From jurrubin at gmail.com Sat Mar 3 06:04:16 2007 From: jurrubin at gmail.com (David Smart) Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2007 13:04:16 -0600 Subject: [Rq-rules] Adios Avaya! Message-ID: <1c92296e0703021104q3bc2381vd85ee07ce527fbf7@mail.gmail.com> It's official..as of this morning, I became a short-timer. I retire from the Rat Race on March 30th. I still can't believe it. David -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20070302/631e74ff/attachment.html From jurrubin at gmail.com Sat Mar 3 06:39:42 2007 From: jurrubin at gmail.com (David Smart) Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2007 13:39:42 -0600 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Adios Avaya! In-Reply-To: <1c92296e0703021104q3bc2381vd85ee07ce527fbf7@mail.gmail.com> References: <1c92296e0703021104q3bc2381vd85ee07ce527fbf7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1c92296e0703021139i6150621akdb033f81521a4a98@mail.gmail.com> Apologies for my post, everyone. Gmail included the wrong addr. My bad. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20070302/29e61c1d/attachment.html From anders at california.com Sat Mar 3 08:10:25 2007 From: anders at california.com (Anders Swenson) Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2007 13:10:25 -0800 Subject: [Rq-rules] Adios Avaya! In-Reply-To: <1c92296e0703021104q3bc2381vd85ee07ce527fbf7@mail.gmail.com> References: <1c92296e0703021104q3bc2381vd85ee07ce527fbf7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 13:04:16 -0600 "David Smart" wrote: > It's official..as of this morning, I became a short-timer. I retire from > the > Rat Race on March 30th. > > I still can't believe it. > > David Welcoe to the club! --Anders From steve at perrinworlds.com Sat Mar 3 14:45:57 2007 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2007 19:45:57 -0800 Subject: [Rq-rules] Adios Avaya! References: <1c92296e0703021104q3bc2381vd85ee07ce527fbf7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <002c01c75d46$73a203c0$a4407442@chaosce4015e22> You are both officially on my list of people to envy... Steve Perrin, too many years writing games for too little money ----- Original Message ----- From: "Anders Swenson" To: "Discussion of RuneQuest rules." Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 1:10 PM Subject: Re: [Rq-rules] Adios Avaya! > On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 13:04:16 -0600 > "David Smart" wrote: >> It's official..as of this morning, I became a short-timer. I retire from >> the >> Rat Race on March 30th. >> >> I still can't believe it. >> >> David > > Welcoe to the club! > --Anders > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From alanjrichards at googlemail.com Sun Mar 4 00:35:35 2007 From: alanjrichards at googlemail.com (alan richards) Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2007 13:35:35 +0000 Subject: [Rq-rules] Specials and Criticals Message-ID: <50a0ed550703030535t6395b88cn26b65e0d068b4846@mail.gmail.com> I recently played in a game of Alternity. For those who don't know (and I didn't previously) this was T$R's sci-fi game and setting immediately prior to their takeover by WoTCost. There are all kinds of negative comparisons I could make between the Alternity ruleset and RQ's but there was/is one rule which I liked. Alternity has Average/Good/Oustanding successes in the same way as dear old RQ has Success/Special/Critical however in Alternity Good (Special) = 1/2 of skill Outstanding (Critical) = 1/4 of skill Thus Specials and Criticals happen much more often. I really liked this and will be having a stab at using the next time I run RQ Al -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20070303/73e7f5cb/attachment.html From mason.bruce at gmail.com Sun Mar 4 03:01:05 2007 From: mason.bruce at gmail.com (Bruce Mason) Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2007 16:01:05 +0000 Subject: [Rq-rules] Specials and Criticals In-Reply-To: <50a0ed550703030535t6395b88cn26b65e0d068b4846@mail.gmail.com> References: <50a0ed550703030535t6395b88cn26b65e0d068b4846@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <5f3990080703030801p76d192e7h18ba2654b87338ed@mail.gmail.com> On 03/03/07, alan richards wrote: > > Alternity has Average/Good/Oustanding successes in the same way as dear > old RQ has Success/Special/Critical however in Alternity > > Good (Special) = 1/2 of skill > Outstanding (Critical) = 1/4 of skill > > Thus Specials and Criticals happen much more often. > > I really liked this and will be having a stab at using the next time I run > RQ > See, I think this is bad game design because it means that a "non-standard" result happens with every other roll. This means that you, essentially, have two different types of success. The beauty of 1/5 as a special result is that, as it says, it is marked enough to feel special. If your special result is 1/2 of skill you might as well say that if you succeed and roll an odd then you get a different type of success than you would with an even. That said, I personally, have been playing with specials and criticals folded into 1/10 chance - as MRQ has done. Still, different strokes for different folks. Bruce -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20070303/5bf5d9da/attachment.html From lancelot at inetnebr.com Sun Mar 4 03:57:49 2007 From: lancelot at inetnebr.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2007 10:57:49 -0600 Subject: [Rq-rules] Specials and Criticals In-Reply-To: <5f3990080703030801p76d192e7h18ba2654b87338ed@mail.gmail.com> References: <50a0ed550703030535t6395b88cn26b65e0d068b4846@mail.gmail.com> <5f3990080703030801p76d192e7h18ba2654b87338ed@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <45E9A90D.7020602@inetnebr.com> Bruce Mason wrote: > > > On 03/03/07, *alan richards* > wrote: > > Alternity has Average/Good/Oustanding successes in the same way as > dear old RQ has Success/Special/Critical however in Alternity > > Good (Special) = 1/2 of skill > Outstanding (Critical) = 1/4 of skill > > Thus Specials and Criticals happen much more often. > > I really liked this and will be having a stab at using the next > time I run RQ > > > See, I think this is bad game design because it means that a > "non-standard" result happens with every other roll. This means that > you, essentially, have two different types of success. The beauty of > 1/5 as a special result is that, as it says, it is marked enough to > feel special. If your special result is 1/2 of skill you might as well > say that if you succeed and roll an odd then you get a different type > of success than you would with an even. > > That said, I personally, have been playing with specials and criticals > folded into 1/10 chance - as MRQ has done. Still, different strokes > for different folks. > > Bruce In some games I have seen things get real mechanical sounding until you hit specials and criticals... perhaps.. adding more descriptive "normal" action could be what is desired. Having more choices that describe how the actions are performed might accomplish more of what is desired without impacting the specialness of those specials. From gazza666 at gmail.com Sun Mar 4 12:54:06 2007 From: gazza666 at gmail.com (Gary Sturgess) Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2007 10:54:06 +0900 Subject: [Rq-rules] Specials and Criticals In-Reply-To: <45E9A90D.7020602@inetnebr.com> References: <50a0ed550703030535t6395b88cn26b65e0d068b4846@mail.gmail.com> <5f3990080703030801p76d192e7h18ba2654b87338ed@mail.gmail.com> <45E9A90D.7020602@inetnebr.com> Message-ID: <9ebd81400703031754r3e9d8570k4c6509b7750ecb7e@mail.gmail.com> > > Alternity has Average/Good/Oustanding successes in the same way as > > dear old RQ has Success/Special/Critical however in Alternity > > > > Good (Special) = 1/2 of skill > > Outstanding (Critical) = 1/4 of skill > > > > Thus Specials and Criticals happen much more often. > > > > I really liked this and will be having a stab at using the next > > time I run RQ The main disadvantage (IMHO) of the 1/5 and 1/20 rules in RQ is that it's annoying having to constantly look at the chart, as many people can't do that sort of calculation instantly. In RQ as well you don't REALLY want impales on every alternate hit, and especially not criticals on every 4 attacks - that would make what is already a somewhat lethal combat system into something even worse. (Of course you can change what criticals and specials do, as well, but the point is that merely changing the frequency isn't really enough). In our group we chuck a d20 along with the d100. If the d20 is a 1, and the d100 roll is a success, then you critical. If the d20 is 1-4, and the d100 roll is a success, then you special. If the d20 is a 20, and the d100 roll is a fail, then you fumble. The odds are the same as the standard system but it avoids calculation. It does get a bit messier with skills over 100%. For something from 101-200, you first of all work out the "Mod 100" part (take the skill, and subtract 100). Then: - If the d20 roll is a 1, you critical, regardless of what the d100 roll is. - If the d20 roll is a 1-4, you special, regardless of the d100 roll. - If the d20 roll is a 5, then you critical if the d100 roll would be a success for the Mod 100 part of your skill. - If the d20 roll is a 5-8, then you special if the d100 roll would be a success for the Mod 100 part of your skill. - Fumble rule as per normal*. *Except that in my game I make automatic failures on 97-100 for skills from 101-200, 98-100 for 201-300; that's a house rule, obviously. You can extend this up for 201-300, 301-400, and 401-500. If you have the need for skills beyond 500%, then the simplest approach is to just divide the skill by 5 and then treat the skill as "powered" (ie a fumble is a failure, a failure is a success, a success is a special, and a special is a critical); this isn't strictly speaking 100% accurate but if you have PCs with 510% 2H Sword Attack skills you're already stretching BRP quite a bit. :) -- GAZZA From carpgachair at yahoo.com Mon Mar 5 05:58:29 2007 From: carpgachair at yahoo.com (Paul Cardwell) Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2007 10:58:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Rq-rules] Specials and Criticals In-Reply-To: <9ebd81400703031754r3e9d8570k4c6509b7750ecb7e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <272801.46205.qm@web33505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Gary Sturgess wrote: > The main disadvantage (IMHO) of the 1/5 and 1/20 > rules in RQ is that > it's annoying having to constantly look at the > chart, as many people > can't do that sort of calculation instantly. In RQ > as well you don't > REALLY want impales on every alternate hit, and > especially not > criticals on every 4 attacks - that would make what > is already a > somewhat lethal combat system into something even > worse. (Of course > you can change what criticals and specials do, as > well, but the point > is that merely changing the frequency isn't really > enough). > > In our group we chuck a d20 along with the d100. If > the d20 is a 1, > and the d100 roll is a success, then you critical. > If the d20 is 1-4, > and the d100 roll is a success, then you special. If > the d20 is a 20, > and the d100 roll is a fail, then you fumble. The > odds are the same as > the standard system but it avoids calculation. > > It does get a bit messier with skills over 100%. For > something from > 101-200, you first of all work out the "Mod 100" > part (take the skill, > and subtract 100). Then: > > - If the d20 roll is a 1, you critical, regardless > of what the d100 roll is. > - If the d20 roll is a 1-4, you special, regardless > of the d100 roll. > - If the d20 roll is a 5, then you critical if the > d100 roll would be > a success for the Mod 100 part of your skill. > - If the d20 roll is a 5-8, then you special if the > d100 roll would be > a success for the Mod 100 part of your skill. > - Fumble rule as per normal*. > > *Except that in my game I make automatic failures on > 97-100 for skills > from 101-200, 98-100 for 201-300; that's a house > rule, obviously. > > You can extend this up for 201-300, 301-400, and > 401-500. If you have > the need for skills beyond 500%, then the simplest > approach is to just > divide the skill by 5 and then treat the skill as > "powered" (ie a > fumble is a failure, a failure is a success, a > success is a special, > and a special is a critical); this isn't strictly > speaking 100% > accurate but if you have PCs with 510% 2H Sword > Attack skills you're > already stretching BRP quite a bit. :) > -- > GAZZA Or you can just do as Mythworld and keep the RQ percentages to special and critical and save the math in the game because these figures are listed with each weapon/use on the character sheet following the basic percentage to hit. Yeah, it means creating your own character sheet, but it will still save time in the long run. Paul Cardwell ____________________________________________________________________________________ Don't pick lemons. See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos. http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html From gazza666 at gmail.com Mon Mar 5 12:57:16 2007 From: gazza666 at gmail.com (Gary Sturgess) Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 10:57:16 +0900 Subject: [Rq-rules] Specials and Criticals In-Reply-To: <272801.46205.qm@web33505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <9ebd81400703031754r3e9d8570k4c6509b7750ecb7e@mail.gmail.com> <272801.46205.qm@web33505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9ebd81400703041757i66f56e13s40058438c058b7b0@mail.gmail.com> On 3/5/07, Paul Cardwell wrote: > Or you can just do as Mythworld and keep the RQ > percentages to special and critical and save the math > in the game because these figures are listed with each > weapon/use on the character sheet following the basic > percentage to hit. Problem is that there are modifiers to be taken into account, so the listed percentage on the character sheet isn't the only one you need to know. Of course you can also add in the appropriate numbers for being Demoralised, Fanatic, Berserk, attacking a prone target, and so forth - but after a certain point you might as well just look it up. As an aside - I have a bunch of powergamer buddies that have pointed out an exploit with weapon experience rolls. Basically, you cast Fanaticism or Berserk on yourself in order to boost your chance of getting the tick. They have a similar idea for parrying or agility/magic skills (load yourself up with lots of encumbrance when making the experience check, as that lowers your effective skill and thereby makes it more likely you'll "fail" the roll, thereby getting an increase). Of course we don't actually allow that, but it's a somewhat amusing technically legal "cheat". -- GAZZA From lancelot at inetnebr.com Mon Mar 5 13:48:56 2007 From: lancelot at inetnebr.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2007 20:48:56 -0600 Subject: [Rq-rules] Specials and Criticals In-Reply-To: <9ebd81400703041757i66f56e13s40058438c058b7b0@mail.gmail.com> References: <9ebd81400703031754r3e9d8570k4c6509b7750ecb7e@mail.gmail.com> <272801.46205.qm@web33505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <9ebd81400703041757i66f56e13s40058438c058b7b0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <45EB8518.50307@inetnebr.com> Gary Sturgess wrote: > On 3/5/07, Paul Cardwell wrote: > > load yourself up with lots of encumbrance when > making the experience check, as that lowers your effective skill and > thereby makes it more likely you'll "fail" the roll, thereby getting > an increase Shakes head that is nonsense... there is no specific in game world "time" that a check is made from the characters point of view and mechanically the test is always in unmodified form Though sometimes it reasonably shouldnt be..... a character who is constantly using a magically boosted weapon/body and fighting as though multiple percentiles better than he/she is probably should be making advancement tests as though much more capable... Arguably that reliance on the device/spells will slow advancement From steve at perrinworlds.com Mon Mar 5 07:55:35 2007 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2007 12:55:35 -0800 Subject: [Rq-rules] Specials and Criticals References: <272801.46205.qm@web33505.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000201c75eec$d94180f0$a4407442@chaosce4015e22> For SPQR I decided to go with convenience rather than statistical probability. Therefore I use 50% (because if you can't figure out what half of your %ile is you probably shouldn't be playing a game this complex), 10% (10% of 63 is 6; where's the difficulty?), and 1% (which is usually 1 until you get into the high 100+ numbers). Of course, I call each of these numbers a success and they are cumulative. No one %ile is a special or critical. You have to total your successes and put them against the number of successes of the competition. If you have one more success, you succeed. If you have two, you get a bonus, if you have three more you two bonuses, and the most you can have, no matter the results, is four more successes, giving you three bonuses. The bonuses add up to the effect of a critical or special in the old rules. Comes from actually playing some of the other games out there. RQ and its successors have always been well "researched." Steve Perrin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul Cardwell" To: "Discussion of RuneQuest rules." Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2007 10:58 AM Subject: Re: [Rq-rules] Specials and Criticals > > --- Gary Sturgess wrote: >> The main disadvantage (IMHO) of the 1/5 and 1/20 >> rules in RQ is that >> it's annoying having to constantly look at the >> chart, as many people >> can't do that sort of calculation instantly. In RQ >> as well you don't >> REALLY want impales on every alternate hit, and >> especially not >> criticals on every 4 attacks - that would make what >> is already a >> somewhat lethal combat system into something even >> worse. (Of course >> you can change what criticals and specials do, as >> well, but the point >> is that merely changing the frequency isn't really >> enough). >> >> In our group we chuck a d20 along with the d100. If >> the d20 is a 1, >> and the d100 roll is a success, then you critical. >> If the d20 is 1-4, >> and the d100 roll is a success, then you special. If >> the d20 is a 20, >> and the d100 roll is a fail, then you fumble. The >> odds are the same as >> the standard system but it avoids calculation. >> >> It does get a bit messier with skills over 100%. For >> something from >> 101-200, you first of all work out the "Mod 100" >> part (take the skill, >> and subtract 100). Then: >> >> - If the d20 roll is a 1, you critical, regardless >> of what the d100 roll is. >> - If the d20 roll is a 1-4, you special, regardless >> of the d100 roll. >> - If the d20 roll is a 5, then you critical if the >> d100 roll would be >> a success for the Mod 100 part of your skill. >> - If the d20 roll is a 5-8, then you special if the >> d100 roll would be >> a success for the Mod 100 part of your skill. >> - Fumble rule as per normal*. >> >> *Except that in my game I make automatic failures on >> 97-100 for skills >> from 101-200, 98-100 for 201-300; that's a house >> rule, obviously. >> >> You can extend this up for 201-300, 301-400, and >> 401-500. If you have >> the need for skills beyond 500%, then the simplest >> approach is to just >> divide the skill by 5 and then treat the skill as >> "powered" (ie a >> fumble is a failure, a failure is a success, a >> success is a special, >> and a special is a critical); this isn't strictly >> speaking 100% >> accurate but if you have PCs with 510% 2H Sword >> Attack skills you're >> already stretching BRP quite a bit. :) >> -- >> GAZZA > > Or you can just do as Mythworld and keep the RQ > percentages to special and critical and save the math > in the game because these figures are listed with each > weapon/use on the character sheet following the basic > percentage to hit. > > Yeah, it means creating your own character sheet, but > it will still save time in the long run. > > Paul Cardwell > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > Don't pick lemons. > See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos. > http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From postmaster at runequest.za.org Mon Mar 5 18:20:06 2007 From: postmaster at runequest.za.org (postmaster at runequest.za.org) Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 09:20:06 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [Rq-rules] Specials and Criticals In-Reply-To: <50a0ed550703030535t6395b88cn26b65e0d068b4846@mail.gmail.com> References: <50a0ed550703030535t6395b88cn26b65e0d068b4846@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <58455.196.8.104.31.1173079206.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> Alternity was quite a big launch in its day I think. I still recall receiving a free cut down set of rules as a suppliment with Dragon Magazine\. Tony > I recently played in a game of Alternity. For those who don't know (and I > didn't previously) this was T$R's sci-fi game and setting immediately > prior > to their takeover by WoTCost. > > There are all kinds of negative comparisons I could make between the > Alternity ruleset and RQ's but there was/is one rule which I liked. > > Alternity has Average/Good/Oustanding successes in the same way as dear > old > RQ has Success/Special/Critical however in Alternity > > Good (Special) = 1/2 of skill > Outstanding (Critical) = 1/4 of skill > > Thus Specials and Criticals happen much more often. > > I really liked this and will be having a stab at using the next time I run > RQ > > > Al > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From slposey at slposey.cnc.net Tue Mar 6 07:13:26 2007 From: slposey at slposey.cnc.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2007 13:13:26 -0700 (MST) Subject: [Rq-rules] Specials and Criticals In-Reply-To: <50a0ed550703030535t6395b88cn26b65e0d068b4846@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20070305201326.4C9571F2B@victory.cnc.net> ---- Discussion of RuneQuest rules. wrote: > > Alternity was quite a big launch in its day I think. I still recall > receiving a free cut down set of rules as a suppliment with Dragon > Magazine\. > Tony The Alternity rules I've seen on the web seem to me like they must have been a significant inspiration behind the design of D&D3.x/D20 (your choice on whether or not that's a good thing). Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From alanjrichards at googlemail.com Tue Mar 6 09:13:45 2007 From: alanjrichards at googlemail.com (alan richards) Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 22:13:45 +0000 Subject: [Rq-rules] Alternity (was Criticals and Specials or Specials and Criticals or something) Message-ID: <50a0ed550703051413x315d2fb5k3c6df589078948c@mail.gmail.com> On 3/4/07, rq-rules-request at crashbox.com wrote: GAZZA he say: > Problem is that there are modifiers to be taken into account, so the > listed percentage on the character sheet isn't the only one you need > to know. Of course you can also add in the appropriate numbers for > being Demoralised, Fanatic, Berserk, attacking a prone target, and so > forth - but after a certain point you might as well just look it up. > > Yes which leads to a bit of Alternity which did not impress me so much (do try not to nod off during this next bit!) The chance for Ordinary/Good/Outstanding are written on thee character sheet. You roll d20 and compare the die roll against these values Then if necessary the GM applies a modifier depending on how easy/hard the task is. This modifier is a staged die which (s)he rolls and adds to your d20 score and you compare the new number to your Ordinary/Good/Outstanding values. i.e. if you have a small advantage (s)he would roll -1d4 upto a massively difficult task where (s)he would roll +3d20 It does mean that you never have to recalculate your skill values (because as Mr Perrin says diving by 2 can be awfully tricky for some people) and I am sure that being T$R it is statistically sound but it struck me as clunky and frustrating. Al -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20070305/f852a98e/attachment.html From alanjrichards at googlemail.com Tue Mar 6 09:20:22 2007 From: alanjrichards at googlemail.com (alan richards) Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 22:20:22 +0000 Subject: [Rq-rules] Lightning Message-ID: <50a0ed550703051420r732dc57fv990a1a352d6e9bf0@mail.gmail.com> Looking through another semi-forgotten rpg today I re-read the rules for lightning strikes in 'Daemon'* Essentially a player rolls d100 against HEAlth. Roll over and character dies instantly as their heart stops. Roll under and subtract (the same d100 roll)/5 Hit Points from burns, neurological damage, bone decalcification and muscle spasms. Given that I have been trying to come up with more oomph for Divine Magic I may give this a shot for Lightning spells Al * If you live outside the UK you won't have heard of this. If you live in the UK, you probably won't have heard of this. It mixes some superb off-the-wall-ideas with a solid 'RQ derived' base and lashings of (to me) extraneous detail -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20070305/705addad/attachment.html From slposey at slposey.cnc.net Tue Mar 6 10:56:31 2007 From: slposey at slposey.cnc.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2007 16:56:31 -0700 (MST) Subject: [Rq-rules] Lightning In-Reply-To: <50a0ed550703051420r732dc57fv990a1a352d6e9bf0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20070305235631.C7B11130B@arkroyal.cnc.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20070305/43b4819b/attachment.html From steve at perrinworlds.com Tue Mar 6 14:45:35 2007 From: steve at perrinworlds.com (Steve Perrin) Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 19:45:35 -0800 Subject: [Rq-rules] Alternity (was Criticals and Specials or Specials andCriticals or something) References: <50a0ed550703051413x315d2fb5k3c6df589078948c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <00e101c75fa1$e63f25e0$a4407442@chaosce4015e22> I played a couple of Alternity games including one relatively extended campaign and the problem I found with it was that it took just a little too much to be good enough to hit. What, in my mind, should have been an 11 out of 20 chance was a 10 out of 20 chance, and so forth. I always felt that I was falling just short of competence, and I don't like playing a character in that situation. Steve Perrin, still striving for competence ----- Original Message ----- From: alan richards To: rq-rules at crashbox.com Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 2:13 PM Subject: [Rq-rules] Alternity (was Criticals and Specials or Specials andCriticals or something) On 3/4/07, rq-rules-request at crashbox.com wrote: GAZZA he say: Problem is that there are modifiers to be taken into account, so the listed percentage on the character sheet isn't the only one you needto know. Of course you can also add in the appropriate numbers forbeing Demoralised, Fanatic, Berserk, attacking a prone target, and so forth - but after a certain point you might as well just look it up.Yes which leads to a bit of Alternity which did not impress me so much (do try not to nod off during this next bit!) The chance for Ordinary/Good/Outstanding are written on thee character sheet. You roll d20 and compare the die roll against these values Then if necessary the GM applies a modifier depending on how easy/hard the task is. This modifier is a staged die which (s)he rolls and adds to your d20 score and you compare the new number to your Ordinary/Good/Outstanding values. i.e. if you have a small advantage (s)he would roll -1d4 upto a massively difficult task where (s)he would roll +3d20 It does mean that you never have to recalculate your skill values (because as Mr Perrin says diving by 2 can be awfully tricky for some people) and I am sure that being T$R it is statistically sound but it struck me as clunky and frustrating. Al ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ 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/20070305/10d13a1f/attachment.html From Ludowick at aol.com Wed Mar 7 00:43:52 2007 From: Ludowick at aol.com (Ludowick at aol.com) Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 08:43:52 EST Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Daemon RPG Message-ID: Alan Richards wrote: > Looking through another semi-forgotten rpg today I re-read the rules for > lightning strikes in 'Daemon'* > * If you live outside the UK you won't have heard of this. If you live in > the UK, you probably won't have heard of this. > It mixes some superb off-the-wall-ideas with a solid 'RQ derived' base and > lashings of (to me) extraneous detail Could you provide more details on this game, please? I'd like to know the author, publisher, and/or copyright date, as searching through Google, Ebay, and online gamestores turned up nothing. The lightning rules looked cool, and I'm a sucker for anything BRPesque in RPG rules. Michael Hoxie


**************************************
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. From slposey at slposey.cnc.net Wed Mar 7 03:56:25 2007 From: slposey at slposey.cnc.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2007 09:56:25 -0700 (MST) Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Daemon RPG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20070306165625.0419528A4@courageux.cnc.net> ---- Discussion of RuneQuest rules. wrote: > > Alan Richards wrote: > > > Looking through another semi-forgotten rpg today I re-read the rules for > > lightning strikes in 'Daemon'* > > > > > * If you live outside the UK you won't have heard of this. If you live in > > the UK, you probably won't have heard of this. > > It mixes some superb off-the-wall-ideas with a solid 'RQ derived' base and > > lashings of (to me) extraneous detail > > Could you provide more details on this game, please? I'd like to know the > author, publisher, and/or copyright date, as searching through Google, Ebay, > and online gamestores turned up nothing. The lightning rules looked cool, > and I'm a sucker for anything BRPesque in RPG rules. Ditto. Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From alanjrichards at googlemail.com Wed Mar 7 09:48:25 2007 From: alanjrichards at googlemail.com (alan richards) Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 22:48:25 +0000 Subject: [Rq-rules] Re: Daemon Message-ID: <50a0ed550703061448s7a94c1den99a5f1a390bebda5@mail.gmail.com> 'Daemon' Mike Ohren BPFP 1987 (although I bought my copy in 90-91 following a review of 'new' games in the late lamented GMI magazine which makes me a little curious about the publication date) There is a picture of a purple demoney-type thing clinging to some rocks on the front. It has got a handful of cracking ideas (mainly on the subject of naturally dangerous things such as lightning and diseases) If you manage to find a copy I will be amazed, I've never met anyone else who bought it! And likewise have never managed to find another copy on t'internet (as my copy is sweat stained, dog-eared and water damaged almost beyond usability) Good luck and happy hunting Al -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20070306/4ba97b54/attachment.html From pmaranci at gmail.com Fri Mar 9 04:31:20 2007 From: pmaranci at gmail.com (Peter Maranci) Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 12:31:20 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players Message-ID: I'm trying to persuade the D&D group I play with to try a one-shot RuneQuest scenario. Some of them have expressed reluctance, saying that they don't want to learn a whole new system just for a one-shot. I tried to explain that RQ is very easy to learn compared to D&D, and that the two systems are very similar in many ways, but I haven't quite convinced them. How would you explain it? I'm planning to run RQIII or fantasy BRP/d100 with RQIII-compatible rules, incidentally. You know, this really is something that I should write up and post on my website, now that I think of it. -- 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/20070308/5b3159ac/attachment.html From IQuinn at surewest.net Fri Mar 9 04:48:35 2007 From: IQuinn at surewest.net (Robert Hoffman) Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 09:48:35 -0800 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <001f01c761a9$ff9153b0$6401a8c0@QUINNLAND> The one thing I always point out is the simplification of experience; rather then tracking the difficulty level of encounters which translates into generic experience points that you accumulate to gain a level and receive points to distribute among skills - you simply track when a skill is used and then see if you get better! I never understood the logic of global improvement when leveling regardless of what the character did to achieve that level. -----Original Message----- From: rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com [mailto:rq-rules-bounces at crashbox.com] On Behalf Of Peter Maranci Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 9:31 AM To: RuneQuest-Rules Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players I'm trying to persuade the D&D group I play with to try a one-shot RuneQuest scenario. Some of them have expressed reluctance, saying that they don't want to learn a whole new system just for a one-shot. I tried to explain that RQ is very easy to learn compared to D&D, and that the two systems are very similar in many ways, but I haven't quite convinced them. How would you explain it? I'm planning to run RQIII or fantasy BRP/d100 with RQIII-compatible rules, incidentally. You know, this really is something that I should write up and post on my website, now that I think of it. -- 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/20070308/ff9b3bc1/attachment.html From bick10 at comcast.net Fri Mar 9 05:12:41 2007 From: bick10 at comcast.net (Jim Bickmeyer) Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 18:12:41 +0000 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players Message-ID: <030820071812.6578.45F05219000283A2000019B22200745672CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> From: "Peter Maranci" > I'm trying to persuade the D&D group I play with to try a one-shot RuneQuest > scenario. Some of them have expressed reluctance, saying that they don't > want to learn a whole new system just for a one-shot. I suggest suppling them with pre-generated characters in the 70-80% skill range for main skills. Give them all the PC's some useful magic. When I first played RQ, one of the things that struck me was that everyone could use magic. Maybe some one use Divine scattered about the PC. Do not allow any magic weapons. Only allow the temporal spells on weapons. That will help them separate D&D and RQ. You should do well. Have fun and get them converted. Jim Bickmeyer From slposey at slposey.cnc.net Fri Mar 9 05:26:53 2007 From: slposey at slposey.cnc.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2007 11:26:53 -0700 (MST) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20070308182653.8C0BE2987@victory.cnc.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20070308/4ad527ec/attachment.html From styopa1 at gmail.com Sat Mar 10 06:30:59 2007 From: styopa1 at gmail.com (Styopa) Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2007 13:30:59 -0600 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: <20070308182653.8C0BE2987@victory.cnc.net> References: <20070308182653.8C0BE2987@victory.cnc.net> Message-ID: <56e64e7a0703091130h61ac5567n6451a3f7ca3c1e54@mail.gmail.com> Whenever I get the "why do you think RQ is better" question (not unrelated to yours) I point out the situation that summarizes RQ in a nutshell: Highly experienced warrior (Level 10+ in D&D) suddenly finds himself face to face with a road bandit, 10' away, with a heavy crossbow aimed the warrior's chest. Using the RQ rules, what might happen? - the bandit shoots and misses - the bandit shoots and hits > if it's a normal hit, the warrior can perhaps survive, as long as it's not in the chest or head. In any case, the warrior is going to be hurt. Using the D&D rules? - the bandit shoots and misses - the bandit hits, which makes no difference whatsoever because the Xbow does what, 2d4 at best, and the fighter has easily 80+ hp I'd use the above example and point out that RQ might seem like a 'new' rules set for them, but mechanically, you're much better equipped simply to use *real-life logic* in RQ than to need to know the mass of contraditions and special rules that D&D requires (albeit much less so in 3.5). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20070309/829505cb/attachment.html From lancelot at inetnebr.com Sat Mar 10 12:34:50 2007 From: lancelot at inetnebr.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 19:34:50 -0600 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: <56e64e7a0703091130h61ac5567n6451a3f7ca3c1e54@mail.gmail.com> References: <20070308182653.8C0BE2987@victory.cnc.net> <56e64e7a0703091130h61ac5567n6451a3f7ca3c1e54@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <45F20B3A.6000501@inetnebr.com> Styopa wrote: > Whenever I get the "why do you think RQ is better" question (not > unrelated to yours) I point out the situation that summarizes RQ in a > nutshell: > > Highly experienced warrior (Level 10+ in D&D) suddenly finds himself > face to face with a road bandit, 10' away, with a heavy crossbow aimed > the warrior's chest. > > Using the RQ rules, what might happen? > - the bandit shoots and misses > - the bandit shoots and hits > > if it's a normal hit, the warrior can perhaps survive, as long as > it's not in the chest or head. In any case, the warrior is going to > be hurt. > > Using the D&D rules? > - the bandit shoots and misses > - the bandit hits, which makes no difference whatsoever because the > Xbow does what, 2d4 at best, and the fighter has easily 80+ hp And note a capable hero isnt randomly killed near the beginning of the story in very many of my fantasy novels or the movies I watch, nor do I particularly feel like pretending to be either the incapable hero represented by a low level D&D character or the high level RQ one who randomly died at an inappropriate juncture. Those 80+hp represent fatigue and skill and a bit of luck and maybe a few scratches.. The D&D fighters skill causes most of the advancement...the luck and stamina are what gradually runs out... Note the D&D fighter doesnt get a progressive dodge or block or parry skill except by way of this advancement desparate dodges getting cheaper as you get better? Sure they could have given fatigue points which the warrior spends when he does a last second desparate move and avoids dying... the player knows for certain the hero will make it... and that makes some players have a disconnect. RQ characters always seemed to start out more competent unless we explicitly chose otherwise... D&D is the opposite that is something I like about RQ. I have become less worried about Game System over time... but percentiles always seemed something a complete newbie could grok. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20070309/55b250a8/attachment.html From styopa1 at gmail.com Mon Mar 12 13:31:53 2007 From: styopa1 at gmail.com (Styopa) Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2007 21:31:53 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: <45F20B3A.6000501@inetnebr.com> References: <20070308182653.8C0BE2987@victory.cnc.net> <56e64e7a0703091130h61ac5567n6451a3f7ca3c1e54@mail.gmail.com> <45F20B3A.6000501@inetnebr.com> Message-ID: <56e64e7a0703111931g43f52fcybeb05249fda3c488@mail.gmail.com> On 3/9/07, Lance Dyas wrote: > > Styopa wrote: > > Whenever I get the "why do you think RQ is better" question (not unrelated > to yours) I point out the situation that summarizes RQ in a nutshell: > > Highly experienced warrior (Level 10+ in D&D) suddenly finds himself face > to face with a road bandit, 10' away, with a heavy crossbow aimed the > warrior's chest. > > Using the RQ rules, what might happen? > - the bandit shoots and misses > - the bandit shoots and hits > > if it's a normal hit, the warrior can perhaps survive, as long as it's > not in the chest or head. In any case, the warrior is going to be hurt. > > Using the D&D rules? > - the bandit shoots and misses > - the bandit hits, which makes no difference whatsoever because the Xbow > does what, 2d4 at best, and the fighter has easily 80+ hp > > And note a capable hero isnt randomly killed near the beginning of the > story in very many of my fantasy novels or the movies I watch, nor do I > particularly feel like pretending to be either the incapable hero > represented by a low level D&D character or the high level RQ one who > randomly died at an inappropriate juncture. > > Those 80+hp represent fatigue and skill and a bit of luck and maybe a few > scratches.. The D&D fighters skill causes most of the advancement...the luck > and stamina are what gradually runs out... Note the D&D fighter doesnt get > a progressive dodge or block or parry skill except by way of this > advancement desparate dodges getting cheaper as you get better? > We all have heard that rationalization. It works (barely) for combat, but it doesn't for coup de grace, poison, falling, or acid, as well as a host of other factors. The problem with your description of a hero is the self-selection and predestination problems. Nobody's a "hero" for going out to get the mail. Firstly it's trivial, secondly for most of the world it's a nearly perfectly safe activity. "Heroic" stature is a title one gains after the fact, when the 99.9% of 'average' has been winnowed out by circumstance or, yes, luck, and the one hardy bastard remains. Even in heroic fantasy fiction, either the hero isn't determined at the beginning (and we just happen to be following the 0.01% guy that IS going to make it), or even if he IS (ala Conan, etc.) there is the reasonable chance of death throughout. There are many situations in which the D&D mechanics make a dangerous situation almost impossible to die in. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20070311/fdb581a8/attachment.html From gazza666 at gmail.com Mon Mar 12 13:48:37 2007 From: gazza666 at gmail.com (Gary Sturgess) Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 11:48:37 +0900 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: <56e64e7a0703111931g43f52fcybeb05249fda3c488@mail.gmail.com> References: <20070308182653.8C0BE2987@victory.cnc.net> <56e64e7a0703091130h61ac5567n6451a3f7ca3c1e54@mail.gmail.com> <45F20B3A.6000501@inetnebr.com> <56e64e7a0703111931g43f52fcybeb05249fda3c488@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <9ebd81400703111948j547be8d6v9ddceb7de95753d0@mail.gmail.com> > Even in heroic fantasy fiction, either the hero isn't determined at the > beginning (and we just happen to be following the 0.01% guy that IS going to > make it), or even if he IS (ala Conan, etc.) there is the reasonable chance > of death throughout. There are many situations in which the D&D mechanics > make a dangerous situation almost impossible to die in. True. D&D is very definitely not a realistic system; it can't model reality very well (I'm not sure about D20 Modern, as I've never played it, but I suspect it suffers the same "flaw"). However, RuneQuest can be appallingly bloody. It's not at all uncommon for limbs to be flying off all the time and then stuck back on with healing magic, and I personally find it to be somewhat debatable that this is any more "realistic". Lest anyone get the wrong impression here, I definitely prefer RQ to D&D (I will play in and even run D&D, but only under protest). The realism I like to see in a D&D is the "realism" of your average adventure flick. I don't think D&D captures that particularly well, for what it's worth (D&D is far more high magic than anything short of maybe Dragonball Z); RQ does in some cases but not so much in others (I can see it working for Conan the Barbarian, but not so much Lord of the Rings - the number of orcs that Aragon and co fought pretty much would guarantee a critical at some point, and they weren't even wearing much in the way of armour). HeroQuest seems to have mechanics that can model this reasonably well, interestingly enough, though it's hardly unique or the first to do so (Hero System scales to whatever level of lethality you like fairly easily, and Amber flat out makes it impossible for any PC to get injured "accidentally"). There's nothing quite like the amusement offered by RuneQuest's flying limbs, though. ;) -- GAZZA From steve at verso.org Mon Mar 12 14:09:39 2007 From: steve at verso.org (Steve Rennell) Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 16:09:39 +1300 (NZDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: <9ebd81400703111948j547be8d6v9ddceb7de95753d0@mail.gmail.com> References: <20070308182653.8C0BE2987@victory.cnc.net> <56e64e7a0703091130h61ac5567n6451a3f7ca3c1e54@mail.gmail.com> <45F20B3A.6000501@inetnebr.com> <56e64e7a0703111931g43f52fcybeb05249fda3c488@mail.gmail.com> <9ebd81400703111948j547be8d6v9ddceb7de95753d0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <47026.203.118.136.41.1173668979.squirrel@paradise.gen.nz> > However, RuneQuest can be appallingly bloody. It's not at all uncommon > for limbs to be flying off all the time and then stuck back on with > healing magic, and I personally find it to be somewhat debatable that > this is any more "realistic". Looking at some of the medieval illuminations (say, the Maciejewski Bible) there are lots of limbs being hacked off. The I.33 sword and buckler manual suggests one of the best ways to end a fight is to take their sword hand/arm off. The grave dig at Visby shows much evidence of pre-lethal wounds (i.e the wound just before they were killed) to legs and arms (one victim apparently having both legs hacked off with one blow, followed up by a back-hand to the face). I've done some cutting against targets designed to replicate human limbs, and swords do a good job of slicing right through them. I think having limbs lopped off in combat is very realistic. Sticking them back on is just RQ's way of making characters not be cripples after the first close fight. Stephen -- Steve Rennell Wellington, New Zealand "If you want to end a war, whom else do you negotiate with except your enemy?" - Israeli statesman Abba Eban From gazza666 at gmail.com Mon Mar 12 15:09:49 2007 From: gazza666 at gmail.com (Gary Sturgess) Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 13:09:49 +0900 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: <47026.203.118.136.41.1173668979.squirrel@paradise.gen.nz> References: <20070308182653.8C0BE2987@victory.cnc.net> <56e64e7a0703091130h61ac5567n6451a3f7ca3c1e54@mail.gmail.com> <45F20B3A.6000501@inetnebr.com> <56e64e7a0703111931g43f52fcybeb05249fda3c488@mail.gmail.com> <9ebd81400703111948j547be8d6v9ddceb7de95753d0@mail.gmail.com> <47026.203.118.136.41.1173668979.squirrel@paradise.gen.nz> Message-ID: <9ebd81400703112109i250da6a1kdb963f373c7c7e1f@mail.gmail.com> On 3/12/07, Steve Rennell wrote: > I think having limbs lopped off in combat is very realistic. Sticking them > back on is just RQ's way of making characters not be cripples after the > first close fight. Perhaps, but RQ definitely goes overboard in some areas (I believe someone once worked out that thousands of troops in a significant battle would have cut their own heads off, according to RQ rules - the details escape me). -- GAZZA From tcantine at incentre.net Mon Mar 12 16:47:39 2007 From: tcantine at incentre.net (Tom Cantine) Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2007 22:47:39 -0700 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: <9ebd81400703112109i250da6a1kdb963f373c7c7e1f@mail.gmail.com> References: <20070308182653.8C0BE2987@victory.cnc.net> <56e64e7a0703091130h61ac5567n6451a3f7ca3c1e54@mail.gmail.com> <45F20B3A.6000501@inetnebr.com> <56e64e7a0703111931g43f52fcybeb05249fda3c488@mail.gmail.com> <9ebd81400703111948j547be8d6v9ddceb7de95753d0@mail.gmail.com> <47026.203.118.136.41.1173668979.squirrel@paradise.gen.nz> <9ebd81400703112109i250da6a1kdb963f373c7c7e1f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2FE832E7-D05D-11DB-A106-000D9334A9EA@incentre.net> Yes, I remember the analysis. It was the fumble tables. Imagine ten thousand warriors in a big battle. Assume they're all over 70%, and only fumble on 00. In the first round of combat, 100 will fumble. Six will hit "nearest friend", six will "hit self", not counting those two who must roll two or three times on the table. Twelve hits on friendlies, two of them effectively criticals (maximum damage ignoring armour). On 11-Mar-07, at 9:09 PM, Gary Sturgess wrote: > On 3/12/07, Steve Rennell wrote: >> I think having limbs lopped off in combat is very realistic. Sticking >> them >> back on is just RQ's way of making characters not be cripples after >> the >> first close fight. > > Perhaps, but RQ definitely goes overboard in some areas (I believe > someone once worked out that thousands of troops in a significant > battle would have cut their own heads off, according to RQ rules - the > details escape me). > -- > GAZZA > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From postmaster at runequest.za.org Mon Mar 12 20:52:50 2007 From: postmaster at runequest.za.org (postmaster at runequest.za.org) Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 11:52:50 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: <030820071812.6578.45F05219000283A2000019B22200745672CFCE050C070D@comc ast.net> References: <030820071812.6578.45F05219000283A2000019B22200745672CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> Message-ID: <20152.196.8.104.37.1173693170.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> Jim Wrote:> > I suggest suppling them with pre-generated characters in the 70-80% skill > range for main skills. Give them all the PC's some useful magic. When I > first played RQ, one of the things that struck me was that everyone could > use magic. Maybe some one use Divine scattered about the PC. Do not > allow any magic weapons. Only allow the temporal spells on weapons. That > will help them separate D&D and RQ. > > You should do well. Have fun and get them converted. > > I most heartedly agree with Jim here. My group has tried it with skilled players as well as beginners. (to role play in general). It works, trust me. Firstly the player doesn't get bogged down in rolling up character and all the fiddly bits that go with it. If you use a decent tool, or just have time to do it yourself, you can consult with the players beforehand to get an idea of what type of character they would like to play. Also helps a lot with planning the adventure if you do it this way. I also agree on the magic side, if you must give them magic, single use healing spells etc in preferance to stuff they have to comprehend the magic rules to use. Hmm, maybe also whip together a cheat sheet with handy tables and brief overviews of specific day to day rules to save on thumbing through the rulebook. Stuff like how impales vs knock backs work, the skill results table and teh attack modifiers table. (Don't forget the all important dropped oil lamp table, ha ha) Tony From tom at zunder.org.uk Mon Mar 12 21:30:28 2007 From: tom at zunder.org.uk (Thomas Zunder) Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 10:30:28 +0000 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: <56e64e7a0703111931g43f52fcybeb05249fda3c488@mail.gmail.com> References: <20070308182653.8C0BE2987@victory.cnc.net> <56e64e7a0703091130h61ac5567n6451a3f7ca3c1e54@mail.gmail.com> <45F20B3A.6000501@inetnebr.com> <56e64e7a0703111931g43f52fcybeb05249fda3c488@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <44922B27-B3C7-42E1-BC8B-C81F777EBDD4@zunder.org.uk> On 12 Mar 2007, at 02:31, Styopa wrote: > On 3/9/07, Lance Dyas wrote: > Styopa wrote: >> Whenever I get the "why do you think RQ is better" question (not >> unrelated to yours) I point out the situation that summarizes RQ >> in a nutshell: >> >> Highly experienced warrior (Level 10+ in D&D) suddenly finds >> himself face to face with a road bandit, 10' away, with a heavy >> crossbow aimed the warrior's chest. >> All the worse experiences as a GM in RQ have been when the bloody trollkin kills the RuneLord with a lucky slingshot. RQ can be far too able to deliver player death with no comeback somtimes. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20070312/c848881a/attachment.html From tom at zunder.org.uk Mon Mar 12 22:05:20 2007 From: tom at zunder.org.uk (Thomas Zunder) Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 11:05:20 +0000 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: <2FE832E7-D05D-11DB-A106-000D9334A9EA@incentre.net> References: <20070308182653.8C0BE2987@victory.cnc.net> <56e64e7a0703091130h61ac5567n6451a3f7ca3c1e54@mail.gmail.com> <45F20B3A.6000501@inetnebr.com> <56e64e7a0703111931g43f52fcybeb05249fda3c488@mail.gmail.com> <9ebd81400703111948j547be8d6v9ddceb7de95753d0@mail.gmail.com> <47026.203.118.136.41.1173668979.squirrel@paradise.gen.nz> <9ebd81400703112109i250da6a1kdb963f373c7c7e1f@mail.gmail.com> <2FE832E7-D05D-11DB-A106-000D9334A9EA@incentre.net> Message-ID: <45F533F0.6030005@zunder.org.uk> Tom Cantine wrote: > Yes, I remember the analysis. It was the fumble tables. Imagine ten > thousand warriors in a big battle. Assume they're all over 70%, and > only fumble on 00. In the first round of combat, 100 will fumble. Six > will hit "nearest friend", six will "hit self", not counting those two > who must roll two or three times on the table. > > Twelve hits on friendlies, two of them effectively criticals (maximum > damage ignoring armour). Now, ten thousand men, all heavily armed and battle crazy, how many do you think might hit a 'friend' by mistake, possibly fatally? How often does it happen now? Not often, but often enough. I suspect this isn't all that odd. -------------- 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/20070312/8b868036/attachment.vcf From gazza666 at gmail.com Mon Mar 12 22:45:24 2007 From: gazza666 at gmail.com (Gary Sturgess) Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 20:45:24 +0900 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: <45F533F0.6030005@zunder.org.uk> References: <20070308182653.8C0BE2987@victory.cnc.net> <56e64e7a0703091130h61ac5567n6451a3f7ca3c1e54@mail.gmail.com> <45F20B3A.6000501@inetnebr.com> <56e64e7a0703111931g43f52fcybeb05249fda3c488@mail.gmail.com> <9ebd81400703111948j547be8d6v9ddceb7de95753d0@mail.gmail.com> <47026.203.118.136.41.1173668979.squirrel@paradise.gen.nz> <9ebd81400703112109i250da6a1kdb963f373c7c7e1f@mail.gmail.com> <2FE832E7-D05D-11DB-A106-000D9334A9EA@incentre.net> <45F533F0.6030005@zunder.org.uk> Message-ID: <9ebd81400703120445n2008af4euc510e51a911e841c@mail.gmail.com> On 3/12/07, Thomas Zunder wrote: > Tom Cantine wrote: > Now, ten thousand men, all heavily armed and battle crazy, how many do > you think might hit a 'friend' by mistake, possibly fatally? > > How often does it happen now? Not often, but often enough. These aren't n00bs, note. Conversions are always subjective to some degree, but I'd say that a 70% skill corresponds to at least 5th or 6th level in D&D terms, and in real world terms quite possibly elite troops (perhaps not quite Navy Seal/SRS level - they'd probably qualify as Rune Lords - but better than Joe Grunt). > I suspect this isn't all that odd. In the heat of a mass combat, with all that chaos, and mostly green troops? Sure. But the analysis assumed no penalties for mass combat distraction, so we're basically saying that a competent warrior will hit a friend or himself for maximum damage ignoring armour once every 10000 melee rounds. I suspect that would be VERY odd. In fact, I'd venture to suggest that the only reason that fumbles happen so often in RuneQuest is because they're funny, and if they were represented at more realistic levels you'd never see them. Works for me - that's a good ENOUGH reason to have them - but I'm not going to argue that it's anymore "realistic" than D&D is (it's a very DIFFERENT feel, to be sure, but is it actually objectively more realistic?) On a more pragmatic note, observe that things like critical hits and fumbles (in any system) always favour the NPCs. A critical from a PC might kill one nameless NPC foe; a critical against them might kill a character that has seen many hours of game time (and with any system where it takes hours to create characters, you have to be very careful not to kill too often). A fumble by an NPC, again, is just one nameless foe that dies slightly quicker than usual. The basic reasoning is that NPCs are going to die anyway - at most, a critical or a fumble (as appropriate) just hastens the process a bit. The PCs will be on the receiving end of a lot more criticals and have a lot more fumbles than any of their opponents, and the consequences are far more dire. (Yes, I know there is more to gaming than killing things - it's just the simplest example; the principle applies to noncombat situations as well). -- GAZZA From lancelot at inetnebr.com Tue Mar 13 00:59:06 2007 From: lancelot at inetnebr.