thinbits.net> Message-ID: <1e842f7f0610191030q66f2d810of56a0ad02895f3c6@mail.gmail.com> Steve : Actually, I allow for experience gains for knowledge skills. This is why. > > If you learn something from training alone, it does not necessarily ground > itself in your brain and stay there. I'm sure we're all had that > experience > from book larnin'. > > But when you have that information in the deep dark recesses of your mind > and you bring it out successfully, then you have imprinted it. You have > seen > it in action and it works (or is true, or whatever). Thus, your stock of > ready knowledge increases, and your percentage goes up. > > That's how I'm doing it, anyway. Steve, I've come to the exact same conclusion as you have. I also allow PCs to increase/train their INT scores like any other characteristic, for two reasons : 1) Intelligence can actually in the RW be increased by training ; there are some limits to this from natural ability/disability, but it is possible. 2) More importantly, a character in a roleplaying game with low INT might just be someone with bad parents, bad background, bad education, be someone with unrealized potential, or might simply be a late bloomer like Einstein. or whatever ; rules allowing INT increase can provide for both scenarios. :-) Julian Lord -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061019/21d3ba59/attachment.html From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Oct 20 04:02:49 2006 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 11:02:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 13, Issue 13 Message-ID: <20061019180249.71034.qmail@web31208.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Same here. Not giving experience checks in Lore skills pretty much kills advancement for any sorcerer. Leon --- rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com wrote: > Steve : > > Actually, I allow for experience gains for knowledge skills. This is why. > > > > If you learn something from training alone, it does not necessarily ground > > itself in your brain and stay there. I'm sure we're all had that > > experience > > from book larnin'. > > > > But when you have that information in the deep dark recesses of your mind > > and you bring it out successfully, then you have imprinted it. You have > > seen > > it in action and it works (or is true, or whatever). Thus, your stock of > > ready knowledge increases, and your percentage goes up. > > > > That's how I'm doing it, anyway. > > > Steve, I've come to the exact same conclusion as you have. > > I also allow PCs to increase/train their INT scores like any other > characteristic, for two reasons : 1) Intelligence can actually in the RW be > increased by training ; there are some limits to this from natural > ability/disability, but it is possible. 2) More importantly, a character in > a roleplaying game with low INT might just be someone with bad parents, bad > background, bad education, be someone with unrealized potential, or might > simply be a late bloomer like Einstein. or whatever ; rules allowing INT > increase can provide for both scenarios. :-) > > Julian Lord > ------------ > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From anders at california.com Fri Oct 20 04:38:56 2006 From: anders at california.com (Anders Swenson) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 11:38:56 -0700 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ Play-by-email? In-Reply-To: <20061019025641.65327.qmail@web31208.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 19:56:41 -0700 (PDT) Leon Kirshtein wrote: > --- Peter Maranci wrote: > > > I've been getting the urge to do more roleplaying, > > and since it's impossible > > to find RQ players in this area, I'm thinking of > > running a play-by-email (or > > possibly a game on a LiveJournal community or > > something). > > This would be the place to do it: > > http://www.rpol.net > > I am runing several games there, some RQ and some not, > but it has everything (or most) things you need to run > a game. > > Leon Sounds interesting, assuming I register on the site, what do I do next to get into a game? --Anders From wbcreighton at yahoo.ca Fri Oct 20 05:52:40 2006 From: wbcreighton at yahoo.ca (Warren Creighton) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 15:52:40 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ Play-by-email? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20061019195240.48555.qmail@web32106.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Don't forget: http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/GloranthaInternetGaming/ A meeting place for RQ and HQ pbem games. Warren My pbem game that I am going to revive: http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/griffin_mtn_rq2/ --- Anders Swenson wrote: > On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 19:56:41 -0700 (PDT) > Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > --- Peter Maranci wrote: > > > > > I've been getting the urge to do more > roleplaying, > > > and since it's impossible > > > to find RQ players in this area, I'm thinking of > > > running a play-by-email (or > > > possibly a game on a LiveJournal community or > > > something). > > > > This would be the place to do it: > > > > http://www.rpol.net > > > > I am runing several games there, some RQ and some > not, > > but it has everything (or most) things you need to > run > > a game. > > > > Leon > Sounds interesting, assuming I register on the site, > what do I do next to get > into a game? > --Anders > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Oct 20 06:45:53 2006 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 13:45:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ Play-by-email? Message-ID: <20061019204553.65017.qmail@web31214.mail.mud.yahoo.com> They run a whole bunch of games, majority are D&D, but there are plenty of others. There are forums on the site where people advitise for players and or GMs. You can also start your own game. Get an account, look around. Leon --- rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com wrote: > On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 19:56:41 -0700 (PDT) > Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > --- Peter Maranci wrote: > > > > > I've been getting the urge to do more roleplaying, > > > and since it's impossible > > > to find RQ players in this area, I'm thinking of > > > running a play-by-email (or > > > possibly a game on a LiveJournal community or > > > something). > > > > This would be the place to do it: > > > > http://www.rpol.net > > > > I am runing several games there, some RQ and some not, > > but it has everything (or most) things you need to run > > a game. > > > > Leon > Sounds interesting, assuming I register on the site, what do I do next to get > into a game? > --Anders > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From lancelot at inetnebr.com Fri Oct 20 09:39:07 2006 From: lancelot at inetnebr.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 18:39:07 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 13, Issue 13 In-Reply-To: <1e842f7f0610191030q66f2d810of56a0ad02895f3c6@mail.gmail.com> References: <20061019071857.0DD91D8208C@mini.thinbits.net> <1e842f7f0610191030q66f2d810of56a0ad02895f3c6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <45380C9B.7050806@inetnebr.com> Julian Lord wrote: > Steve : > > Actually, I allow for experience gains for knowledge skills. This > is why. > > If you learn something from training alone, it does not > necessarily ground > itself in your brain and stay there. I'm sure we're all had that > experience > from book larnin'. > > But when you have that information in the deep dark recesses of > your mind > and you bring it out successfully, then you have imprinted it. You > have seen > it in action and it works (or is true, or whatever). Thus, your > stock of > ready knowledge increases, and your percentage goes up. > > That's how I'm doing it, anyway. > > > Steve, I've come to the exact same conclusion as you have. > > I also allow PCs to increase/train their INT scores like any other > characteristic, for two reasons : 1) Intelligence can actually in the > RW be increased by training ; there are some limits to this from > natural ability/disability, but it is possible. 2) More importantly, a > character in a roleplaying game with low INT might just be someone > with bad parents, bad background, bad education, be someone with > unrealized potential, or might simply be a late bloomer like Einstein. Einstein failed some early math... not due to lack of ability but rather because of a disinterest in anything so simple and his social skills were lacking.. he couldnt be tactful with a teacher less capable than himself or so the rumor goes. And by his late 20s had already shown full bloom brilliance his later in life accomplishments were ahem "social" rather than mathematical or physics oriented. INT didn't increase but CHA did ;-) From darthvogel at hotmail.com Fri Oct 20 12:05:54 2006 From: darthvogel at hotmail.com (Fred Vogel) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 21:05:54 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude In-Reply-To: <45375203.2050100@zunder.org.uk> Message-ID: I can see two sides to this and both are very valid. On the one hand, if I see a plant and have plant lore at 15% and ask to ID the plant the following would seem to apply: On Success 1) It was part of what I had learned already. I don't gain in knowledge for this, I just applied my knowledge. On Failure 1. It wasn't part of what I learned; I simply can't ID the plant. 2. I could draw the plant or take notes and try to learn about it through research later and maybe increase via research. But, on the other hand; if I was using my Orc Lore and I was spying on a group of orcs for several days, I may simply observe enough to learn something about Orc behaviour, culture, etc.; which could actually cause an increase or skill entry. Both are valid viewpoints. In this case I guess the best way to implement something that captures both sides, the GM would have to rule on a case by case basis what the learning value of the action/observation. >From Steve's comment: >Steve Perrin wrote: >>But when you have that information in the deep dark recesses of your mind >>and you bring it out successfully, then you have imprinted it. You have >>seen it in action and it works (or is true, or whatever). Thus, your stock >>of ready knowledge increases, and your percentage goes up. The problem I see with this angle is that it assumes that the player already possesses all knowledge of the subject and it is a matter of bringing it out. This is contrary to the way learning actually is, where knowledge is only gained by study or observation. The idea in Steve's comment that I like is the concept of retention. When I learn something in real life, such as calculus, I have to use it or I forget it. A quick brush up could get me able to use it quickly; but if I were to try to answer a calculus question after 5 years of not touching it, that might be a very hard task to pull off. Off the top of my head I can't think of a way to model all of these aspects easily. I will think about this and see if I can come up with something. Fred >It is known that some learn best by doing, some by reading, some by seeing >etc. > >I think with a low tech fantasy world then learning by doing will work with >knowledge skills, if you assume the roll is in fact the highpoint of >chatting, talking, observing, reading etc. > >In a modern BRP game you could actually ask people to categorise their >character into the three groups and allow different skill point increases >by type. > >So, I am a 'learning by doing' person, I get 1d6 for all action based >experience rolls, and can learn knowledge skills by training. > >I am a 'learning by observing', I get 1d6 for all training based increases. > >I 'learn by reading', I get 1d6 for all research based increases. > >Tom Zunder _________________________________________________________________ Get FREE company branded e-mail accounts and business Web site from Microsoft Office Live http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/mcrssaub0050001411mrt/direct/01/ From lancelot at inetnebr.com Fri Oct 20 12:25:56 2006 From: lancelot at inetnebr.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 21:25:56 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <453833B4.6050200@inetnebr.com> Fred Vogel wrote: > > The idea in Steve's comment that I like is the concept of retention. > When I learn something in real life, such as calculus, I have to use > it or I forget it. A quick brush up could get me able to use it > quickly; but if I were to try to answer a calculus question after 5 > years of not touching it, that might be a very hard task to pull off. > > Off the top of my head I can't think of a way to model all of these > aspects easily. I will think about this and see if I can come up with > something. > > Fred > I can't remember what they call it but I call it shifting your skill emphasis... its a way to show neglecting one skill in favor of another... the player can explicitly allow one skill to fade to gain skill in another. From tcantine at incentre.net Fri Oct 20 14:18:02 2006 From: tcantine at incentre.net (Tom Cantine) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 22:18:02 -0600 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 19-Oct-06, at 8:05 PM, Fred Vogel wrote: > > I can see two sides to this and both are very valid. > > On the one hand, if I see a plant and have plant lore at 15% and ask > to ID the plant the following would seem to apply: > > On Success > 1) It was part of what I had learned already. I don't gain in > knowledge for this, I just applied my knowledge. Another possibility just occurred to me here. You see a plant you recognize, but you notice something new about it. For example, in finding it, you notice that it often seems to grow in the shade of a certain kind of tree. So you get a check, and there's a chance that you'll find the same plant faster next time because you have a better idea where to look, as well as what to look for. From sunwolfek12 at sbcglobal.net Fri Oct 20 14:39:47 2006 From: sunwolfek12 at sbcglobal.net (andrep) Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 21:39:47 -0700 Subject: [Rq-rules] RE: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 13, Issue 14 In-Reply-To: <20061019204615.574D2D8A06D@mini.thinbits.net> Message-ID: Uncloaking... Tom Zunder wrote, >So, I am a 'learning by doing' person, I get 1d6 for all action based experience rolls, and can learn knowledge skills by training. >I am a 'learning by observing', I get 1d6 for all training based increases. >I 'learn by reading', I get 1d6 for all research based increases. >etc. etc. >I know there are some formal terms for these different styles but I cannot remember them right now. Kinesthetic (doing), Auditory (listening) and Visual (watching) learners. ...cloaking From jurrubin at gmail.com Fri Oct 20 21:54:09 2006 From: jurrubin at gmail.com (David Smart) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 06:54:09 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] RE: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 13, Issue 14 In-Reply-To: References: <20061019204615.574D2D8A06D@mini.thinbits.net> Message-ID: <1c92296e0610200454t68243739l894ce9fe8f83594@mail.gmail.com> So, essentially, "knowledge" allows one to recognize patterns in one's environment while "skills" allows one to modify one's environment. On 10/19/06, andrep wrote: > > Uncloaking... > > Tom Zunder wrote, > > >So, I am a 'learning by doing' person, I get 1d6 for all action based > experience rolls, and can learn knowledge skills by training. > > >I am a 'learning by observing', I get 1d6 for all training based > increases. > > >I 'learn by reading', I get 1d6 for all research based increases. > > >etc. etc. > > >I know there are some formal terms for these different styles but I > cannot remember them right now. > > Kinesthetic (doing), Auditory (listening) and Visual (watching) learners. > > ...cloaking > > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061020/dafe7a85/attachment.html From alanjrichards at googlemail.com Sat Oct 21 00:11:38 2006 From: alanjrichards at googlemail.com (alan richards) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 15:11:38 +0100 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 13, Issue 14 In-Reply-To: <20061019204615.68F71D8A06E@mini.thinbits.net> References: <20061019204615.68F71D8A06E@mini.thinbits.net> Message-ID: <50a0ed550610200711n2252c42rca5c942f7d47a2a4@mail.gmail.com> On 10/19/06, rq-rules-request at crashbox.com wrote: > > Send RQ-Rules mailing list submissions to > Message: 2 > Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 11:22:59 +0100 > From: Thomas Zunder > Subject: Re: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude > To: "Discussion of RuneQuest rules." > Message-ID: <45375203.2050100 at zunder.org.uk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Steve Perrin wrote: > > But when you have that information in the deep dark recesses of your > > mind and you bring it out successfully, then you have imprinted it. > > You have seen it in action and it works (or is true, or whatever). > > Thus, your stock of ready knowledge increases, and your percentage > > goes up. > It is known that some learn best by doing, some by reading, some by > seeing etc. > > I think with a low tech fantasy world then learning by doing will work > with knowledge skills, if you assume the roll is in fact the highpoint > of chatting, talking, observing, reading etc. > > In a modern BRP game you could actually ask people to categorise their > character into the three groups and allow different skill point > increases by type. > > So, I am a 'learning by doing' person, I get 1d6 for all action based > experience rolls, and can learn knowledge skills by training. > > I am a 'learning by observing', I get 1d6 for all training based > increases. > > I 'learn by reading', I get 1d6 for all research based increases. > > etc. etc. > > I know there are some formal terms for these different styles but I > cannot remember them right now. > > -- > Tom Zunder More than one theory on this one VAK: Visual, Auditory, Kinaesthetic Respectively Learn by seeing, learn by hearing, learn by doing Multiple Intelligences Bodil-Kinaesthetic Creative Intrapersonal Interpersonal Linguistic Logical-Mathematical Musical Where each Intelligence is a strength in types of learning and ways of learning. An IQ test for example measures mathematical-logical intelligence but there are lots of people with very high IQs who simply cannot grasp the fundamentals of a foreign language or sing in tune. I personally add Technical as another category as I have any number of bodies who turn up to my workshop who are 'good at sport' and thus expect to be 'good at practical work' but in fact at difficulty holding a Tenon Saw the right way round; and there are any number of fat knackers who are no use at ball sports but excel at fine motor skills work I used to have a horrendously complex system of allocating skills to each of these Intelligences (in the place of skill categories) but eventually gave it up as a bad job. DareDevils has an intriguingidea of adding Aptitudes as additional characteristics, but being an FGU game it then explodes into a mess of complication Al -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061020/9963c289/attachment.html From styopa1 at gmail.com Sat Oct 21 00:27:36 2006 From: styopa1 at gmail.com (Styopa) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 09:27:36 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <56e64e7a0610200727x51b66547uc106659c8eb81eb3@mail.gmail.com> W-e-l-l.... I think one could go ridiculously far (ref my earlier point about RQ rules being realistic enough that they sustain investigation deeper and deeper to paralyzingly navel-contemplating levels). Let's remember first of all that Plant Lore (as with any skill) is a catch-all covering, but not limited to: -plant identification -plant use in foods -medical applications of plant products -farming -etc, etc, etc ...each of which could itself be a giant catch-all for geographically-specific regions, fields of specialization, etc. Each of these COULD have a different approach, saying that in some cases you're simply regurgitating knowledge, and in others you're synthesizing information which results in net greater information on a subject. Unless you want to bore your players to tears, or have character sheet lists of skills 300 pages long, a rationalization is called for. My simplest suggestion would be that we could simply say that you only get a skill check with a special success, to represent an occasion where you actually learned something by applying the knowledge? Or if you wanted to make it more based on the character, not the skill, say that they get the skill check IF their ability modifier is the reason they succeeded (ie the naked roll would have failed). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061020/41e82730/attachment.html From alanjrichards at googlemail.com Sat Oct 21 00:33:04 2006 From: alanjrichards at googlemail.com (alan richards) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 15:33:04 +0100 Subject: [Rq-rules] Bloody Digests Message-ID: <50a0ed550610200733i69f605f5n941b50fb3b0ed13c@mail.gmail.com> On 10/20/06, rq-rules-request at crashbox.com wrote: > > > Message: 5 > Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 21:39:47 -0700 > From: "andrep" > Subject: [Rq-rules] RE: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 13, Issue 14 > To: > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Uncloaking... > > Tom Zunder wrote, > > >So, I am a 'learning by doing' person, I get 1d6 for all action based > experience rolls, and can learn knowledge skills by training. > > >I am a 'learning by observing', I get 1d6 for all training based > increases. > > >I 'learn by reading', I get 1d6 for all research based increases. > > >etc. etc. > > >I know there are some formal terms for these different styles but I > cannot remember them right now. > > Kinesthetic (doing), Auditory (listening) and Visual (watching) learners. > > ...cloaking Honest I didn't ignore Andrep's post or try to trump him in some way. i get this list in digest, so posted my reply before I received his Sorry Al -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061020/8334b557/attachment.html From tom at zunder.org.uk Sat Oct 21 02:17:48 2006 From: tom at zunder.org.uk (Thomas Zunder) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 17:17:48 +0100 Subject: [Rq-rules] Bloody Digests In-Reply-To: <50a0ed550610200733i69f605f5n941b50fb3b0ed13c@mail.gmail.com> References: <50a0ed550610200733i69f605f5n941b50fb3b0ed13c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4538F6AC.6060303@zunder.org.uk> alan richards wrote: > > Honest I didn't ignore Andrep's post or try to trump him in some way. > i get this list in digest, so posted my reply before I received his I found them *complementary*. -- Tom Zunder http://www.zunder.org.uk AIM: tomzunder Yahoo: tzunder MSN: tom at zunder.org.uk -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: tom.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 250 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061020/ff24ef73/attachment.vcf From slposey at slposey.cnc.net Sat Oct 21 06:06:54 2006 From: slposey at slposey.cnc.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 14:06:54 -0600 (MDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 13, Issue 14 In-Reply-To: <20061019204615.68F71D8A06E@mini.thinbits.net> Message-ID: <200610202006.QAA26151@centaur.cnc.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061020/c1f0683d/attachment.html From slposey at slposey.cnc.net Sat Oct 21 06:10:33 2006 From: slposey at slposey.cnc.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 14:10:33 -0600 (MDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200610202010.QAA29409@centaur.cnc.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061020/a97fb171/attachment.html From jurrubin at gmail.com Sat Oct 21 06:20:23 2006 From: jurrubin at gmail.com (David Smart) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 15:20:23 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude In-Reply-To: <200610202010.QAA29409@centaur.cnc.net> References: <200610202010.QAA29409@centaur.cnc.net> Message-ID: <1c92296e0610201320u7c5934d7pd1b8e1b7825ab62@mail.gmail.com> Interesting! And by modifying the percentage gained rolls to something like 2d4 then gains happen more rarely but when they do the character has really learned something. The bad news is at low skill levels, even high-INT characters may not learn at all and I just can't accept that. On 10/20/06, Stephen Posey wrote: > > > I've been inclined to give checks for special failures too, to reflect > learning from your mistakes ("I'll never do *that* again!"). > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061020/f4c71ee1/attachment.html From carpgachair at yahoo.com Sun Oct 22 01:40:42 2006 From: carpgachair at yahoo.com (Paul Cardwell) Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 08:40:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Aptitude In-Reply-To: <200610202010.QAA29409@centaur.cnc.net> Message-ID: <20061021154042.84599.qmail@web31805.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Stephen Posey wrote: ...Unless you want to bore your players to tears, or have character sheet lists of skills 300 pages long, a rationalization is called for. Mythworld character sheets are only four pages long. 1. physical stats, armor, weapons, and spells; 2. skills (agility, communication, knowledge, manipulation); 3. skills (perception, stealth) and items owned (battle, dismounted, mounted, trade, etc. kits); 4. stats for mount and familiar. First time players only think it is 300 pages! :-) However, once we found no one had the handout characters at a convention and three of us generated ten fully developed characters in one hour. Paul Cardwell __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From postmaster at runequest.za.org Mon Oct 23 15:22:19 2006 From: postmaster at runequest.za.org (postmaster at runequest.za.org) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 07:22:19 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQIV vs RQVI In-Reply-To: <20061017033823.44323.qmail@web33514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <1e842f7f0610160837l1d584a25hf2d0f4e479d5ca94@mail.gmail.com> <20061017033823.44323.qmail@web33514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <43024.196.8.104.31.1161580939.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> Lev wrote: > > RQ: AiG is unpublished and therefore doesn't get a > number. > > Slayers had nothing to do with the game RQ and whilst > it is an interesting game it is own right, has never > been considered an intrinsic part of RQ discussion > groups afiak. > > (and yes, I have read both RQ: AiG and RQ Slayers) > > Ergo, I'm sticking with describing Mongoose's > publication as RQ IV. > > I agree with Lev here, a version should only be considered if it is officially published. Slayers is available on the net, but methinks it doesn't count as an official publication. Tony From postmaster at runequest.za.org Mon Oct 23 15:37:12 2006 From: postmaster at runequest.za.org (postmaster at runequest.za.org) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 07:37:12 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [Rq-rules] Finally got my copy of MRQ In-Reply-To: <20061017184550.49490.qmail@web32812.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <1c92296e0610171123q24e9a49fw3675553ba5bcb925@mail.gmail.com> <20061017184550.49490.qmail@web32812.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <61099.196.8.104.31.1161581832.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> Greg wrote: > So far I have the Main MRQ, the MRQ COMPANION, MRQ > MONSTERS, and MRQ LEGENDS. > > I really like the monsters book. > I am keen to lay hands on some of the gear and have a look. My prob is I tend to get excited and want to collect everything end end up wasting cash on sh1te like Daughter of Darkness. Still, Maybe will wait until I can guage just how much Mongoose tends to flood the market with. Tony From postmaster at runequest.za.org Mon Oct 23 15:39:58 2006 From: postmaster at runequest.za.org (postmaster at runequest.za.org) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 07:39:58 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Runequest History and reprint availability In-Reply-To: <8C8C038683C2344-8A8-58DC@FWM-M26.sysops.aol.com> References: <20061017181833.77974D6B1CF@mini.thinbits.net> <8C8C038683C2344-8A8-58DC@FWM-M26.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <1172.196.8.104.31.1161581998.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> Rick wrote: > Thanks for the link to your history of Runequest. > > In your article you mention the avialability of RQ material. > You can get high quality reprints (new layout, extra art, etc.) of: > > Pavis & Big Rubble > Griffin Mountain > Cult Compendium (combo of Cults of Prax and Cults of Terror, plus other > cults) > Borderlands & Beyond (Borderlands, Plunder and Runemasters) > > from my www.glorantha.info website. > Ah, nothing like a plug for ones business, ha ha:) Seriously though, I actually saw a copy of your Griffin Mountain book at my "loical" games shop here in South Africa. Stranget it made it thus far cause the RQ/Glorantha community here is more or less nonexistant. Tony From postmaster at runequest.za.org Mon Oct 23 15:41:43 2006 From: postmaster at runequest.za.org (postmaster at runequest.za.org) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 07:41:43 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 13, Issue 9 In-Reply-To: <1e842f7f0610180016rc5e55a5p9b303ae44426f6c9@mail.gmail.com> References: <20061017181833.77974D6B1CF@mini.thinbits.net> <1e842f7f0610180016rc5e55a5p9b303ae44426f6c9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <3014.196.8.104.31.1161582103.