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 08:59:06 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: <56e64e7a0703111931g43f52fcybeb05249fda3c488@mail.gmail.com> References: <20070308182653.8C0BE2987@victory.cnc.net> <56e64e7a0703091130h61ac5567n6451a3f7ca3c1e54@mail.gmail.com> <45F20B3A.6000501@inetnebr.com> <56e64e7a0703111931g43f52fcybeb05249fda3c488@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <45F55CAA.6060406@inetnebr.com> Styopa wrote: > On 3/9/07, *Lance Dyas* > wrote: > > Styopa wrote: >> Whenever I get the "why do you think RQ is better" question (not >> unrelated to yours) I point out the situation that summarizes RQ >> in a nutshell: >> >> Highly experienced warrior (Level 10+ in D&D) suddenly finds >> himself face to face with a road bandit, 10' away, with a heavy >> crossbow aimed the warrior's chest. >> >> Using the RQ rules, what might happen? >> - the bandit shoots and misses >> - the bandit shoots and hits >> > if it's a normal hit, the warrior can perhaps survive, as long >> as it's not in the chest or head. In any case, the warrior is >> going to be hurt. >> >> Using the D&D rules? >> - the bandit shoots and misses >> - the bandit hits, which makes no difference whatsoever because >> the Xbow does what, 2d4 at best, and the fighter has easily 80+ hp > And note a capable hero isnt randomly killed near the beginning of > the story in very many of my fantasy novels or the movies I watch, > nor do I particularly feel like pretending to be either the > incapable hero represented by a low level D&D character or the > high level RQ one who randomly died at an inappropriate juncture. > > Those 80+hp represent fatigue and skill and a bit of luck and > maybe a few scratches.. The D&D fighters skill causes most of the > advancement...the luck and stamina are what gradually runs out... > Note the D&D fighter doesnt get a progressive dodge or block or > parry skill except by way of this advancement desparate dodges > getting cheaper as you get better? > > > We all have heard that rationalization. It works (barely) for combat, > but it doesn't for coup de grace, poison, falling, or acid, as well as > a host of other factors. If you want realism the military studies indicated people fight without impairment till taken out... the injury which takes them out may be relatively minor but doesnt even seem to be consistant for the same individual one time a minor injury will stop the same marine who was only stopped by a major one previously.... > > The problem with your description of a hero is the self-selection and > predestination problems. Nope the "player" is not the "character" and you seem to think people want to play 1000 or more games before having a character who doesn't have a meaningless random death.... wow From lancelot at inetnebr.com Tue Mar 13 01:01:48 2007 From: lancelot at inetnebr.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 09:01:48 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: <47026.203.118.136.41.1173668979.squirrel@paradise.gen.nz> References: <20070308182653.8C0BE2987@victory.cnc.net> <56e64e7a0703091130h61ac5567n6451a3f7ca3c1e54@mail.gmail.com> <45F20B3A.6000501@inetnebr.com> <56e64e7a0703111931g43f52fcybeb05249fda3c488@mail.gmail.com> <9ebd81400703111948j547be8d6v9ddceb7de95753d0@mail.gmail.com> <47026.203.118.136.41.1173668979.squirrel@paradise.gen.nz> Message-ID: <45F55D4C.7020506@inetnebr.com> Steve Rennell wrote: > > I've done some cutting against targets designed to replicate human limbs, > and swords do a good job of slicing right through them. > Tie them up on a rope so they move around ... or watch the Myth Busters...when they do it you have to hack and hack on flexibly located subjects .... Historically gangrene and similar things took peoples arms and legs more often than the injury directly From pmaranci at gmail.com Tue Mar 13 01:37:01 2007 From: pmaranci at gmail.com (Peter Maranci) Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 10:37:01 -0400 Subject: [Rq-rules] Deity Types Message-ID: This relates to the "Fantasy Earth gods?" thread from a while ago, as well as the current "RQ for D&D players" thread. But I thought it warranted it's own topic. I was making a list of deity types from the RQIII Magic book, and was surprised to see some holes in the list. Here's what's in the book: - Agricultural Goddess - Earth Goddess - Hunting God - Moon Goddess - Night Goddess - Ruling Deity - Sea God - Storm God - Sun God - Trickster God - Underworld God - War God Possibly some of these could be folded into one of the other categories above, but here are some other types that I thought would be appropriate: Animal God Chaos God City God Death God Healing God Hearth God Messenger God Racial God Undead God Anyone care to add to the list, or provide some examples? -- 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/20070312/360109f7/attachment.html From bick10 at comcast.net Tue Mar 13 02:07:19 2007 From: bick10 at comcast.net (Jim Bickmeyer) Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:07:19 +0000 Subject: [Rq-rules] Deity Types Message-ID: <031220071507.8260.45F56CA700049EA8000020442206999735CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> From: "Peter Maranci" > This relates to the "Fantasy Earth gods?" thread from a while ago, as well > as the current "RQ for D&D players" thread. But I thought it warranted it's > own topic. >.... Just a few quickly. Also, I will not limit them to God or Goddess. So add gender bias as you see fit. Debauchery Builder (Mason, Metal work) Learning/Knowledge Justice Magic Spirits Jim Bickmeyer From carpgachair at yahoo.com Tue Mar 13 04:45:56 2007 From: carpgachair at yahoo.com (Paul Cardwell) Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 10:45:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: <9ebd81400703112109i250da6a1kdb963f373c7c7e1f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <960035.92412.qm@web33514.mail.mud.yahoo.com> That was in Murphey's Rules, a cartoon on illogical game rules in the old printed Pyramid, originally illustrated by Pulitizer laurete Ben Sargeant. I asked Steve Jackson how it got such a major cartoonist for the job and he replied, "Why not? He is a gamer." Paul Cardwell --- Gary Sturgess wrote: > On 3/12/07, Steve Rennell wrote: > > I think having limbs lopped off in combat is very > realistic. Sticking them > > back on is just RQ's way of making characters not > be cripples after the > > first close fight. > > Perhaps, but RQ definitely goes overboard in some > areas (I believe > someone once worked out that thousands of troops in > a significant > battle would have cut their own heads off, according > to RQ rules - the > details escape me). > -- > GAZZA > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Don't get soaked. Take a quick peek at the forecast with the Yahoo! Search weather shortcut. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#loc_weather From steve at verso.org Tue Mar 13 04:56:44 2007 From: steve at verso.org (Steve Rennell) Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 06:56:44 +1300 (NZDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: <45F55D4C.7020506@inetnebr.com> References: <20070308182653.8C0BE2987@victory.cnc.net> <56e64e7a0703091130h61ac5567n6451a3f7ca3c1e54@mail.gmail.com> <45F20B3A.6000501@inetnebr.com> <56e64e7a0703111931g43f52fcybeb05249fda3c488@mail.gmail.com> <9ebd81400703111948j547be8d6v9ddceb7de95753d0@mail.gmail.com> <47026.203.118.136.41.1173668979.squirrel@paradise.gen.nz> <45F55D4C.7020506@inetnebr.com> Message-ID: <55698.203.97.170.26.1173722204.squirrel@paradise.gen.nz> > Steve Rennell wrote: >> I've done some cutting against targets designed to replicate human >> limbs, and swords do a good job of slicing right through them. > Tie them up on a rope so they move around ... We had it mounted on a spike. For people who were inexperienced, the "limb" tended to fly through the air some meters and land mostly undamaged. For people who could make the sword move fast and smooth, the remains of the "limb" didn't move at all and the lopped off bit flew a very short way. Skill makes a lot of difference to the damage inflicted. The most important aspect seemed to be getting the sword to travel in a straight line, exactly edge on, throughout the whole of the cut. If the sword started to twist half way through a cut, then the cut stopped pretty much dead, if the sword was off line as it hit, then there was huge impact but no cut. Note that I have no direct experience of the effect of armour on a cut. (Except to say that butted mail doesn't stop a thrust at all). > or watch the Myth Busters...when they do it you have to hack and > hack on flexibly located subjects .... A quick check on You Tube fails to find it, but I'll try a bit more in depth later. Any clues as to what episode it was? > Historically gangrene and similar things took peoples arms and legs more > often than the injury directly Although I'd agree that wound infection killed a lot of people. I'm not convinced that you were more likely to lose a limb from infection than having it hit. What basis do you have for believing this? Cheers, Stephen -- Steve Rennell Wellington, New Zealand "If you want to end a war, whom else do you negotiate with except your enemy?" - Israeli statesman Abba Eban From jurrubin at gmail.com Tue Mar 13 06:11:28 2007 From: jurrubin at gmail.com (David Smart) Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 14:11:28 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] Deity Types In-Reply-To: <031220071507.8260.45F56CA700049EA8000020442206999735CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> References: <031220071507.8260.45F56CA700049EA8000020442206999735CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> Message-ID: <1c92296e0703121211m2018dcb0l971fc4482b0e76d3@mail.gmail.com> And don't forget the Deity of Trade. Issaries rocks. On 3/12/07, Jim Bickmeyer wrote: > > From: "Peter Maranci" > > This relates to the "Fantasy Earth gods?" thread from a while ago, as > well > > as the current "RQ for D&D players" thread. But I thought it warranted > it's > > own topic. > >.... > > Just a few quickly. Also, I will not limit them to God or Goddess. So > add gender bias as you see fit. > > Debauchery > Builder (Mason, Metal work) > Learning/Knowledge > Justice > Magic > Spirits > > > Jim Bickmeyer > > > _______________________________________________ > 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/20070312/c4ed6ba7/attachment.html From gerard at gamesmeister.com Tue Mar 13 06:38:40 2007 From: gerard at gamesmeister.com (Gerard Crowe) Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 19:38:40 -0000 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: <20070312135727.9DC07154E8B4@mini.thinbits.net> Message-ID: <004401c764de$0bb30f30$020ba8c0@eagles> >> Highly experienced warrior (Level 10+ in D&D) suddenly finds >> himself face to face with a road bandit, 10' away, with a heavy >> crossbow aimed the warrior's chest. > >All the worse experiences as a GM in RQ have been when the bloody >trollkin kills the RuneLord with a lucky slingshot. >RQ can be far too able to deliver player death with no comeback >somtimes. As this is the rules list, I just thought I'd point out that the new MRQ rules allocate Hero Points to PCs, which help to reduce the frequency of this sort of event Gerry From styopa1 at gmail.com Tue Mar 13 07:51:26 2007 From: styopa1 at gmail.com (Styopa) Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:51:26 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: <004401c764de$0bb30f30$020ba8c0@eagles> References: <20070312135727.9DC07154E8B4@mini.thinbits.net> <004401c764de$0bb30f30$020ba8c0@eagles> Message-ID: <56e64e7a0703121351o6bcd1fc1g2955a770c3b1b990@mail.gmail.com> On 3/12/07, Gerard Crowe wrote: > > > As this is the rules list, I just thought I'd point out that the new MRQ > rules allocate Hero Points to PCs, which help to reduce the frequency of > this sort of event > > Gerry 1) I much prefer realistic RPGs as a player or a GM. I'd rather know my chances are something comparable to what I'd expect in real life, than to have a game allow my characters to be "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" until that one moment when I expect it but they suddenly aren't. 2) I give my players hero points, always. Ob the multi-posts-above reply suggesting that I believe players want 1000 characters to die before one of them's hero? That's silliness, and faintly disingenuous. I was merely pointing out the self-selection problems that crop up when an RPG assumes 'every character is a hero!' - for example, the "problem" of the city guard. If every player is a hero, why do they care what the city guard says? A lvl 16 fighter doesn't care a hoot when some lvl 4 sergeant and his 4 lvl 1 conscripts try to arrest him. OTOH, you've got other TSR products that presume the 'city watch' is commensurate with the level of the characters to keep them in check, then you have to wonder - how many lvl 16s 'guardsmen' live in one town? They are married to level 18 'milkmaids'? Regarding hero points, I've never liked the 'expectable' quality of them. Players know "heh, I have 3 hero points, I can survive this fight no matter what!". I kind of use them like divine intervention for runelords - d10 vs. current hero points. If your roll is <= your points, it works, and you lose that many hero points, in any case a roll reduces your total heropoints by one. Yes, I have allowed people to use HP to reroll failed HP rolls because I'm a softie. Generally I force them to give me a story as to how their luck would be implemented dramatically. Players pick their starting ages 17-28, and their characters get starting HP = 28-age. So younger characters have low skill, but lots of luck. Housecats ALWAYS start with 9. :) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20070312/65f29ba7/attachment.html From slposey at slposey.cnc.net Tue Mar 13 08:56:58 2007 From: slposey at slposey.cnc.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 15:56:58 -0600 (MDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] Deity Types In-Reply-To: <031220071507.8260.45F56CA700049EA8000020442206999735CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> Message-ID: <20070312215659.0E2755289@captain.cnc.net> ---- Discussion of RuneQuest rules. wrote: > > From: "Peter Maranci" > > This relates to the "Fantasy Earth gods?" thread from a while ago, as > > well as the current "RQ for D&D players" thread. But I thought it > > warranted it's own topic. > >.... > > Just a few quickly. Also, I will not limit them to God or Goddess. > So add gender bias as you see fit. > > Debauchery > Builder (Mason, Metal work) > Learning/Knowledge > Justice > Magic > Spirits Are we talking "Spirits" as in Spooks or "Spirits" as in Wine/Whiskey? Both are valid so I'm listing the OTHER from whichever you meant. ;-) More: Fire Time Plants Music Sky/Weather/Thunder/Lightning (not necessarily all the same, though the portfolios sometimes overlapped). Harvest/Sex/Fertility/Childbirth (ditto) Stephen Posey slposey at concentric.net From tcantine at incentre.net Tue Mar 13 10:45:22 2007 From: tcantine at incentre.net (Tom Cantine) Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2007 16:45:22 -0700 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: <45F533F0.6030005@zunder.org.uk> References: <20070308182653.8C0BE2987@victory.cnc.net> <56e64e7a0703091130h61ac5567n6451a3f7ca3c1e54@mail.gmail.com> <45F20B3A.6000501@inetnebr.com> <56e64e7a0703111931g43f52fcybeb05249fda3c488@mail.gmail.com> <9ebd81400703111948j547be8d6v9ddceb7de95753d0@mail.gmail.com> <47026.203.118.136.41.1173668979.squirrel@paradise.gen.nz> <9ebd81400703112109i250da6a1kdb963f373c7c7e1f@mail.gmail.com> <2FE832E7-D05D-11DB-A106-000D9334A9EA@incentre.net> <45F533F0.6030005@zunder.org.uk> Message-ID: I don't think it's odd at all. Seems quite reasonable, actually. This is quite a low number, in my view. Bear in mind, however, it's just a single melee round. Over the course of 10 minutes of battle, there's be lots more... On 12-Mar-07, at 4:05 AM, Thomas Zunder wrote: > Tom Cantine wrote: >> Yes, I remember the analysis. It was the fumble tables. Imagine ten >> thousand warriors in a big battle. Assume they're all over 70%, and >> only fumble on 00. In the first round of combat, 100 will fumble. Six >> will hit "nearest friend", six will "hit self", not counting those >> two who must roll two or three times on the table. >> >> Twelve hits on friendlies, two of them effectively criticals (maximum >> damage ignoring armour). > Now, ten thousand men, all heavily armed and battle crazy, how many do > you think might hit a 'friend' by mistake, possibly fatally? > > How often does it happen now? Not often, but often enough. > > I suspect this isn't all that odd. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules From bick10 at comcast.net Tue Mar 13 23:22:54 2007 From: bick10 at comcast.net (Jim Bickmeyer) Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 12:22:54 +0000 Subject: [Rq-rules] Deity Types Message-ID: <031320071222.18174.45F6979E0003FFB0000046FE2206999735CFCE050C070D@comcast.net> > > Just a few quickly. Also, I will not limit them to God or Goddess. > > So add gender bias as you see fit. > > > > Debauchery > > Builder (Mason, Metal work) > > Learning/Knowledge > > Justice > > Magic > > Spirits > > Are we talking "Spirits" as in Spooks or "Spirits" as in Wine/Whiskey? Both are > valid so I'm listing the OTHER from whichever you meant. ;-) Spirits as in Boooo. Wine and Whiskey could be with Debauchery. Although I guess good Wine and Whiskey would be under Plants/Agriculture. > More: > Fire > Time > Plants > Music > Sky/Weather/Thunder/Lightning (not necessarily all the same, though the > portfolios sometimes overlapped). > Harvest/Sex/Fertility/Childbirth (ditto) > > Stephen Posey > slposey at concentric.net God of landscapes? Mountains, Deserts, Jungle, Forests, Tundra, Glaciers The first list has Underworld. Is that beneath the ground or where the dead end up? Jim Bickmeyer From lancelot at inetnebr.com Wed Mar 14 01:04:28 2007 From: lancelot at inetnebr.