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> > Two or three versions of the playtest rules can be discovered online if > you > look for them, but the fuller version(s), including the proposed > publication > draft, were only made available to a very small number of people. > > And whether or not NDA with a defunct games company applies or not, it is > unlikely they will ever surface on the net... > > Julian Lord Greg Stafford (AFAIK) sold a copy on eBay two weeks ago...... From lancelot at inetnebr.com Mon Oct 23 23:30:55 2006 From: lancelot at inetnebr.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 08:30:55 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQIV vs RQVI In-Reply-To: <43024.196.8.104.31.1161580939.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> References: <1e842f7f0610160837l1d584a25hf2d0f4e479d5ca94@mail.gmail.com> <20061017033823.44323.qmail@web33514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43024.196.8.104.31.1161580939.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> Message-ID: <453CC40F.8000602@inetnebr.com> postmaster at runequest.za.org wrote: > Lev wrote: > >> RQ: AiG is unpublished and therefore doesn't get a >> number. >> >> Slayers had nothing to do with the game RQ and whilst >> it is an interesting game it is own right, has never >> been considered an intrinsic part of RQ discussion >> groups afiak. >> >> (and yes, I have read both RQ: AiG and RQ Slayers) >> >> Ergo, I'm sticking with describing Mongoose's >> publication as RQ IV. >> >> >> > I agree with Lev here, a version should only be considered if it is > officially published. Slayers is available on the net, but methinks it > doesn't count as an official publication. > Tony > However avoiding confusion when referring to something is more important than being pedantic. The RQ AiG version has a history on the web at least of being called RQIV if Mongoose's RQ called itself RQIV - that would supersede it certainly. The latest Release doesn't call itself anything but Rune Quest though it could have chosen a 4th edition tag line (not yet purchased this champing at the bit) If I recall RuneQuest Slayers did not owe anything of its rules to any previous Runequest though it certainly had an interesting theme. so presenting it as a RQ5 would indeed be odd to me...whether it was official or not but that might be a prejudice on my part From pmaranci at gmail.com Mon Oct 23 23:49:49 2006 From: pmaranci at gmail.com (Peter Maranci) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 09:49:49 -0400 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQIV vs RQVI In-Reply-To: <453CC40F.8000602@inetnebr.com> References: <1e842f7f0610160837l1d584a25hf2d0f4e479d5ca94@mail.gmail.com> <20061017033823.44323.qmail@web33514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43024.196.8.104.31.1161580939.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> <453CC40F.8000602@inetnebr.com> Message-ID: On 10/23/06, Lance Dyas wrote: > > However avoiding confusion when referring to something is more important > than being pedantic. The RQ AiG version has a history on the web at least of > being called RQIV if Mongoose's RQ called itself RQIV - that would > supersede it certainly. > > The latest Release doesn't call itself anything but Rune Quest though it > could have chosen a 4th edition tag line (not yet purchased this champing at > the bit) Hmm. I wonder if there would be legal issues if Mongoose were to use a tag indicating a direct relationship between the versions of RQ published by Chaosium (or under their auspices), since Chaosium still holds the copyright to the text of RQ1-3. "The same system in different words", after all. Putting Mongoose RQ in numerical sequence with the Chaosium versions would imply a relationship that doesn't exist, as I understand it. But then, I'm not a lawyer. Sigh. Looks like I'll be left out of things here on the list more and often, since I'm not going to buy or support MRQ. Oh well! ->Peter -- Peter Maranci - pmaranci at gmail.com Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying! http://www.runequest.org/rq.htm The Diary of An Invisible Man: http://bobquasit.livejournal.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061023/b5db570d/attachment.html From jurrubin at gmail.com Tue Oct 24 00:17:04 2006 From: jurrubin at gmail.com (David Smart) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 09:17:04 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQIV vs RQVI In-Reply-To: References: <1e842f7f0610160837l1d584a25hf2d0f4e479d5ca94@mail.gmail.com> <20061017033823.44323.qmail@web33514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43024.196.8.104.31.1161580939.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> <453CC40F.8000602@inetnebr.com> Message-ID: <1c92296e0610230717q40bb1a83m29f60adabee946a6@mail.gmail.com> Heh. Don't bet on being left out, Peter. Topics on MRQ will likely spawn thoughts we'd love to hear from you. Example: One of the things I admit to really liking about MRQ is its inclusion of brief visual description of spell effects. Ex. Heal causes the skin to appear to crawl and move together, sealing the wound. Realistically, this has nothing to do with the MRQ engine but rather is a little add-on that can help improve the RQ experience and make it more immersive. I'm definitely adding such descriptions to my own campaign's spell lists. As for what to call Mongoose's published version, we on this list can call it anything we want as long as we all understand the reference. I myself will henceforth refer to it as MRQ and refer to the aborted version after RQIII as RQIV or RQ:AIG interchangeably. On 10/23/06, Peter Maranci wrote: > > > Sigh. Looks like I'll be left out of things here on the list more and > often, since I'm not going to buy or support MRQ. Oh well! > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061023/fcc778ec/attachment.html From tcantine at incentre.net Tue Oct 24 00:55:09 2006 From: tcantine at incentre.net (Tom Cantine) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 08:55:09 -0600 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQIV vs RQVI In-Reply-To: <1c92296e0610230717q40bb1a83m29f60adabee946a6@mail.gmail.com> References: <1e842f7f0610160837l1d584a25hf2d0f4e479d5ca94@mail.gmail.com> <20061017033823.44323.qmail@web33514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43024.196.8.104.31.1161580939.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> <453CC40F.8000602@inetnebr.com> <1c92296e0610230717q40bb1a83m29f60adabee946a6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <7AA8F5C4-62A6-11DB-ABBC-000D9334A9EA@incentre.net> I'm very much in favour of such descriptions, but I'm of two minds about including them in the rule book directly. That is, there should certainly be mention of the importance of providing vivid descriptions, and perhaps an example or two, but as for whether there should be any official description, I'm not so sure. I like my game systems to be generic. I tend to view rules as a way to lay out the basic functional underpinnings of the world, and I like them to leave room for the GM/players to provide the much colour as much as possible. Providing a single (or even a small selection of) official description(s) can limit that. On 23-Oct-06, at 8:17 AM, David Smart wrote: > Heh. Don't bet on being left out, Peter. Topics on MRQ will likely > spawn thoughts we'd love to hear from you. > > Example: One of the things I admit to really liking about MRQ is its > inclusion of brief visual description of spell effects. Ex. Heal > causes the skin to appear to crawl and move together, sealing the > wound. > > Realistically, this has nothing to do with the MRQ engine but rather > is a little add-on that can help improve the RQ experience and make it > more immersive. I'm definitely adding such descriptions to my own > campaign's spell lists. > > As for what to call Mongoose's published version, we on this list can > call it anything we want as long as we all understand the reference. I > myself will henceforth refer to it as MRQ and refer to the aborted > version after RQIII as RQIV or RQ:AIG interchangeably. > > On 10/23/06, Peter Maranci wrote: > ? > Sigh. Looks like I'll be left out of things here on the list more and > often, since I'm not going to buy or support MRQ. Oh well! > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 1933 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061023/3a3948c9/attachment.bin From anders at california.com Tue Oct 24 01:51:33 2006 From: anders at california.com (Anders Swenson) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 08:51:33 -0700 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQIV vs RQVI In-Reply-To: <453CC40F.8000602@inetnebr.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 08:30:55 -0500 Lance Dyas wrote: >[snip] > The latest Release doesn't call itself anything but Rune Quest though it > could have chosen a 4th edition tag line (not yet purchased this champing at > the bit) > Funny you should say that, I have several copies of MRQ lacking customers. Too bad you're probably not in the States. --Anders From jurrubin at gmail.com Tue Oct 24 02:34:35 2006 From: jurrubin at gmail.com (David Smart) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 11:34:35 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQIV vs RQVI In-Reply-To: <7AA8F5C4-62A6-11DB-ABBC-000D9334A9EA@incentre.net> References: <1e842f7f0610160837l1d584a25hf2d0f4e479d5ca94@mail.gmail.com> <20061017033823.44323.qmail@web33514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43024.196.8.104.31.1161580939.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> <453CC40F.8000602@inetnebr.com> <1c92296e0610230717q40bb1a83m29f60adabee946a6@mail.gmail.com> <7AA8F5C4-62A6-11DB-ABBC-000D9334A9EA@incentre.net> Message-ID: <1c92296e0610230934w40cd8c04l642bb1bf3436280@mail.gmail.com> Heh. Ain't no such thing as "official" to me. Just material for the campaign gristmill. On 10/23/06, Tom Cantine wrote: > > I tend to view rules as a way to > lay out the basic functional underpinnings of the world, and I like > them to leave room for the GM/players to provide the much colour as > much as possible. Providing a single (or even a small selection of) > official description(s) can limit that. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061023/fd18420e/attachment.html From slposey at slposey.cnc.net Tue Oct 24 05:03:12 2006 From: slposey at slposey.cnc.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 13:03:12 -0600 (MDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQIV vs RQVI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200610231903.PAA13726@atlas.cnc.net> ---- Discussion of RuneQuest rules. wrote: > > On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 08:30:55 -0500 > Lance Dyas wrote: > >[snip] > > > The latest Release doesn't call itself anything but Rune Quest though it > > could have chosen a 4th edition tag line (not yet purchased this > > champing at the bit) > > > Funny you should say that, I have several copies of MRQ lacking customers. > Too bad you're probably not in the States. > --Anders I, however, AM in the US and don't yet have a copy. How much are you selling them for? (include S&H if you please). Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From lancelot at inetnebr.com Tue Oct 24 09:56:15 2006 From: lancelot at inetnebr.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 18:56:15 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQIV vs RQVI In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <453D569F.60407@inetnebr.com> Anders Swenson wrote: > On Mon, 23 Oct 2006 08:30:55 -0500 > Lance Dyas wrote: > >> [snip] >> > > >> The latest Release doesn't call itself anything but Rune Quest though it >> could have chosen a 4th edition tag line (not yet purchased this champing >> > at > >> the bit) >> >> > Funny you should say that, I have several copies of MRQ lacking customers. > Too bad you're probably not in the States. > --Anders > Actually the Dyas sept of the Skene clan may have originated in Scotland near Amberdeenshire... but myself and closest kin are indeed Amerikin...or is that USA'ers. The eartliest funds will be available for such a purchase is probably early Nov. Though it might have to be a birthday present for my son.. rather than me ;-) From gianni at basicrps.com Tue Oct 24 19:44:39 2006 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 11:44:39 +0200 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQIV vs RQVI Message-ID: <20061024094459.8EB8DDC0F98@mini.thinbits.net> Hi > Heh. Don't bet on being left out, Peter. Topics on MRQ will likely spawn > thoughts we'd love to hear from you. > > Example: One of the things I admit to really liking about MRQ is its > inclusion of brief visual description of spell effects. Ex. Heal causes the > skin to appear to crawl and move together, sealing the wound. Another interesting addition from the MRQ product line is the source book about Second Age Glorantha. I haven't read it cover-to-cover yet, but until now there weren't any 'technical' data in it, so people using older versions of RQ (or even HQ) should definitely check it out. Cheers, Gianni From clive.wickens at btopenworld.com Thu Oct 26 07:43:30 2006 From: clive.wickens at btopenworld.com (Clive Wickens) Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 22:43:30 +0100 Subject: [Rq-rules] Somewhat off topic Message-ID: <000601c6f87e$9e6932e0$5b698456@sickboy> Whilst stooging around I found out that David Gemmell the author had died back in July: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5224868.stm Shame, I liked his stuff and he seemed a nice chap when I met him. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061025/1ea75738/attachment.html From postmaster at runequest.za.org Thu Oct 26 20:17:21 2006 From: postmaster at runequest.za.org (postmaster at runequest.za.org) Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 12:17:21 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [Rq-rules] Somewhat off topic In-Reply-To: <000601c6f87e$9e6932e0$5b698456@sickboy> References: <000601c6f87e$9e6932e0$5b698456@sickboy> Message-ID: <33756.196.8.104.31.1161857841.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> Bummer, I have read one or two of his books. The bloke liked a good siege story. A shame. > Whilst stooging around I found out that David Gemmell the author had died > back in July: > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5224868.stm > > Shame, I liked his stuff and he seemed a nice chap when I met > him._______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From clive.wickens at btopenworld.com Sat Oct 28 06:18:33 2006 From: clive.wickens at btopenworld.com (Clive Wickens) Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 21:18:33 +0100 Subject: [Rq-rules] Some thoughts about SIZ Message-ID: <000601c6fa05$14efd400$695f8456@sickboy> One of the things that always kind of bothered me about RQ is that SIZ is really just a function of weight ( or should that be mass to be accurate ? ) the SIZ table only takes into account how much an object or creature weighs. The actual size or volume of the creature in question just doesn't seem to get taken into account. To me the SIZ of say...an elephant should factor in it's height, length AND weight. I don't have a clue quite how you'd work all that though. Any ideas ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061027/f71ab3e6/attachment.html From gianni at basicrps.com Sat Oct 28 21:27:39 2006 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2006 13:27:39 +0200 Subject: [Rq-rules] Spolite Message-ID: <20061028112757.297A2DF8837@mini.thinbits.net> Hi all This is a Gloranthan-related question. I've seen several references to the 'Spolite Empire' on fan sites (e.g., http://www.etyries.com/) but couldn't find any in official material. Does anybody have a reference? Cheers, Gianni From kpmcdona at mindspring.com Sun Oct 29 10:24:40 2006 From: kpmcdona at mindspring.com (Kevin McDonald) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2006 19:24:40 -0400 Subject: [Rq-rules] Spolite In-Reply-To: <20061028112757.297A2DF8837@mini.thinbits.net> References: <20061028112757.297A2DF8837@mini.thinbits.net> Message-ID: <55e63e6a0610281624p1a901411u16f0debe34ce6476@mail.gmail.com> There is some info in the Entekosiad and Fortunate Succession, but not much. Basically, it was a Darkness worshiping empire early in the Second Age that was toppled by the Carmanians after Syranthir and the Ten Thousand arrived in the Oronin Valley. ~Kevin McD On 10/28/06, Gianni wrote: > Hi all > > This is a Gloranthan-related question. I've seen several references to the > 'Spolite Empire' on fan sites (e.g., http://www.etyries.com/) but couldn't > find any in official material. > > Does anybody have a reference? > > Cheers, > > Gianni _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From slposey at concentric.net Sun Oct 29 15:48:51 2006 From: slposey at concentric.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2006 22:48:51 -0600 Subject: [Rq-rules] Some thoughts about SIZ In-Reply-To: <000601c6fa05$14efd400$695f8456@sickboy> References: <000601c6fa05$14efd400$695f8456@sickboy> Message-ID: <454432B3.50205@concentric.net> Clive Wickens wrote: > One of the things that always kind of bothered me about RQ is that SIZ > is really just a function of weight ( or should that be mass to be > accurate ? ) the SIZ table only takes into account how much an object or > creature weighs. The actual size or volume of the creature in question > just doesn't seem to get taken into account. To me the SIZ of say...an > elephant should factor in it's height, length AND weight. I don't have a > clue quite how you'd work all that though. I've always felt that SIZ conceptually felt more like volume than mass, given that its original in-game function seemed intened to reflect how easy it was to hit something in combat, not how heavy or tough it was. The Ringworld variant of BRP actually calls the characteristic "Mass" (abbreviated MAS) and includes rules for dealing with the implications of varying gravity. The BRP related system in Other Suns takes a more physiological approach to this, characters and creatures have ratings for height/length and build. "Size" is determined from those using a formula and Mass is then determined from Size. I think Niall Shapero (Other Suns' author) reads this list sometimes. If he's okay with it, I can transcribe and post the relevant passages. One other idea I've toyed with is using SIZ as more of the determinant of Hit Points. The idea is that most flesh and blood creatures have CON on a 3-18 scale, CON being a relative measure of health. Using this idea, I calculate Hit Points thusly: HP = (CON / 10) * SIZ Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From mason.bruce at gmail.com Sun Oct 29 22:20:46 2006 From: mason.bruce at gmail.com (Bruce Mason) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 11:20:46 +0000 Subject: [Rq-rules] Some thoughts about SIZ In-Reply-To: <454432B3.50205@concentric.net> References: <000601c6fa05$14efd400$695f8456@sickboy> <454432B3.50205@concentric.net> Message-ID: <5f3990080610290320l53342e9ar62748dccda2abf0b@mail.gmail.com> On 29/10/06, Stephen Posey wrote: > > > One other idea I've toyed with is using SIZ as more of the > determinant of Hit Points. The idea is that most flesh and blood > creatures have CON on a 3-18 scale, CON being a relative measure > of health. Using this idea, I calculate Hit Points thusly: > > HP = (CON / 10) * SIZ Although I don't use this precisely, I also did go back to an insight from RQ2 which is that CON INT and DEX basically max out at 21 for mortals; after all a giant is just as vulnerable to a cold as a dwarf. In RQ3, CON started to scale with STR and SIZ as a fudge for HPs and FPs. I do also tend to use SIZ for living beings as being an abstract codification of shape, volume and mass. A being with STR that is relatively greater than SIZ (e.g. STR 4d6+6, SIZ 3D6+6) is relatively highly muscled, dense or some such while one with SIZ relatively greater than STR is perhaps relatively under-muscled or maybe unusually shaped. If you do keep CON in a 3-18 range then I could see HP being equal to SIZ with a modifier based on CON. That means you don't have to scale CON to SIZ. FREX, opening the RQ3 creatures book at random, a large shark is CON 4D6+18, (SIZ 6D6+24), presumably because it eats a lot of vitamin pills. Average HPs of 39. Using Stephen's formula and assuming it is CON 3D6 then it would have around 45HPs. Of course this would tend to 'break' RQ3's FP system (stop sniggering at the back). I'm not sure I would use Stephen's system because it gets too swingy at high SIZs, e.g. a super healthy average size shark (CON 18) has 45*1.8 = 81 HPs while consumptive 8m shark (CON 3) has 14 HPs and would be a rather pathetic shark. That and you don't really want to have to calculate SIZ*(CON/10) on the fly for some random mooks that happen to be SIZ 14, CON 12. There is an argument that you could just have HPs equal to SIZ with a CON modifier. E.g. CON 5 or less gives you a negative, CON 15 or more gives a positive. Something like CON 5=-1HP, CON 4=-2HP, CON 3=-3HP, CON 15=+1 HP, 16=+2hp and so on. Probably depends on your gaming flavour. If you like games with lots of crunch then something like Stephen's might well work. If you like to avoid crunch you could use something like a CON modifier or even just say HPs equal SIZ and use CON in FPs, disease resistance and so on. Interestingly, to me, MRQ works really nicely for CON on a 3-18 scale. There HPs are set by CON+SIZ. In human ranges this means your HPs are roughly equally affected by SIZ and CON but as the creatures get bigger, HPs are dominated by SIZ. I think that works nicely for gaming purposes at the average PC level, is relatively crunch light and handily captures the extra HPs for big things without having to scale CON. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061029/eb93f2e7/attachment.html From tiggermb at verizon.net Mon Oct 30 09:15:29 2006 From: tiggermb at verizon.net (tiggermb at verizon.net) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 16:15:29 -0600 (CST) Subject: [Rq-rules] Morality? Message-ID: <21702957.697041162160129163.JavaMail.root@vms170.mailsrvcs.net> Hello all. Some other RPG rules (D+D, White wolf) have a system of "morality" for the players, to help them determine what actions would be acceptable for thier characters to perform. I have found this helps when dealing with players who are more into the "Game" aspect of an RPG and less into the "Role-Playing". None of the RQIII material that I own seems to have any reference to a system of morality. Has anyone come up with a morality system for use with RQ? From joemills at columbus.rr.com Mon Oct 30 09:21:09 2006 From: joemills at columbus.rr.com (Joe Mills) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 17:21:09 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] Morality? In-Reply-To: <21702957.697041162160129163.JavaMail.root@vms170.mailsrvcs.net> Message-ID: <000001c6fba8$893cd2a0$0201a8c0@laptop2> Well, there are cult spirits of retribution, I guess. Add some authority figures used to dealing with tough guys armed with swords, and you've got all the morality reinforcement you need. -- Joe -----Original Message----- From: rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com] On Behalf Of tiggermb at verizon.net Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2006 5:15 PM To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: [Rq-rules] Morality? Hello all. Some other RPG rules (D+D, White wolf) have a system of "morality" for the players, to help them determine what actions would be acceptable for thier characters to perform. I have found this helps when dealing with players who are more into the "Game" aspect of an RPG and less into the "Role-Playing". None of the RQIII material that I own seems to have any reference to a system of morality. Has anyone come up with a morality system for use with RQ? _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From tom at zunder.org.uk Mon Oct 30 09:37:45 2006 From: tom at zunder.org.uk (Thomas Zunder) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 22:37:45 +0000 Subject: [Rq-rules] Morality? In-Reply-To: <000001c6fba8$893cd2a0$0201a8c0@laptop2> References: <000001c6fba8$893cd2a0$0201a8c0@laptop2> Message-ID: Glorantha, the home of RQ, has very clear codes of morality and behaviour, as defined by the cults and religions. From lev_lafayette at yahoo.com.au Mon Oct 30 10:12:26 2006 From: lev_lafayette at yahoo.com.au (Lev Lafayette) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 15:12:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Rq-rules] Morality? In-Reply-To: <21702957.697041162160129163.JavaMail.root@vms170.mailsrvcs.net> Message-ID: <20061029231226.65756.qmail@web33512.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- tiggermb at verizon.net wrote: > > Hello all. > > Some other RPG rules (D+D, White wolf) have a system > of "morality" for the players, to help them > determine what actions would be acceptable for thier > characters to perform. I have found this helps when > dealing with players who are more into the "Game" > aspect of an RPG and less into the "Role-Playing". > > None of the RQIII material that I own seems to have > any reference to a system of morality. Has anyone > come up with a morality system for use with RQ? Well, the moral codes are determined by culture and religion in both Glorantha and the Alternate Earth worlds. For a game aspect you can strongly tie these to ability to use runes, as they are the shared symbolic powers of each culture. So stay true to the path of Orlanth (for example) or your next POW sacrifice may not be accepted (or for primitive cultures, the bound spirit may decide you're so culturally adverse to try to break free)... It's those deistic sorcerors you want to watch out for. All this stuff about creating their own moral codes based on secular and universal reason..... ____________________________________________________________________________________ Want to start your own business? Learn how on Yahoo! Small Business (http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com) From StevenDLeary at comcast.net Mon Oct 30 10:40:21 2006 From: StevenDLeary at comcast.net (Steven Leary) Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 15:40:21 -0800 Subject: [Rq-rules] Morality? In-Reply-To: <000001c6fba8$893cd2a0$0201a8c0@laptop2> References: <000001c6fba8$893cd2a0$0201a8c0@laptop2> Message-ID: <9C303D0F-1339-450A-B361-7275C9929764@comcast.net> There is also the "Personality Factors" from the NPC Record Form from the Griffin Mountain reprint, I can't remember if these were in the Griffin Island supplement. You could also import Traits and Passions from Pendragon. For either option though you would have to figure out the Cult or Cultural norms for the Clan/Tribe/Region. SDLeary On 29 Oct , 06, at 2:21 PM, Joe Mills wrote: > Well, there are cult spirits of retribution, I guess. Add some > authority > figures used to dealing with tough guys armed with swords, and > you've got > all the morality reinforcement you need. > > -- Joe > > -----Original Message----- > From: rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules- > bounces at crashbox.com] > On Behalf Of tiggermb at verizon.net > Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2006 5:15 PM > To: rq-rules at crashbox.com > Subject: [Rq-rules] Morality? > > > Hello all. > > Some other RPG rules (D+D, White wolf) have a system of "morality" > for the > players, to help them determine what actions would be acceptable > for thier > characters to perform. I have found this helps when dealing with > players who > are more into the "Game" aspect of an RPG and less into the "Role- > Playing". > > None of the RQIII material that I own seems to have any reference to a > system of morality. Has anyone come up with a morality system for > use with > RQ? > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From jurrubin at gmail.com Tue Oct 31 02:58:25 2006 From: jurrubin at gmail.com (David Smart) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 09:58:25 -0600 Subject: [Rq-rules] Morality? In-Reply-To: <9C303D0F-1339-450A-B361-7275C9929764@comcast.net> References: <000001c6fba8$893cd2a0$0201a8c0@laptop2> <9C303D0F-1339-450A-B361-7275C9929764@comcast.net> Message-ID: <1c92296e0610300758ldd69138p633349d05fba4bc0@mail.gmail.com> Griffin Island does not contain the Personality Factors, more's the pity. I've found the Pendragon rules work pretty good for RQ3 as well. On 10/29/06, Steven Leary wrote: > > There is also the "Personality Factors" from the NPC Record Form from > the Griffin Mountain reprint, I can't remember if these were in the > Griffin Island supplement. > > You could also import Traits and Passions from Pendragon. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061030/c4103c6f/attachment.html From carpgachair at yahoo.com Tue Oct 31 03:13:15 2006 From: carpgachair at yahoo.com (Paul Cardwell) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 08:13:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Rq-rules] Some thoughts about SIZ In-Reply-To: <000601c6fa05$14efd400$695f8456@sickboy> Message-ID: <328666.34205.qm@web31807.mail.mud.yahoo.com> In that old RQ variant known as Mythworld, SIZ charts give both height in centimeters (head for humanoids, withers for quadrupeds, and base of neck for aviaforms) and weight in kilos. Some species will have a weight bonus for build (dwarfs +2, halflings +1, elves -1, etc.) and use the adjusted weight with the rolled height. Thes system works quite well and even follows the square-cube law. Yet aside from character generation, the only chart the average player will use is that for fumbles. All others are strictly for referees and scenarists (weather, treasure, etc. generation). --- Clive Wickens wrote: > One of the things that always kind of bothered me > about RQ is that SIZ is really just a function of > weight ( or should that be mass to be accurate ? ) > the SIZ table only takes into account how much an > object or creature weighs. The actual size or volume > of the creature in question just doesn't seem to get > taken into account. To me the SIZ of say...an > elephant should factor in it's height, length AND > weight. I don't have a clue quite how you'd work all > that though. > > Any ideas ? > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Get your email and see which of your friends are online - Right on the New Yahoo.com (http://www.yahoo.com/preview) From slposey at slposey.cnc.net Tue Oct 31 03:36:51 2006 From: slposey at slposey.cnc.