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 09:04:28 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: <55698.203.97.170.26.1173722204.squirrel@paradise.gen.nz> References: <20070308182653.8C0BE2987@victory.cnc.net> <56e64e7a0703091130h61ac5567n6451a3f7ca3c1e54@mail.gmail.com> <45F20B3A.6000501@inetnebr.com> <56e64e7a0703111931g43f52fcybeb05249fda3c488@mail.gmail.com> <9ebd81400703111948j547be8d6v9ddceb7de95753d0@mail.gmail.com> <47026.203.118.136.41.1173668979.squirrel@paradise.gen.nz> <45F55D4C.7020506@inetnebr.com> <55698.203.97.170.26.1173722204.squirrel@paradise.gen.nz> Message-ID: <45F6AF6C.1080203@inetnebr.com> Steve Rennell wrote: >> Steve Rennell wrote: >> >>> I've done some cutting against targets designed to replicate human >>> limbs, and swords do a good job of slicing right through them. >>> > > >> Tie them up on a rope so they move around ... >> > > We had it mounted on a spike. What I expected actually .. you doubled the impact when you make the target so that it not only stands there but tries to hold position instead of flexing out of the way like a real limb is likely to do > For people who were inexperienced, the > "limb" tended to fly through the air some meters and land mostly > undamaged. For people who could make the sword move fast and smooth, the > remains of the "limb" didn't move at all and the lopped off bit flew a > very short way. Skill makes a lot of difference to the damage inflicted. > The most important aspect seemed to be getting the sword to travel in a > straight line, exactly edge on, throughout the whole of the cut. If the > sword started to twist half way through a cut, then the cut stopped pretty > much dead, if the sword was off line as it hit, then there was huge impact > but no cut. > > Note that I have no direct experience of the effect of armour on a cut. > (Except to say that butted mail doesn't stop a thrust at all). > Seems likely even a little armor and a mobile target has the impact of the making a cut less smooth even fabrique armor was surprizingly effective and more common historically than us gamers give it credit for. >> or watch the Myth Busters...when they do it you have to hack and >> hack on flexibly located subjects .... >> > > A quick check on You Tube fails to find it, but I'll try a bit more in > depth later. Any clues as to what episode it was? > Argghh.. memory failing me.. checking on it myself they did an episode where the were unable to build a souped up fan that would remove a head... and one were you cant break a sword with a sword. My subconcious must have been imagining some of there attacks on pig bodies being with swords An interesting counter point to whether it is "realistic" or "not" the further back we go from history into legend/and myth the more you read about limb loss "in one fell stroke" etc... whether it is myth or legend or reality ... atleast the delivery of such strokes might be a part of what we want the game to simulate. And magical replacement of limbs was ther in old myth as well.. Celtic gods with cybernetic arms is just cool ;-) >> Historically gangrene and similar things took peoples arms and legs more >> often than the injury directly >> > > Although I'd agree that wound infection killed a lot of people. I'm not > convinced that you were more likely to lose a limb from infection than > having it hit. What basis do you have for believing this? > The shear lack of knowledge about how to prevent the latter effect However even RQ basic healing makes that element of history a moot point. From carpgachair at yahoo.com Wed Mar 14 03:17:51 2007 From: carpgachair at yahoo.com (Paul Cardwell) Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 09:17:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <449297.40802.qm@web33502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> "Friendly fire" preexists firearms. Still, the percentages are a bit extreme. I cut them to one-sixth in Mythworld. Paul Cardwell --- Tom Cantine wrote: > I don't think it's odd at all. Seems quite > reasonable, actually. This > is quite a low number, in my view. Bear in mind, > however, it's just a > single melee round. Over the course of 10 minutes of > battle, there's be > lots more... > > On 12-Mar-07, at 4:05 AM, Thomas Zunder wrote: > > > Tom Cantine wrote: > >> Yes, I remember the analysis. It was the fumble > tables. Imagine ten > >> thousand warriors in a big battle. Assume they're > all over 70%, and > >> only fumble on 00. In the first round of combat, > 100 will fumble. Six > >> will hit "nearest friend", six will "hit self", > not counting those > >> two who must roll two or three times on the > table. > >> > >> Twelve hits on friendlies, two of them > effectively criticals (maximum > >> damage ignoring armour). > > Now, ten thousand men, all heavily armed and > battle crazy, how many do > > you think might hit a 'friend' by mistake, > possibly fatally? > > > > How often does it happen now? Not often, but often > enough. > > > > I suspect this isn't all that odd. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Bored stiff? Loosen up... Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games. http://games.yahoo.com/games/front From lev_lafayette at yahoo.com.au Wed Mar 14 18:03:11 2007 From: lev_lafayette at yahoo.com.au (Lev Lafayette) Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 00:03:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D players In-Reply-To: <47026.203.118.136.41.1173668979.squirrel@paradise.gen.nz> Message-ID: <883974.89373.qm@web33501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Steve Rennell wrote: > I think having limbs lopped off in combat is very > realistic. Sticking them > back on is just RQ's way of making characters not be > cripples after the > first close fight. It has also been argued that because Glorantha has such strong healing magic (I mean every third peasant seems to have at least heal 1), it tends to be a more violent society as well. > -- > Steve Rennell > Wellington, New Zealand Ahh, another Kiwi, eh? I'm intending to move there some time in the near future... All the best, Lev ____________________________________________________________________________________ We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love (and love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list. http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/265 From gazza666 at gmail.com Wed Mar 14 18:05:47 2007 From: gazza666 at gmail.com (Gary Sturgess) Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 16:05:47 +0900 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D player In-Reply-To: <883974.89373.qm@web33501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <47026.203.118.136.41.1173668979.squirrel@paradise.gen.nz> <883974.89373.qm@web33501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9ebd81400703140005xbd7fd30w306c42d516dffde3@mail.gmail.com> On 3/14/07, Lev Lafayette wrote: > > It has also been argued that because Glorantha has > such strong healing magic (I mean every third peasant > seems to have at least heal 1), it tends to be a more > violent society as well. I was under the impression that the RuneQuest high availability of healing magic was deemed to be a "bug" - that Glorantha was not supposed to be thus, but it was necessary due to the high lethality of combat, and that it was partly to address this that the HeroQuest mechanics toned the lethality way down (so that healing magic is no longer as prevalent). -- GAZZA From lancelot at inetnebr.com Wed Mar 14 23:33:18 2007 From: lancelot at inetnebr.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 07:33:18 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D player In-Reply-To: <9ebd81400703140005xbd7fd30w306c42d516dffde3@mail.gmail.com> References: <47026.203.118.136.41.1173668979.squirrel@paradise.gen.nz> <883974.89373.qm@web33501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <9ebd81400703140005xbd7fd30w306c42d516dffde3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <45F7EB8E.4090304@inetnebr.com> Gary Sturgess wrote: > On 3/14/07, Lev Lafayette wrote: >> >> It has also been argued that because Glorantha has >> such strong healing magic (I mean every third peasant >> seems to have at least heal 1), it tends to be a more >> violent society as well. > > I was under the impression that the RuneQuest high availability of > healing magic was deemed to be a "bug" - Hmmm, well in the real world ... amongst societies with beliefs in magic magic which heals has been amongst the most common... protection from spirits and enhancing ones deficiencies probably on the list as well.= Hell faith healing is still one of the most common ;-) I would argue making healing magic common is more "realistic" hehehe. > that Glorantha was not > supposed to be thus, but it was necessary due to the high lethality of > combat, and that it was partly to address this that the HeroQuest > mechanics toned the lethality way down (so that healing magic is no > longer as prevalent). From ghoyle1 at sbcglobal.net Thu Mar 15 02:09:39 2007 From: ghoyle1 at sbcglobal.net (Guy Hoyle) Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 10:09:39 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D player In-Reply-To: <45F7EB8E.4090304@inetnebr.com> References: <47026.203.118.136.41.1173668979.squirrel@paradise.gen.nz> <883974.89373.qm@web33501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <9ebd81400703140005xbd7fd30w306c42d516dffde3@mail.gmail.com> <45F7EB8E.4090304@inetnebr.com> Message-ID: <45F81033.8010200@sbcglobal.net> Lance Dyas wrote: > Hmmm, well in the real world ... amongst societies with beliefs in magic > magic which heals has been amongst the most common... protection > from spirits and enhancing ones deficiencies probably on the list as well.= > Hell faith healing is still one of the most common ;-) Doesn't faith healing typically deal with illnesses such as cancer or heart disease, or handicaps such as disabled limbs, mental illness, infertility (and impotence, for males), and other disfiguring conditions? The most commonly available healing spell in RQ is the Spirit Magic spell Healing, which is most useful in combat situations (and learned by the majority of all PCs I've ever seen). Even faith healers typically can't stick an amputated limb back on, especially in the middle of combat. Most PCs will go to a specialist for other types of cures. Guy (Hoyle) From Nick.Middleton at wrsl.com Thu Mar 15 03:35:06 2007 From: Nick.Middleton at wrsl.com (Nick.Middleton at wrsl.com) Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 16:35:06 +0000 Subject: [Rq-rules] Ken Murphy's Elementals document... Message-ID: Is Ken Murphy about? On Ben Monroe's Yahoo RQ3 group (http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/rq3/) the topic of RQ creatrues came up - and I was thinking of posting the word doc I have of Ken's excellent work on Elelmentals in the file section there, but would like to double check that's OK with Ken first. Also, can anyone remember when the original posts / discussions about these was held? Cheers, Nick Middleton "Soon we'll be out, amid the cold world's strife, Soon we'll be sliding down the razor blade of life." Tom Lehrer, College Days Any files attached to this e-mail will have been checked with virus detection software prior to transmission but you should carry out your own virus check before opening any attachment. WRSL does not accept liability for any damage or loss which may be caused by software viruses. The contents of this e-mail and any attachments are the property of WRSL and are intended for the confidential use by the named recipient only. They may be legally privileged and should not be communicated to, or relied upon, by any other person without written consent. If you are not the addressee, please notify us immediately at the following address: Westinghouse Rail Systems Ltd (WRSL), PO Box 79, Pew Hill, Langley Park, Chippenham, Wiltshire, SN15 1JD - Tel 01249 441441 Westinghouse Rail Systems Ltd is a subsidiary of Invensys Plc. Registered office: Portland House, Bressenden Place, London, SW1E 5BF. Registered in England and Wales No. 1641421. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: test2.png Type: image/png Size: 28131 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20070314/6b8c7578/attachment.png From gazza666 at gmail.com Thu Mar 15 09:59:24 2007 From: gazza666 at gmail.com (Gary Sturgess) Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 07:59:24 +0900 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D player In-Reply-To: <45F81033.8010200@sbcglobal.net> References: <47026.203.118.136.41.1173668979.squirrel@paradise.gen.nz> <883974.89373.qm@web33501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <9ebd81400703140005xbd7fd30w306c42d516dffde3@mail.gmail.com> <45F7EB8E.4090304@inetnebr.com> <45F81033.8010200@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <9ebd81400703141559q26427a56o2445ca2539ab9bcd@mail.gmail.com> > The most commonly available healing spell in RQ is the Spirit Magic > spell Healing, which is most useful in combat situations (and learned by > the majority of all PCs I've ever seen). Even faith healers typically > can't stick an amputated limb back on, especially in the middle of > combat. Most PCs will go to a specialist for other types of cures. > > Guy (Hoyle) Faith healers in the RW can't do anything at all, but even if they could it would clearly be divine rather than spirit magic. -- GAZZA From ghoyle1 at sbcglobal.net Thu Mar 15 10:01:10 2007 From: ghoyle1 at sbcglobal.net (Guy Hoyle) Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 18:01:10 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D player In-Reply-To: <9ebd81400703141559q26427a56o2445ca2539ab9bcd@mail.gmail.com> References: <47026.203.118.136.41.1173668979.squirrel@paradise.gen.nz> <883974.89373.qm@web33501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <9ebd81400703140005xbd7fd30w306c42d516dffde3@mail.gmail.com> <45F7EB8E.4090304@inetnebr.com> <45F81033.8010200@sbcglobal.net> <9ebd81400703141559q26427a56o2445ca2539ab9bcd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <45F87EB6.4060807@sbcglobal.net> Gary Sturgess wrote: >> The most commonly available healing spell in RQ is the Spirit Magic >> spell Healing, which is most useful in combat situations (and learned by >> the majority of all PCs I've ever seen). Even faith healers typically >> can't stick an amputated limb back on, especially in the middle of >> combat. Most PCs will go to a specialist for other types of cures. >> >> Guy (Hoyle) > > > Faith healers in the RW can't do anything at all, but even if they > could it would clearly be divine rather than spirit magic. Well, that's what I mean. The Amazing Randi's book on faith healers is a great look at "real world" faith healers. Guy From gazza666 at gmail.com Thu Mar 15 10:02:38 2007 From: gazza666 at gmail.com (Gary Sturgess) Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 08:02:38 +0900 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D player In-Reply-To: <45F87EB6.4060807@sbcglobal.net> References: <47026.203.118.136.41.1173668979.squirrel@paradise.gen.nz> <883974.89373.qm@web33501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <9ebd81400703140005xbd7fd30w306c42d516dffde3@mail.gmail.com> <45F7EB8E.4090304@inetnebr.com> <45F81033.8010200@sbcglobal.net> <9ebd81400703141559q26427a56o2445ca2539ab9bcd@mail.gmail.com> <45F87EB6.4060807@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <9ebd81400703141602q22d8b8f6jfb72005cdefada58@mail.gmail.com> On 3/15/07, Guy Hoyle wrote: > Gary Sturgess wrote: > > Faith healers in the RW can't do anything at all, but even if they > > could it would clearly be divine rather than spirit magic. > > Well, that's what I mean. The Amazing Randi's book on faith healers is a > great look at "real world" faith healers. Good man. Just wanted to make sure this list wasn't about to degenerate into woo-woo territory. -- GAZZA From lev_lafayette at yahoo.com.au Thu Mar 15 10:17:18 2007 From: lev_lafayette at yahoo.com.au (Lev Lafayette) Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 16:17:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D player In-Reply-To: <9ebd81400703141559q26427a56o2445ca2539ab9bcd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <703746.95660.qm@web33512.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Gary Sturgess wrote: > > Faith healers in the RW can't do anything at all, > but even if they > could it would clearly be divine rather than spirit > magic. Depends on what you mean by "faith healer". If you include shaman and witch-doctors in this category you'll find that they are remarkably good at what we moderns would call psychotherapy. All the best, Lev ____________________________________________________________________________________ Finding fabulous fares is fun. Let Yahoo! FareChase search your favorite travel sites to find flight and hotel bargains. http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097 From ghoyle1 at sbcglobal.net Thu Mar 15 10:31:37 2007 From: ghoyle1 at sbcglobal.net (Guy Hoyle) Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 18:31:37 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D player In-Reply-To: <703746.95660.qm@web33512.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <703746.95660.qm@web33512.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <45F885D9.5030905@sbcglobal.net> Lev Lafayette wrote: > > Depends on what you mean by "faith healer". If you > include shaman and witch-doctors in this category > you'll find that they are remarkably good at what we > moderns would call psychotherapy. > And what we'd call "stage magic" and "scams" as well. (Not to contradict what you said, but it's all part of the package. You could put together a pretty decent "real-world faith healer" type in RQ without using any spells at all.) Guy From pmj at comhem.se Thu Mar 15 11:01:42 2007 From: pmj at comhem.se (Peter Johansson) Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 01:01:42 +0100 Subject: [Rq-rules] Ken Murphy's Elementals document... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <45F88CE6.6000903@comhem.se> Hi! Ken was posting stuff about Elementals on November 4 2003. There were discussions on the subject taking place from October 27 and forward for about three weeks after that. I can't find that Ken has posted anything since December 2005. Cheers, /Peter J Nick.Middleton at wrsl.com wrote: > Is Ken Murphy about? > > On Ben Monroe's Yahoo RQ3 group (http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/rq3/) > the topic of RQ creatrues came up - and I was thinking of posting the word > doc I have of Ken's excellent work on Elelmentals in the file section > there, but would like to double check that's OK with Ken first. > > Also, can anyone remember when the original posts / discussions about these > was held? > > Cheers, > > Nick Middleton > "Soon we'll be out, amid the cold world's strife, > > Soon we'll be sliding down the razor blade of life." > > Tom Lehrer, College Days > > Any files attached to this e-mail will have been checked with virus detection software prior to transmission but you should carry out your own virus check before opening any attachment. WRSL does not accept liability for any damage or loss which may be caused by software viruses. The contents of this e-mail and any attachments are the property of WRSL and are intended for the confidential use by the named recipient only. They may be legally privileged and should not be communicated to, or relied upon, by any other person without written consent. If you are not the addressee, please notify us immediately at the following address: Westinghouse Rail Systems Ltd (WRSL), PO Box 79, Pew Hill, Langley Park, Chippenham, Wiltshire, SN15 1JD - Tel 01249 441441 > > Westinghouse Rail Systems Ltd is a subsidiary of Invensys Plc. Registered office: Portland House, Bressenden Place, London, SW1E 5BF. > Registered in England and Wales No. 1641421. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From lancelot at inetnebr.com Thu Mar 15 13:18:50 2007 From: lancelot at inetnebr.com (Lance Dyas) Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 21:18:50 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D player In-Reply-To: <9ebd81400703141559q26427a56o2445ca2539ab9bcd@mail.gmail.com> References: <47026.203.118.136.41.1173668979.squirrel@paradise.gen.nz> <883974.89373.qm@web33501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <9ebd81400703140005xbd7fd30w306c42d516dffde3@mail.gmail.com> <45F7EB8E.4090304@inetnebr.com> <45F81033.8010200@sbcglobal.net> <9ebd81400703141559q26427a56o2445ca2539ab9bcd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <45F8AD0A.70004@inetnebr.com> Gary Sturgess wrote: >> The most commonly available healing spell in RQ is the Spirit Magic >> spell Healing, which is most useful in combat situations (and learned by >> the majority of all PCs I've ever seen). Even faith healers typically >> can't stick an amputated limb back on, especially in the middle of >> combat. Most PCs will go to a specialist for other types of cures. >> >> Guy (Hoyle) > > Faith healers in the RW can't do anything at all, but even if they > could it would clearly be divine rather than spirit magic. Well the real world had .. two divisions for magic also.. .they called... them my priests holy miracles and the other fellows deamonic miracles... it was all "divine" and dependent on whether the one working the magic was on your team or not. The D&Dism of excluding healing from "magic" should be put down with as big of club as possible ;-) From postmaster at runequest.za.org Fri Mar 16 00:48:57 2007 From: postmaster at runequest.za.org (postmaster at runequest.za.org) Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 15:48:57 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D player In-Reply-To: <45F885D9.5030905@sbcglobal.net> References: <703746.95660.qm@web33512.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <45F885D9.5030905@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <60181.196.8.104.37.1173966537.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> Guy het geschryf: >> > And what we'd call "stage magic" and "scams" as well. (Not to contradict > what you said, but it's all part of the package. You could put together > a pretty decent "real-world faith healer" type in RQ without using any > spells at all.) > Indeed, I saw a d&d character class in an old dragon mag (circa issue 160ish) called the charlatain.... Maybe some good imput here. Oddly enough dragon more recently published the same article, although as I never read much of either, prob updated for their newer rules. Tony From pmaranci at gmail.com Fri Mar 16 01:41:45 2007 From: pmaranci at gmail.com (Peter Maranci) Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 10:41:45 -0400 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D player In-Reply-To: <60181.196.8.104.37.1173966537.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> References: <703746.95660.qm@web33512.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <45F885D9.5030905@sbcglobal.net> <60181.196.8.104.37.1173966537.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> Message-ID: Not to divert the thread from the current direction, but just in case anyone's interested: The game wasn't run. Only two out of the six potential players were willing to play, and even though I was desperate enough to be willing to run the scenario for two players, they both backed out when we couldn't get a third. The other four never responded. This is the third time I've offered to run RQ for this group and gotten the exact same result, so I'm giving up on those four. It strikes me that this is a real problem for d100/CBRP/RQ; a lot of gamers out there simply WON'T try any system other than D&D. Even one of the two players who was willing to give it a try expressed concern about learning "a whole new system just for a one-shot". The problem is that they're assuming that RQ/d100/CBRP is as complex, awkward, and difficult to learn as D&D. I tried to explain that you spend a lot less time looking up rules when playing RQ, but I guess they weren't convinced. I'm disappointed, I must admit. But maybe I'll be able to find a couple of other players elsewhere eventually and put them together with the two from the D&D group. Oh, while I'm at it: I'm in the process of moving my RQ site. The old host/registrar is being rather difficult, so my site may go dark for a few days (or even, if things go very badly, for a few weeks). But it WILL return, and it will be better than before. ->Peter On 3/15/07, postmaster at runequest.za.org wrote: > > Guy het geschryf: > >> > > And what we'd call "stage magic" and "scams" as well. (Not to contradict > > what you said, but it's all part of the package. You could put together > > a pretty decent "real-world faith healer" type in RQ without using any > > spells at all.) > > > Indeed, I saw a d&d character class in an old dragon mag (circa issue > 160ish) called the charlatain.... Maybe some good imput here. Oddly enough > dragon more recently published the same article, although as I never read > much of either, prob updated for their newer rules. > Tony > _______________________________________________ > 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/20070315/8510ea2f/attachment.html From slposey at slposey.cnc.net Fri Mar 16 02:57:50 2007 From: slposey at slposey.cnc.net (Stephen Posey) Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 09:57:50 -0600 (MDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D player In-Reply-To: <703746.95660.qm@web33512.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <45F885D9.5030905@sbcglobal.net> <60181.196.8.104.37.1173966537.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> Message-ID: <20070315155750.354BE41AE@theseus.cnc.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://localhost.localdomain/pipermail/rq-rules/attachments/20070315/4c90410d/attachment.html From gianni at basicrps.com Fri Mar 16 02:59:12 2007 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:59:12 +0100 Subject: [Rq-rules] Deity Types Message-ID: <20070315155726.EC5051575913@mini.thinbits.net> Pete, > I was making a list of deity types from the RQIII Magic book, and was > surprised to see some holes in the list. Here's what's in the book: > > - Agricultural Goddess > - Earth Goddess > - Hunting God > - Moon Goddess > - Night Goddess > - Ruling Deity > - Sea God > - Storm God > - Sun God > - Trickster God > - Underworld God > - War God > > Possibly some of these could be folded into one of the other categories > above, but here are some other types that I thought would be appropriate: > > Animal God Could be the same as the Hunting God: you must appease the Animal God before being allowed to hunt. > Chaos God Not really a generic god. The Ruling deity of the enemy can be your 'Chaos God', qv Baalzebub in the Bible. > City God Can be the same as the Ruling God, qv Marduk et al. > Death God OK, I agree this is missing. > Healing God Could be the same as the Earth (Fertility) Goddess. > Hearth God Not always present. > Messenger God Ditto. > Racial God > Undead God These are more fantasy oriented. Cheers Gianni From ghoyle1 at sbcglobal.net Fri Mar 16 08:13:02 2007 From: ghoyle1 at sbcglobal.net (Guy Hoyle) Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:13:02 -0500 Subject: [Rq-rules] Deity Types In-Reply-To: <20070315155726.EC5051575913@mini.thinbits.net> References: <20070315155726.EC5051575913@mini.thinbits.net> Message-ID: <45F9B6DE.7040609@sbcglobal.net> Aaoron Allston's Complete Priest Handbook, for @nd Ed. AD&D, has a large number of different types of gods, as well as several varieties of priests. It's available at http://www.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?products_id=916& for $4.95, which makes it an excellent buy IMO. It has lots of ideas for the duties of a priest as well as restrictions on what they can do, an excellent aid for roleplaying. Guy From mechashef at emailme.net.au Fri Mar 16 08:49:41 2007 From: mechashef at emailme.net.au (Mechashef) Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 08:49:41 +1100 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D player In-Reply-To: <45F81033.8010200@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <20070315214158.13EEC230049@m0.velocity.net.au> Guy (Hoyle) wrote: > Doesn't faith healing typically deal with illnesses such as cancer or > heart disease, or handicaps such as disabled limbs, mental illness, > infertility (and impotence, for males), and other disfiguring conditions? > The most commonly available healing spell in RQ is the Spirit Magic > spell Healing, which is most useful in combat situations (and learned by > the majority of all PCs I've ever seen). Even faith healers typically > can't stick an amputated limb back on, especially in the middle of > combat. Most PCs will go to a specialist for other types of cures. Probably because in the real world faith healing generally doesn't work. If it did you probably would see lots of faith healing "spells" that fixed broken/amputated limbs, major cuts etc. If your magic doesn't actually work you tend to use it for things that take a long time to fix to make it easier to disguise the fact it doesn't work. From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Mar 16 09:23:45 2007 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 15:23:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D player In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <667969.61182.qm@web31202.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Peter Maranci wrote: > It strikes me that this is a real problem for > d100/CBRP/RQ; a lot of gamers > out there simply WON'T try any system other than > D&D. Even one of the two > players who was willing to give it a try expressed > concern about learning "a > whole new system just for a one-shot". > > The problem is that they're assuming that > RQ/d100/CBRP is as complex, > awkward, and difficult to learn as D&D. Yep, been there. The real issue is that they already know D&D and would much rather just play than try something else. What I have done instead is started to play D&D in Glorantha. Thus I introduce the World with a system they are familiar, then as certain things come up, I point out how unreasonable D&D is. After while I offer to let them try RQ with a different character, but in the now familiar setting. Been working fairly well for now. Leon ____________________________________________________________________________________ Need Mail bonding? Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396546091 From tcantine at incentre.net Fri Mar 16 10:31:38 2007 From: tcantine at incentre.net (Tom Cantine) Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 16:31:38 -0700 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D player In-Reply-To: <667969.61182.qm@web31202.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <667969.61182.qm@web31202.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <5242CCF1-D34D-11DB-BD95-000D9334A9EA@incentre.net> The very first time I ever played RQ, I was unfamiliar with RPGs in general, except perhaps for Traveller. My GM had a good, simple, straightforward approach: he didn't tell me anything about the rules. Wouldn't even let me read the rulebook. So, no ruleslawyering, and a BIG sense of mystery about the weird guy in the party using magic of some sort. The main thing that made this approach work was that he told me from the beginning to treat the game world as real, and then if I want to try to do something, as I might in real life, go ahead and try, and then as needed, the rules would come into play. "I'm going to shoot an arrow at that tree." "Okay. Look here, on your character sheet. You see this number? That's your percent chance to hit. But the tree is a pretty stable target, so I'll let you add 10 percentiles." "Hmm. So, 57%? Okay, I take my time, lining up carefully, checking the wind..." "Good. You take a few seconds to check the wind, +10%, then carefully line up the arrow, another 10%..." "Really? All right! 77%? I shoot!" "All right. Roll these percentile dice..." And so on. I VERY quickly learned about specials, criticals and fumbles, and from there on, I was sold. Didn't need much more than that to get into the system, actually. On 15-Mar-07, at 3:23 PM, Leon Kirshtein wrote: > --- Peter Maranci wrote: >> It strikes me that this is a real problem for >> d100/CBRP/RQ; a lot of gamers >> out there simply WON'T try any system other than >> D&D. Even one of the two >> players who was willing to give it a try expressed >> concern about learning "a >> whole new system just for a one-shot". >> >> The problem is that they're assuming that >> RQ/d100/CBRP is as complex, >> awkward, and difficult to learn as D&D. > > Yep, been there. The real issue is that they already > know D&D and would much rather just play than try > something else. > > What I have done instead is started to play D&D in > Glorantha. Thus I introduce the World with a system > they are familiar, then as certain things come up, I > point out how unreasonable D&D is. After while I > offer to let them try RQ with a different character, > but in the now familiar setting. Been working fairly > well for now. > > Leon > > > > > _______________________________________________________________________ > _____________ > Need Mail bonding? > Go to the Yahoo! Mail Q&A for great tips from Yahoo! Answers users. > http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396546091 > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > From lev_lafayette at yahoo.com.au Fri Mar 16 11:57:52 2007 From: lev_lafayette at yahoo.com.au (Lev Lafayette) Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 17:57:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D player In-Reply-To: <667969.61182.qm@web31202.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <136962.3512.qm@web33510.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > Yep, been there. The real issue is that they > already > know D&D and would much rather just play than try > something else. That is indeed part of the problem. Roleplaying is fun and individual game systems are less important than the activity itself. Of course, seriously broken game systems eventually get in the way of having fun which is *part* of the reason why new game systems are developed. e.g., RQ, GURPS, D&D3.x > What I have done instead is started to play D&D in > Glorantha. Thus I introduce the World with a system > they are familiar, then as certain things come up, I > point out how unreasonable D&D is. After while I > offer to let them try RQ with a different character, > but in the now familiar setting. Been working fairly > well for now. Of course Glorantha is very cool and axiomatically enticing, although slotting in the D&D rules would be a lot of work for a GM. Some of the RQ3 campaign packs (e.g., Vikings or Japan) might be a handy alternative. Another alternative would be to write-up a one-two page summary of rules to show the players. Although RQ does have a fair of crunch (e.g., combat) I'm pretty sure it can still be done. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection. Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta. http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/features_spam.html From pmaranci at gmail.com Fri Mar 16 12:09:19 2007 From: pmaranci at gmail.com (Peter Maranci) Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 21:09:19 -0400 Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D playe In-Reply-To: <667969.61182.qm@web31202.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <667969.61182.qm@web31202.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 3/15/07, Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > --- Peter Maranci wrote: > > It strikes me that this is a real problem for > > d100/CBRP/RQ; a lot of gamers > > out there simply WON'T try any system other than > > D&D. Even one of the two > > players who was willing to give it a try expressed > > concern about learning "a > > whole new system just for a one-shot". > > > > The problem is that they're assuming that > > RQ/d100/CBRP is as complex, > > awkward, and difficult to learn as D&D. > > Yep, been there. The real issue is that they already > know D&D and would much rather just play than try > something else. > > What I have done instead is started to play D&D in > Glorantha. Thus I introduce the World with a system > they are familiar, then as certain things come up, I > point out how unreasonable D&D is. After while I > offer to let them try RQ with a different character, > but in the now familiar setting. Been working fairly > well for now. > Since I've given up Glorantha for good, though, that approach won't work for me. I have to admit, I'm a bit put out over all this. I learned a new system to join their group, and I offered to create pre-generates to their specifications; still, nothing. No response. So it goes. Maybe if d100/CBRP takes off, I'll be able to find more players. I hope so. -- 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/20070315/010c9507/attachment.html From postmaster at runequest.za.org Fri Mar 16 20:42:38 2007 From: postmaster at runequest.za.org (postmaster at runequest.za.org) Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 11:42:38 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D player In-Reply-To: References: <703746.95660.qm@web33512.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <45F885D9.5030905@sbcglobal.net> <60181.196.8.104.37.1173966537.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> Message-ID: <15725.196.8.104.37.1174038158.