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 09:36:51 -0700 (MST) Subject: [Rq-rules] =?UTF-8?Q?Morality=3F?= In-Reply-To: <000001c6fba8$893cd2a0$0201a8c0@laptop2> <9C303D0F-1339-450A-B361-7275C9929764@comcast.net> Message-ID: <200610301636.LAA02591@courageux.cnc.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061030/41631130/attachment.html From IQuinn at surewest.net Tue Oct 31 03:59:07 2006 From: IQuinn at surewest.net (Robert Hoffman) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 08:59:07 -0800 Subject: [Rq-rules] Morality? In-Reply-To: <21702957.697041162160129163.JavaMail.root@vms170.mailsrvcs.net> Message-ID: <003001c6fc44$b7beac60$6401a8c0@QUINNLAND> Though it was not exclusively about "morality" I also liked the old TSR Top Secret optional rules on personality traits. It offered 6-8 contrasting pairs of characteristics such as Introvert/Extrovert, Passive/Aggressive, Generous/Greedy, Forgiving/Vindictive,... etc. A D10 roll on each would determine where you fall on each individual scale (1 being the softer side and 10 being the more extreme). Given a handful of peaks and valley's it offered players who where new to role-playing some good beginning guidelines. Cheers, Bert -----Original Message----- From: rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com] On Behalf Of tiggermb at verizon.net Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2006 2:15 PM To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Subject: [Rq-rules] Morality? Hello all. Some other RPG rules (D+D, White wolf) have a system of "morality" for the players, to help them determine what actions would be acceptable for thier characters to perform. I have found this helps when dealing with players who are more into the "Game" aspect of an RPG and less into the "Role-Playing". None of the RQIII material that I own seems to have any reference to a system of morality. Has anyone come up with a morality system for use with RQ? _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From IQuinn at surewest.net Tue Oct 31 04:01:04 2006 From: IQuinn at surewest.net (Robert Hoffman) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 09:01:04 -0800 Subject: [Rq-rules] Some thoughts about SIZ In-Reply-To: <328666.34205.qm@web31807.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003101c6fc45$00b458c0$6401a8c0@QUINNLAND> "Yet aside from character generation, the only chart the average player will use is that for fumbles." >>How did SIZ affect fumbles? -----Original Message----- From: rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com] On Behalf Of Paul Cardwell Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 8:13 AM To: Discussion of RuneQuest rules. Subject: Re: [Rq-rules] Some thoughts about SIZ In that old RQ variant known as Mythworld, SIZ charts give both height in centimeters (head for humanoids, withers for quadrupeds, and base of neck for aviaforms) and weight in kilos. Some species will have a weight bonus for build (dwarfs +2, halflings +1, elves -1, etc.) and use the adjusted weight with the rolled height. Thes system works quite well and even follows the square-cube law. Yet aside from character generation, the only chart the average player will use is that for fumbles. All others are strictly for referees and scenarists (weather, treasure, etc. generation). --- Clive Wickens wrote: > One of the things that always kind of bothered me > about RQ is that SIZ is really just a function of > weight ( or should that be mass to be accurate ? ) > the SIZ table only takes into account how much an > object or creature weighs. The actual size or volume > of the creature in question just doesn't seem to get > taken into account. To me the SIZ of say...an > elephant should factor in it's height, length AND > weight. I don't have a clue quite how you'd work all > that though. > > Any ideas ? > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > ____________________________________________________________________________ ________ Get your email and see which of your friends are online - Right on the New Yahoo.com (http://www.yahoo.com/preview) _______________________________________________ RQ-Rules mailing list RQ-Rules at crashbox.com http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From StevenDLeary at comcast.net Tue Oct 31 04:04:59 2006 From: StevenDLeary at comcast.net (Steven Leary) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 09:04:59 -0800 Subject: [Rq-rules] Morality? In-Reply-To: <200610301636.LAA02591@courageux.cnc.net> References: <200610301636.LAA02591@courageux.cnc.net> Message-ID: <7DAD078F-EBEB-44AB-988E-0995722DD158@comcast.net> It looks like Dave Dunham has some for the Orlanthi pantheon in the PenDragon Pass section of his site. http://www.pensee.com/dunham/storm.html SDLeary On 30 Oct , 06, at 8:36 AM, Stephen Posey wrote: > > > Discussion of RuneQuest rules. wrote: > Griffin Island does not contain the Personality Factors, more's the > pity. I've found the Pendragon rules work pretty good for RQ3 as well. > > Has anyone on the list come up with specific mappings of Traits/ > Passions for Gloranthan (or otherwise) cults? > > If so, I'd be interested to see what you've come up with. What > process did you use to determine the appropriate Traits and > Passions for a cult? Are you using the just standard Pendragon > Traits or removed and/or added any? Did you come up with any custom > Passions? > > Stephen Posey > > slposey at concentric.net > > > > > > On 10/29/06, Steven Leary wrote: > There is also the "Personality Factors" from the NPC Record Form from > the Griffin Mountain reprint, I can't remember if these were in the > Griffin Island supplement. > > You could also import Traits and Passions from Pendragon. > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061030/edebfd77/attachment.html From carpgachair at yahoo.com Tue Oct 31 04:35:15 2006 From: carpgachair at yahoo.com (Paul Cardwell) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 09:35:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Rq-rules] Some thoughts about SIZ In-Reply-To: <003101c6fc45$00b458c0$6401a8c0@QUINNLAND> Message-ID: <509980.28658.qm@web31809.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Robert Hoffman wrote: > "Yet aside from character generation, > the only chart the average player will use is that > for > fumbles." > >>How did SIZ affect fumbles? I was refering to the issue of the ridiculous abundance of charts in some game systems. While Mythworld has many charts, they are only related to character generating and referee and scenarist plotting. SIZ affects funbles only indirectly and primarily early in a character's career. SIZ affects attack and parry bonus to a limited degree, and the bonus affects the ability in various actions somewhat. To that degree SIZ does affect fumbles, but it is slight. DEX is far more important. Paul Cardwell ____________________________________________________________________________________ Low, Low, Low Rates! Check out Yahoo! Messenger's cheap PC-to-Phone call rates (http://voice.yahoo.com) From pmaranci at gmail.com Tue Oct 31 04:41:04 2006 From: pmaranci at gmail.com (Peter Maranci) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 12:41:04 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] Morality? In-Reply-To: References: <000001c6fba8$893cd2a0$0201a8c0@laptop2> Message-ID: "Glorantha, the home of RQ"? Glorantha is the home of HQ. I don't think I'm the only one who uses RQ for non-Gloranthan settings, right? Didn't we already have this conversation? Oddly enough this topic has been on my mind because the RuneQuest article in Wikipedia has been re-written in a way that (IMHO) implies that RQ is solely a Gloranthan game - which is, of course, not true. I'm considering re-writing the article myself to clarify that point, among other things. Any suggestions on improving that article would be appreciated, by the way. Here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RuneQuest ->Peter On 10/29/06, Thomas Zunder wrote: > > Glorantha, the home of RQ, has very clear codes of morality and > behaviour, as defined by the cults and religions. > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > -- Peter Maranci - pmaranci at gmail.com Pete's RuneQuest & Roleplaying! http://www.runequest.org/rq.htm The Diary of An Invisible Man: http://bobquasit.livejournal.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061030/105bc5bc/attachment.html From tom at zunder.org.uk Tue Oct 31 06:09:04 2006 From: tom at zunder.org.uk (Thomas Zunder) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 19:09:04 +0000 Subject: [Rq-rules] Morality? In-Reply-To: References: <000001c6fba8$893cd2a0$0201a8c0@laptop2> Message-ID: Glorantha is where RQ came from and developed in. I also use it for non Glorantha. From alanjrichards at googlemail.com Tue Oct 31 07:29:06 2006 From: alanjrichards at googlemail.com (alan richards) Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 20:29:06 +0000 Subject: [Rq-rules] Siz and Hit Points Message-ID: <50a0ed550610301229m3bf1566bv3b6081fbdc6a39eb@mail.gmail.com> On 10/30/06, rq-rules-request at crashbox.com wrote: I too am not a fan of arms race CON values and stick with a cap of 21 for mortals (if I ever run a game with Celestial, Fae or Diabolic beings this no longer applies). In order to make sure that big beasties are not short changed on the old HPs I suggest HPs = (Con+Siz+Str) /3 * The rationale being that a creature with high Str has lots of muscle tissue to absorb the force of a blow (and a correspondingly more robust skeleton and more blood, and so on) Alan * actually on the very rare occasions I use Hit Locations I make HP = (Con+Siz+Str) /2 for a little more robustness -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061030/e60d5170/attachment.html From postmaster at runequest.za.org Tue Oct 31 18:00:19 2006 From: postmaster at runequest.za.org (postmaster at runequest.za.org) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 09:00:19 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [Rq-rules] Morality? In-Reply-To: <003001c6fc44$b7beac60$6401a8c0@QUINNLAND> References: <21702957.697041162160129163.JavaMail.root@vms170.mailsrvcs.net> <003001c6fc44$b7beac60$6401a8c0@QUINNLAND> Message-ID: <7136.196.8.104.31.1162278019.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> Bert wrote: > Though it was not exclusively about "morality" I also liked the old TSR > Top > Secret optional rules on personality traits. It offered 6-8 contrasting > pairs of characteristics such as Introvert/Extrovert, Passive/Aggressive, > Generous/Greedy, Forgiving/Vindictive,... etc. A D10 roll on each would > determine where you fall on each individual scale (1 being the softer side > and 10 being the more extreme). Given a handful of peaks and valley's it > offered players who where new to role-playing some good beginning > guidelines. > > Cheers, Ah yes, I loved those traits in Top Secret SI. While they weren't integrated into the game as I recall (like they didn't affect rolls etc) they were visable on Char sheet and a nice wee reminder/guideline for how you would want your character to react in certain situations. Tony From aescleal at btinternet.com Tue Oct 31 20:51:02 2006 From: aescleal at btinternet.com (Ashley Munday) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 09:51:02 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Rq-rules] Siz and Hit Points In-Reply-To: <50a0ed550610301229m3bf1566bv3b6081fbdc6a39eb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20061031095102.50172.qmail@web86102.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Why not use the old Gateway Bestiary suggestion that you get two points of natural armour for every d6 of damage bonus to represent the effect of high STR and SIZ? Cheers, Ash --- alan richards wrote: > On 10/30/06, rq-rules-request at crashbox.com > > wrote: > > I too am not a fan of arms race CON values and stick > with a cap of 21 for > mortals (if I ever run a game with Celestial, Fae or > Diabolic beings this no > longer applies). > In order to make sure that big beasties are not > short changed on the old HPs > I suggest HPs = (Con+Siz+Str) /3 * > The rationale being that a creature with high Str > has lots of muscle tissue > to absorb the force of a blow (and a correspondingly > more robust skeleton > and more blood, and so on) > > > Alan > > * actually on the very rare occasions I use Hit > Locations I make HP = > (Con+Siz+Str) /2 for a little more robustness > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Tue Oct 31 21:06:30 2006 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton at invensys.com) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 10:06:30 +0000 Subject: [Rq-rules] Siz and Hit Points In-Reply-To: <20061031095102.50172.qmail@web86102.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Message-ID: >Why not use the old Gateway Bestiary suggestion that >you get two points of natural armour for every d6 of >damage bonus to represent the effect of high STR and >SIZ? Ooh, had forgotten that one. Must re-read the GB... Personally, I have for a number of years in BRP/RQ based THP on SIZ, modified by CON. Usually, THP = SIZ + (CON-10) in my games, unless I'm aiming for something a bit more heroic but without magic healing in which case I go for THP = SIZ + CON. In general for base line humans it just tweaks things slightly ("average" human THP drift up slightly to 13, or 23 in the "heroic" case), but it makes big creatures (e.g Elephants) significantly more robust (albeit I tend to apply the heroic HP formula ONLY to PC's if I am using it). Cheers, Nick Middleton From soltakss at yahoo.com Tue Oct 31 21:45:17 2006 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (Simon Phipp) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 10:45:17 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Rq-rules] *** JUNK MAIL ***Re: Morality In-Reply-To: <20061030174114.BA0BEE15F8A@mini.thinbits.net> Message-ID: <20061031104517.660.qmail@web51004.mail.yahoo.com> To echo previous points, if you use Cult standards, Personality Traits from Griffin Mountain and Passions for cults then you have a pretty solid set of guidelines on how your PC is likely to act in any given situation. You probably don't need more than that, especially as you don't want your PC to be controlled by these stats, merely guided. Also, to open up a can of worms, morality is defined by the culture and setting, so a Zorak Zorani would have a different personal moral code to a Chalana Arroy healer to a Brithini sorcerer, the same is true for non-Glorantha settings. Peter Maranci: > "Glorantha, the home of RQ"? > > Glorantha is the home of HQ. I don't think I'm the only one who uses RQ for > non-Gloranthan settings, right? Didn't we already have this conversation? Classically, if you count the number of Gloranthan RQ supplements and non-Gloranthan RQ supplements, you will find an overwhelming bias towards Gloranthan ones. RQM has more generic supplements, but is bringing out a lot of Gloranthan supplements fairly soon. > Oddly enough this topic has been on my mind because the RuneQuest article in > Wikipedia has been re-written in a way that (IMHO) implies that RQ is solely > a Gloranthan game - which is, of course, not true. I'm considering > re-writing the article myself to clarify that point, among other things. Solely a Gloranthan game? Clearly not true. Mainly a Gloranthan game? Certainly true. Mainly a non-Gloranthan game? Certainly not true. > Any suggestions on improving that article would be appreciated, by the way. > Here's the link: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RuneQuest Well, RQ2 had Questworld, which was non-Gloranthan, Gateway Bestiary and Snow King's Bride. Judges Guild produced several RQ supplements that were partially Gloranthan (Duck Tower, Duck Pond) or non-Gloranthan (Hell Pits of Night Fang, City of Lei Tabor, Broken Tree Inn). RQ3 also had Monster Coliseum and Griffin Island, making Monster Colisem, Griffin Island, Vikings and Land of Ninja as their early non-Gloranthan offerings. Daughters of Darkness and Lost City of Eldarad are widely accepted as being inferior, mainly because of the ultra-generic setting. The game is controlled by a Games Master (GM) rather than a Dungeon Master (DM) or Narrator. The main focus of past supplements has actually been Prax rather than Dragon Pass. In fact, for RQ only Apple Lane and Snakepipe Hollow have been based in Dragon Pass. Pavis/Prax has had Cults of Prax, Pavis, Big Rubble, Borderlands, Sun County, River of Cradles, Shadows on the Borderlands and Strangers in Prax. In classic RQ, special hits are 20% chance, critical hits are 5% chance. In MRQ, critical hits are 10% chance. Broos are certainly not orc-like in any way, shape or form. Trolls are fairly orc-like, but not broos. The use of specialist skills should be emphasised as a core part of the RQ rules system. Anything you want to do has a skill associated with it and each skill increases mostly independantly of other skills. This allows PCs to be tailored and specialised in a way that AD&D, for instance, does not. The absence of Character Classes and Alignment should also be emphasised in the RQ vs D&D section. It might be worth mentioning the major fanzines as well - Wyrms Footnotes, Different Worlds (possibly), White Dwarf (possibly), Heroes (possibly), Tales of the Reaching Moon, RQ Adventures, Codex and Tradetalk - they all helped RQ throuigh the bad times. So, all in all, it isn't a bad article, but could be improved. Taking out all references to Glorantha would NOT improve it, though :-) See Ya Simon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061031/636d95d0/attachment.html From mason.bruce at gmail.com Tue Oct 31 22:29:33 2006 From: mason.bruce at gmail.com (Bruce Mason) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 11:29:33 +0000 Subject: [Rq-rules] Siz and Hit Points In-Reply-To: References: <20061031095102.50172.qmail@web86102.mail.ird.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <5f3990080610310329u7edf67d8kf5857bef6712b4c3@mail.gmail.com> On 31/10/06, Nick.Middleton at invensys.com wrote: > > > >Why not use the old Gateway Bestiary suggestion that > >you get two points of natural armour for every d6 of > >damage bonus to represent the effect of high STR and > >SIZ? > > Ooh, had forgotten that one. Must re-read the GB... > > Personally, I have for a number of years in BRP/RQ based THP on SIZ, > modified by CON. Usually, THP = SIZ + (CON-10) Although this is of course identical to THP = CON + (SIZ-10). Technically to have CON as a modifier it needs to contribute less to the total than SIZ. That said, I have become a convert to MRQ's CON+SIZ but only if CON gets capped at 3D6 for most mortal and 4D6 for truly exceptional creatures as I think that captures a good relationship between SIZ and CON. A few wierdnesses notwithstanding, I think MRQ's realisation that if you have hit locations you don't really need a measure of total HPs is also a good one. I'm not sure if it will work in the long run as there may be just too many weirdnesses cropping up. It occurs to me though that you could you think of two different HP systems that you could choose between as a module for BRP based games. Hit Locations or General Hit Points. Hit Location systems have: HPs per location, random roll for location, armor with fixed values. GHP systems: One HP value, random roll for armor protection (ala Stormbringer), mechanics for major wound Obviously you can combine them as RQ always has done, but I'm not sure you really need to. They both have a similar number of rolls and both can be tuned for survivability. Bruce -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20061031/497241e5/attachment.html