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> Peter wrote: > Not to divert the thread from the current direction, but just in case > anyone's interested: > > The game wasn't run. Only two out of the six potential players were > willing > to play, and even though I was desperate enough to be willing to run the > scenario for two players, they both backed out when we couldn't get a > third. > The other four never responded. This is the third time I've offered to run > RQ for this group and gotten the exact same result, so I'm giving up on > those four. > > It strikes me that this is a real problem for d100/CBRP/RQ; a lot of > gamers > out there simply WON'T try any system other than D&D. Even one of the two > players who was willing to give it a try expressed concern about learning > "a > whole new system just for a one-shot". > snip This is a little dissapointing, I was looking forward to the feedback, but alas gamers are just people and people like comfort zones. Hey, I am so comfy with RQIII that my brother had to seriously twist my arm to try harnmaster, whci is not exactly a huge leap from RQ anyway. Prob also the reason why most of our cyberpuke sessions fail, players can't be ar$ed to learn the rules and end up with same GM all the time who is just sick of GMing... Tony From carpgachair at yahoo.com Sat Mar 17 04:26:42 2007 From: carpgachair at yahoo.com (Paul Cardwell) Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 10:26:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D playe In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3396.22073.qm@web33513.mail.mud.yahoo.com> This is what we use as a handout to potential Mythworld players who come from a D&D background. They either flee screaming or say "so?" and start playing. For historical reasons, there are great similarities between RQ and MW and most of these apply equally well to RQ. Mythworld for D&D Players by Paul Cardwell, Mythworld creator For those who have only played D&D or its derivatives (Tunnels & Trolls, Hackmaster, etc.), Mythworld will be a whole new experience. Whether it is one you want or not it up to you. This is to help you decide. Mythworld subtitles itself as "realistic fantasy". This is not the paradox it might seem. After a character is generated, about the only chart a player will consult is in the unhappy event of a fumble. Charts are for the players to make characters, and for the scenarist to determine the weather and other natural phenomena which may affect the story. Otherwise, charts are not used in playing the game. The laws of physics are relatively intact. If you don't know the rule, you can usually figure it out. Therefore, Mythworld is easy to learn. Fantasy assumes three factors which are not proven in the real world: 1) there are many, frequently departmental, gods; 2) magic exists; and 3) there are many species of equal intelligence to humans (and some with more) interacting with one another. Simply take the "real world", add these factors, and you have Mythworld. Avoid thinking in terms of the following features from D&D - they don't apply to Mythworld. 1) There are no levels. Your PC has different abilities in each of many skills. Roll that number or less on D100 and you have done it. Five game days later, you can roll to see if anything was learned from successfully using that skill and may increase the PC's ability - in that skill only. What happens if the PC jumps off a thousand meter cliff depends on terminal velocity, not level. 2) There are no saving throws. A PC's avoid is subtracted from the attacker's hit before rolling and one roll covers it all. Magic is a mana versus mana roll on a 5% per point difference to determine if it is resisted. 3) Characters can get injured. They don't carry on as though nothing happened until the last hit point is gone and then drop dead. They can lose abilities and even consciousness and still survive. As a result, there are hit points to various locations as well as the whole character. 4) There are almost no restrictions on a PC. Anything the PC has the time, money, and intelligence to learn, can be learned. The exceptions are such as trade secrets cannot be learned by one not of that trade, or magic spells by one not of that religion. However, all characters can cast magic; all characters can use weapons. Limits are based on primary (rolled) characteristics, not species or sex. 5) There is no alignment. Real people don't have it, but rather are a mess of sometimes-conflicting loyalties to self, family, nation, religion, political party, job, hobbies, and other groups. Game characters should be just as complex. 6) All characters have a trade. This is not just a way to make money between adventures, but often determines the success or failure of the job undertaken. Trade skills and/or tools suddenly become useful at odd moments in a game. 7) All characters have a religion. While many gods exist in this fictional world, most characters are henotheistic - they primarily worship only one, but will sacrifice to another. The character pays the primary religion a tithe (10% of income) and gets magical training and advancement to more powerful status levels. The religions also operate as banks, so the PC needs to follow their requirements. 8) There are no experience points for the nasty old referee to hand out or withhold as the mood strikes. Or more precisely, EPs are intrinsic in the game. There is learning by experience, mentioned in point 1; there is lawful loot obtained in an adventure which may be used directly or has monetary value; and there is income from one's trade. This can be used to buy training, equipment, and supplies. 9) Mythworld is very anti-hack'n'slash. The adventurer operates under rules a lot more restrictive than the modern bounty hunter. Even with wanted criminals, a live prisoner is worth ten times as much as a dead one. In one recent scenario, the band had to arrest some counterfeiters - with no payment for any killed. Aside from the ringleader with a sore back where one PC landed a handspring (his unarmed technique was capoeira and he had to clear some caltrops the villain scattered) as the leader tried to run away, none were even injured - on either side. Game sessions may string together with no combat at all. 10) Character generation takes time. However, you end up with a well-rounded character at the first play. Maybe a little weak in some essential skills, but they will develop. The character sheet is four pages, including a page for mounts and such. There are over a hundred skills any character has at some level, and soon the levels are different for each character. 11) Cooperation between PCs and often NPCs is essential. There is a well-established procedure for dividing loot, with the weaker (in those areas) getting the choicest items. There is a lot of teaching of skills within the group since that keeps the money in the group and thus increases the power of the group as a whole. Indeed, the most unrealistic aspect of Mythworld is that one can often make more money teaching than from the loot on an adventure - the adventure is just a way of keeping the skills honed so that students will want to learn from that character. 12) Resurrection exists in Mythworld, but it is not the cheap grace of D&D. The group must find a shaman capable and willing to perform this (it takes four days without food, drink, or sleep; or a battle with many powerful spirits). It is not given away. 13) Not essential in Mythworld, but in our group, the traditional requirement to stay "in character" is ignored. We are testplaying and this requires occasionally leaving the game to discuss some point of rules. At conventions, we will stop to explain something. And it is our nature to "metagame" just to crack an irrelevant joke or discuss something the game reminded us of. If you insist on always being "in character", you may still like Mythworld, but not our particular group. 14) When we finish testplaying this revision of Mythworld, all changes from the original version will be published in an Update book so loyal players will only need it, plus their old boxed set, rather than tooling up all over again, to play the new version. If you try it and don't like it, move on. No hard feelings. However, if the idea sounds appealing, then let's get to work making characters. Ideally, we need to get together to develop PCs and run through an introductory scenario before joining the existing group. We use two characters so if anything happens to one, you are not out of the game. With four pages of character sheet, this takes time, so we need to develop your characters before you join the group. Once we were at a convention and no handout characters in sight, so three veterans generated ten characters in an hour. It will be awhile before you can do this! So take care of your characters and they will give you much enjoyment. [Details here of our particular testplaying group.] There are obviously some of this that doesn't apply to RQ. We also have a similar paper for RQ players. MYTHWORLD FOR RUNEQUEST PLAYERS by Paul Cardwell Anyone who has played any edition of RuneQuest will have no trouble playing Mythworld. This is because it started out as a suggestion for RuneQuest 3. However, after considerable discussion, Greg Stafford decided he wanted something a bit less detailed. By then, we had lost track of who suggested what, and so I got legal permission to use the Gloranthan critters, even though Mythworld does not use the Gloranthan setting. It was a friendly separation; I refereed the first public demonstration of RQ 3 at Origins '83, the day before doing the same for Mythworld. There are enough similarities to make the RQ fan feel at home, even though there are major differences as well. Even some of the familiar items will have different names. Strike Rank becomes Action Rank because it applies to far more than weapon attack. POW is Mana (MNA) a more anthropologically precise term. In addition to the usual RQ primary (rolled) characteristics, there is also Trustworthiness, which also serves as a morale factor, and Sanity because it seemed the adventurer's life would not be one of calm repose. Gender is a secondary characteristic. High STR and SIZ is male, CON and DEX is female. MW is like RQ in the lack of levels (or each skill has a separate level), avoid is the same, as is casting and resisting spells. But Disruption is called Zap. Religion is similar to RQ. Conflict of loyalties is more realistic than alignment. Although not as bad as D&D's no effect from injury until the last HP is used, RQ still lacks a few of the in-between stages. Therefore, MW has a Pain Resistance Factor, the total of CON, INT, and MNA. If successfully rolled, the character can continue to function until healed sufficiently or is unconscious or dead. If the roll is missed but the character is still conscious, all they can to is hurt until they try again on the next round. Rules provide for a lot more situations (one of the main reasons it is separate rather than having been RQ 3). Weather is elaborately constructed, but primarily of use only to the scenarist, and includes not only temperature, percipitation, wind speed, and cloud cover, but also provisions for wind-chill, temperature-humidity index, hypothermia, heat stroke and exhaustion, and in the revision currently in testplaying, altitude sickness. There are even three types of volcanoes (ash, lava, and pyroclastic flow, with lahar provided for) and earthquakes are on the old Mercalli scale (by visible damage) rather than Richter (movement). Movement is in actual meters per second speed and the Bestiary was once used by the Dallas Museum of Natural History for an Olympics tie-in exhibit (because it was the only place data on run, swim, fly speed and jumping distance could be found in one volume). There are also stats for the whole life-cycle chronology, population densities, natural armor and weapons, etc. in addition to the usual dice for generating the character, hit locations, and such. The square-cube law is intact, as is the second law of thermodynamics - characters can simply get exhausted. One can extrapolate stats for species not included in the over 200 species from beetle to grey whale. Magic is low-key as in RQ, but outside of species, trade, and religion specialties, anyone can theoretically learn any spell - there is no divine, sorcery, rune, etc. divisions restricting the repertoire. And like RQ, there is no restrictions of activity and equipment by warrior, rogue, priest, mage, etc. All characters have a trade, and there is a complete list of the tools of the applicable trades in the Outfitter book. There are over a hundred general skills which most characters will have to some degree or another, plus those restricted to specific trades. As a result, the character sheet is four pages long, although the fourth is for familiars and mounts, and most of the third is equipment inventory. Advancement is similar to RQ with experience or training (including self-training from documents) possible. It is rather anti-hack'n'slash. The variety of skills provide options to combat. There is always some NPC in the scenarios who is essential to the successful completion of the mission. And the referee is encouraged to bring in a substantial constabulary if the band slips into brigandage. We are currently working to find some way to reflect that in combat, most will not shoot - a factor in no way related to courage, as the same ones will not hesitate to rescue under fire or take messages through enemy lines. The old edition is in a readable dot-matrix, no illustrations except covers, and stapled together - a format typical of the early 1980s desktop publication. The next edition will be better. The boxed set consists of Rules, Bestiary, Outfitter, Spells, Skills, an introductory scenario, an errata sheet, and three Gamescience dice (D6, 8 & 20, the bare minimum needed to play). The cost is $35.00 US plus $5.00 shipping outside the US. International Postal Money Order preferred for overseas, as we have no online or plastic capability. There are currently three supporting scenarios (one solo) in the old format, but they are likewise being redone for the revised version. Anyone willing to playtest the revision is invited to get a game and let us know. We will send the work so far on the Update Book, and probably a few specific questions for response. Let me know. Paul Cardwell ____________________________________________________________________________________ Now that's room service! Choose from over 150,000 hotels in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel to find your fit. http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097 From carpgachair at yahoo.com Sat Mar 17 04:51:53 2007 From: carpgachair at yahoo.com (Paul Cardwell) Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 10:51:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] Deity Types In-Reply-To: <45F9B6DE.7040609@sbcglobal.net> Message-ID: <140975.63609.qm@web33509.mail.mud.yahoo.com> The current revision of Mythworld has expanded its religions section to more than a "fer instance" to a more complete version, although still recognizing that in polytheistic cultures, there will always be far more than those. The current list includes: Ancestor, Death and War, Dwarf, Elf, Entertainer, Healing, Hearth and Home, Hunter, Kosag (Lucasfilm wouldn't let us use Wookie), Lanac Raskolak (an anti-slave religion included to illustrate minority religions - they are tolerated in slave-holding cultures because they are quite willing to purchase slaves to free them and they consider rescue of captives part of their religious duty), Nature, Sage, Sea, Storm, Trade, Trickster, and Undead. ____________________________________________________________________________________ The fish are biting. Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing. http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/arp/sponsoredsearch_v2.php From gloomshark at hotmail.com Thu Mar 22 11:33:50 2007 From: gloomshark at hotmail.com (Dana Myers) Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 00:33:50 +0000 Subject: [Rq-rules] Mythworld In-Reply-To: <3396.22073.qm@web33513.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I am not sure if the blurb on the bottom is an ad or not, but if you still have copies available can you drop me an email with purchase instructions. This is the first I have heard of Mythworld, and it sounds interesting. dnc_myers at yahoo.com Thanks, ~Gloom >From: Paul Cardwell >Reply-To: "Discussion of RuneQuest rules." >To: "Discussion of RuneQuest rules." >Subject: Re: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D playe >Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 10:26:42 -0700 (PDT) > >This is what we use as a handout to potential >Mythworld players who come from a D&D background. >They either flee screaming or say "so?" and start >playing. For historical reasons, there are great >similarities between RQ and MW and most of these apply >equally well to RQ. > >Mythworld for D&D Players >by Paul Cardwell, Mythworld creator > >For those who have only played D&D or its derivatives >(Tunnels & Trolls, Hackmaster, etc.), Mythworld will >be a whole new experience. Whether it is one you want >or not it up to you. This is to help you decide. > >Mythworld subtitles itself as "realistic fantasy". >This is not the paradox it might seem. After a >character is generated, about the only chart a player >will consult is in the unhappy event of a fumble. >Charts are for the players to make characters, and for >the scenarist to determine the weather and other >natural phenomena which may affect the story. >Otherwise, charts are not used in playing the game. >The laws of physics are relatively intact. If you >don't know the rule, you can usually figure it out. >Therefore, Mythworld is easy to learn. > >Fantasy assumes three factors which are not proven in >the real world: 1) there are many, frequently >departmental, gods; 2) magic exists; and 3) there are >many species of equal intelligence to humans (and some >with more) interacting with one another. Simply take >the "real world", add these factors, and you have >Mythworld. > >Avoid thinking in terms of the following features from >D&D - they don't apply to Mythworld. > >1) There are no levels. Your PC has different >abilities in each of many skills. Roll that number or >less on D100 and you have done it. Five game days >later, you can roll to see if anything was learned >from successfully using that skill and may increase >the PC's ability - in that skill only. What happens >if the PC jumps off a thousand meter cliff depends on >terminal velocity, not level. > >2) There are no saving throws. A PC's avoid is >subtracted from the attacker's hit before rolling and >one roll covers it all. Magic is a mana versus mana >roll on a 5% per point difference to determine if it >is resisted. > >3) Characters can get injured. They don't carry on >as though nothing happened until the last hit point is >gone and then drop dead. They can lose abilities and >even consciousness and still survive. As a result, >there are hit points to various locations as well as >the whole character. > >4) There are almost no restrictions on a PC. Anything >the PC has the time, money, and intelligence to learn, >can be learned. The exceptions are such as trade >secrets cannot be learned by one not of that trade, or >magic spells by one not of that religion. However, >all characters can cast magic; all characters can use >weapons. Limits are based on primary (rolled) >characteristics, not species or sex. > >5) There is no alignment. Real people don't have it, >but rather are a mess of sometimes-conflicting >loyalties to self, family, nation, religion, political >party, job, hobbies, and other groups. Game >characters should be just as complex. > >6) All characters have a trade. This is not just a >way to make money between adventures, but often >determines the success or failure of the job >undertaken. Trade skills and/or tools suddenly become >useful at odd moments in a game. > >7) All characters have a religion. While many gods >exist in this fictional world, most characters are >henotheistic - they primarily worship only one, but >will sacrifice to another. The character pays the >primary religion a tithe (10% of income) and gets >magical training and advancement to more powerful >status levels. The religions also operate as banks, >so the PC needs to follow their requirements. > >8) There are no experience points for the nasty old >referee to hand out or withhold as the mood strikes. >Or more precisely, EPs are intrinsic in the game. >There is learning by experience, mentioned in point 1; >there is lawful loot obtained in an adventure which >may be used directly or has monetary value; and there >is income from one's trade. This can be used to buy >training, equipment, and supplies. > >9) Mythworld is very anti-hack'n'slash. The >adventurer operates under rules a lot more restrictive >than the modern bounty hunter. Even with wanted >criminals, a live prisoner is worth ten times as much >as a dead one. In one recent scenario, the band had to >arrest some counterfeiters - with no payment for any >killed. Aside from the ringleader with a sore back >where one PC landed a handspring (his unarmed >technique was capoeira and he had to clear some >caltrops the villain scattered) as the leader tried to >run away, none were even injured - on either side. >Game sessions may string together with no combat at >all. > >10) Character generation takes time. However, you end >up with a well-rounded character at the first play. >Maybe a little weak in some essential skills, but they >will develop. The character sheet is four pages, >including a page for mounts and such. There are over >a hundred skills any character has at some level, and >soon the levels are different for each character. > >11) Cooperation between PCs and often NPCs is >essential. There is a well-established procedure for >dividing loot, with the weaker (in those areas) >getting the choicest items. There is a lot of >teaching of skills within the group since that keeps >the money in the group and thus increases the power of >the group as a whole. Indeed, the most unrealistic >aspect of Mythworld is that one can often make more >money teaching than from the loot on an adventure - >the adventure is just a way of keeping the skills >honed so that students will want to learn from that >character. > >12) Resurrection exists in Mythworld, but it is not >the cheap grace of D&D. The group must find a shaman >capable and willing to perform this (it takes four >days without food, drink, or sleep; or a battle with >many powerful spirits). It is not given away. > >13) Not essential in Mythworld, but in our group, the >traditional requirement to stay "in character" is >ignored. We are testplaying and this requires >occasionally leaving the game to discuss some point of >rules. At conventions, we will stop to explain >something. And it is our nature to "metagame" just to >crack an irrelevant joke or discuss something the game >reminded us of. If you insist on always being "in >character", you may still like Mythworld, but not our >particular group. > >14) When we finish testplaying this revision of >Mythworld, all changes from the original version will >be published in an Update book so loyal players will >only need it, plus their old boxed set, rather than >tooling up all over again, to play the new version. > >If you try it and don't like it, move on. No hard >feelings. However, if the idea sounds appealing, then >let's get to work making characters. Ideally, we need >to get together to develop PCs and run through an >introductory scenario before joining the existing >group. We use two characters so if anything happens >to one, you are not out of the game. With four pages >of character sheet, this takes time, so we need to >develop your characters before you join the group. >Once we were at a convention and no handout characters >in sight, so three veterans generated ten characters >in an hour. It will be awhile before you can do this! > So take care of your characters and they will give >you much enjoyment. > >[Details here of our particular testplaying group.] > > >There are obviously some of this that doesn't apply to >RQ. We also have a similar paper for RQ players. > >MYTHWORLD FOR RUNEQUEST PLAYERS >by Paul Cardwell > > Anyone who has played any edition of RuneQuest will >have no trouble playing Mythworld. This is because it >started out as a suggestion for RuneQuest 3. However, >after considerable discussion, Greg Stafford decided >he wanted something a bit less detailed. By then, we >had lost track of who suggested what, and so I got >legal permission to use the Gloranthan critters, even >though Mythworld does not use the Gloranthan setting. >It was a friendly separation; I refereed the first >public demonstration of RQ 3 at Origins '83, the day >before doing the same for Mythworld. > > There are enough similarities to make the RQ fan feel >at home, even though there are major differences as >well. Even some of the familiar items will have >different names. Strike Rank becomes Action Rank >because it applies to far more than weapon attack. >POW is Mana (MNA) a more anthropologically precise >term. In addition to the usual RQ primary (rolled) >characteristics, there is also Trustworthiness, which >also serves as a morale factor, and Sanity because it >seemed the adventurer's life would not be one of calm >repose. > > Gender is a secondary characteristic. High STR and >SIZ is male, CON and DEX is female. > > MW is like RQ in the lack of levels (or each skill >has a separate level), avoid is the same, as is >casting and resisting spells. But Disruption is >called Zap. Religion is similar to RQ. Conflict of >loyalties is more realistic than alignment. > > Although not as bad as D&D's no effect from injury >until the last HP is used, RQ still lacks a few of the >in-between stages. Therefore, MW has a Pain >Resistance Factor, the total of CON, INT, and MNA. If >successfully rolled, the character can continue to >function until healed sufficiently or is unconscious >or dead. If the roll is missed but the character is >still conscious, all they can to is hurt until they >try again on the next round. > > Rules provide for a lot more situations (one of the >main reasons it is separate rather than having been RQ >3). Weather is elaborately constructed, but primarily >of use only to the scenarist, and includes not only >temperature, percipitation, wind speed, and cloud >cover, but also provisions for wind-chill, >temperature-humidity index, hypothermia, heat stroke >and exhaustion, and in the revision currently in >testplaying, altitude sickness. There are even three >types of volcanoes (ash, lava, and pyroclastic flow, >with lahar provided for) and earthquakes are on the >old Mercalli scale (by visible damage) rather than >Richter (movement). > > Movement is in actual meters per second speed and the >Bestiary was once used by the Dallas Museum of Natural >History for an Olympics tie-in exhibit (because it was >the only place data on run, swim, fly speed and >jumping distance could be found in one volume). There >are also stats for the whole life-cycle chronology, >population densities, natural armor and weapons, etc. >in addition to the usual dice for generating the >character, hit locations, and such. The square-cube >law is intact, as is the second law of thermodynamics >- characters can simply get exhausted. One can >extrapolate stats for species not included in the over >200 species from beetle to grey whale. > > Magic is low-key as in RQ, but outside of species, >trade, and religion specialties, anyone can >theoretically learn any spell - there is no divine, >sorcery, rune, etc. divisions restricting the >repertoire. And like RQ, there is no restrictions of >activity and equipment by warrior, rogue, priest, >mage, etc. > > All characters have a trade, and there is a complete >list of the tools of the applicable trades in the >Outfitter book. > > There are over a hundred general skills which most >characters will have to some degree or another, plus >those restricted to specific trades. As a result, the >character sheet is four pages long, although the >fourth is for familiars and mounts, and most of the >third is equipment inventory. Advancement is similar >to RQ with experience or training (including >self-training from documents) possible. > > It is rather anti-hack'n'slash. The variety of >skills provide options to combat. There is always >some NPC in the scenarios who is essential to the >successful completion of the mission. And the referee >is encouraged to bring in a substantial constabulary >if the band slips into brigandage. We are currently >working to find some way to reflect that in combat, >most will not shoot - a factor in no way related to >courage, as the same ones will not hesitate to rescue >under fire or take messages through enemy lines. > > The old edition is in a readable dot-matrix, no >illustrations except covers, and stapled together - a >format typical of the early 1980s desktop publication. > The next edition will be better. The boxed set >consists of Rules, Bestiary, Outfitter, Spells, >Skills, an introductory scenario, an errata sheet, and >three Gamescience dice (D6, 8 & 20, the bare minimum >needed to play). The cost is $35.00 US plus $5.00 >shipping outside the US. International Postal Money >Order preferred for overseas, as we have no online or >plastic capability. There are currently three >supporting scenarios (one solo) in the old format, but >they are likewise being redone for the revised >version. > > Anyone willing to playtest the revision is invited to >get a game and let us know. We will send the work so >far on the Update Book, and probably a few specific >questions for response. Let me know. > >Paul Cardwell > > > > > >____________________________________________________________________________________ >Now that's room service! Choose from over 150,000 hotels >in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel to find your fit. >http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097 >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com >http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules _________________________________________________________________ The average US Credit Score is 675. The cost to see yours: $0 by Experian. http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=660600&bcd=EMAILFOOTERAVERAGE From lev_lafayette at yahoo.com.au Thu Mar 22 12:52:24 2007 From: lev_lafayette at yahoo.com.au (Lev Lafayette) Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 18:52:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] Mythworld In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <256202.75690.qm@web33506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> More begging for Mythworld... Send me a PDF copy and I'll review it on RPG.net All the best, Lev --- Dana Myers wrote: > > I am not sure if the blurb on the bottom is an ad or > not, but if you still > have copies available can you drop me an email with > purchase instructions. > This is the first I have heard of Mythworld, and it > sounds interesting. > dnc_myers at yahoo.com > > Thanks, > ~Gloom > > >From: Paul Cardwell > >Reply-To: "Discussion of RuneQuest rules." > > >To: "Discussion of RuneQuest rules." > > >Subject: Re: [Rq-rules] RQ for D&D playe > >Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 10:26:42 -0700 (PDT) > > > >This is what we use as a handout to potential > >Mythworld players who come from a D&D background. > >They either flee screaming or say "so?" and start > >playing. For historical reasons, there are great > >similarities between RQ and MW and most of these > apply > >equally well to RQ. > > > >Mythworld for D&D Players > >by Paul Cardwell, Mythworld creator > > > >For those who have only played D&D or its > derivatives > >(Tunnels & Trolls, Hackmaster, etc.), Mythworld > will > >be a whole new experience. Whether it is one you > want > >or not it up to you. This is to help you decide. > > > >Mythworld subtitles itself as "realistic fantasy". > >This is not the paradox it might seem. After a > >character is generated, about the only chart a > player > >will consult is in the unhappy event of a fumble. > >Charts are for the players to make characters, and > for > >the scenarist to determine the weather and other > >natural phenomena which may affect the story. > >Otherwise, charts are not used in playing the game. > >The laws of physics are relatively intact. If you > >don't know the rule, you can usually figure it out. > >Therefore, Mythworld is easy to learn. > > > >Fantasy assumes three factors which are not proven > in > >the real world: 1) there are many, frequently > >departmental, gods; 2) magic exists; and 3) there > are > >many species of equal intelligence to humans (and > some > >with more) interacting with one another. Simply > take > >the "real world", add these factors, and you have > >Mythworld. > > > >Avoid thinking in terms of the following features > from > >D&D - they don't apply to Mythworld. > > > >1) There are no levels. Your PC has different > >abilities in each of many skills. Roll that number > or > >less on D100 and you have done it. Five game days > >later, you can roll to see if anything was learned > >from successfully using that skill and may increase > >the PC's ability - in that skill only. What > happens > >if the PC jumps off a thousand meter cliff depends > on > >terminal velocity, not level. > > > >2) There are no saving throws. A PC's avoid is > >subtracted from the attacker's hit before rolling > and > >one roll covers it all. Magic is a mana versus > mana > >roll on a 5% per point difference to determine if > it > >is resisted. > > > >3) Characters can get injured. They don't carry > on > >as though nothing happened until the last hit point > is > >gone and then drop dead. They can lose abilities > and > >even consciousness and still survive. As a result, > >there are hit points to various locations as well > as > >the whole character. > > > >4) There are almost no restrictions on a PC. > Anything > >the PC has the time, money, and intelligence to > learn, > >can be learned. The exceptions are such as trade > >secrets cannot be learned by one not of that trade, > or > >magic spells by one not of that religion. However, > >all characters can cast magic; all characters can > use > >weapons. Limits are based on primary (rolled) > >characteristics, not species or sex. > > > >5) There is no alignment. Real people don't have > it, > >but rather are a mess of sometimes-conflicting > >loyalties to self, family, nation, religion, > political > >party, job, hobbies, and other groups. Game > >characters should be just as complex. > > > >6) All characters have a trade. This is not just a > >way to make money between adventures, but often > >determines the success or failure of the job > >undertaken. Trade skills and/or tools suddenly > become > >useful at odd moments in a game. > > > >7) All characters have a religion. While many gods > >exist in this fictional world, most characters are > >henotheistic - they primarily worship only one, but > >will sacrifice to another. The character pays the > >primary religion a tithe (10% of income) and gets > >magical training and advancement to more powerful > >status levels. The religions also operate as > banks, > >so the PC needs to follow their requirements. > > > >8) There are no experience points for the nasty old > >referee to hand out or withhold as the mood > strikes. > >Or more precisely, EPs are intrinsic in the game. > >There is learning by experience, mentioned in point > 1; > >there is lawful loot obtained in an adventure which > >may be used directly or has monetary value; and > there > >is income from one's trade. This can be used to > buy > >training, equipment, and supplies. > > > >9) Mythworld is very anti-hack'n'slash. The > >adventurer operates under rules a lot more > restrictive > >than the modern bounty hunter. Even with wanted > >criminals, a live prisoner is worth ten times as > much > >as a dead one. In one recent scenario, the band had > to > >arrest some counterfeiters - with no payment for > any > >killed. Aside from the ringleader with a sore back > >where one PC landed a handspring (his unarmed > >technique was capoeira and he had to clear some > >caltrops the villain scattered) as the leader tried > to > >run away, none were even injured - on either side. > >Game sessions may string together with no combat at > >all. > > > >10) Character generation takes time. However, you > end > >up with a well-rounded character at the first play. > >Maybe a little weak in some essential skills, but > they > >will develop. The character sheet is four pages, > >including a page for mounts and such. There are > over > >a hundred skills any character has at some level, > and > >soon the levels are different for each character. > > > >11) Cooperation between PCs and often NPCs is > >essential. There is a well-established procedure > for > >dividing loot, with the weaker (in those areas) > >getting the choicest items. There is a lot of > >teaching of skills within the group since that > keeps > >the money in the group and thus increases the power > of > >the group as a whole. Indeed, the most unrealistic > >aspect of Mythworld is that one can often make more > >money teaching than from the loot on an adventure - > >the adventure is just a way of keeping the skills > >honed so that students will want to learn from that > >character. > > > >12) Resurrection exists in Mythworld, but it is not > >the cheap grace of D&D. The group must find a > shaman > >capable and willing to perform this (it takes four > >days without food, drink, or sleep; or a battle > with > >many powerful spirits). It is not given away. > > > >13) Not essential in Mythworld, but in our group, > the > >traditional requirement to stay "in character" is > >ignored. We are testplaying and this requires > >occasionally leaving the game to discuss some point > of > >rules. At conventions, we will stop to explain > >something. And it is our nature to "metagame" just > to > >crack an irrelevant joke or discuss something the > game > >reminded us of. If you insist on always being "in > >character", you may still like Mythworld, but not > our > >particular group. > > > >14) When we finish testplaying this revision of > >Mythworld, all changes from the original version > will > >be published in an Update book so loyal players > will > >only need it, plus their old boxed set, rather than > >tooling up all over again, to play the new version. > > > >If you try it and don't like it, move on. No hard > >feelings. However, if the idea sounds appealing, > then > >let's get to work making characters. Ideally, we > need > >to get together to develop PCs and run through an > >introductory scenario before joining the existing > >group. We use two characters so if anything > happens > >to one, you are not out of the game. With four > pages > >of character sheet, this takes time, so we need to > >develop your characters before you join the group. > >Once we were at a convention and no handout > characters > >in sight, so three veterans generated ten > characters > >in an hour. It will be awhile before you can do > this! > > So take care of your characters and they will > give > >you much enjoyment. > > > >[Details here of our particular testplaying group.] > > > > > >There are obviously some of this that doesn't apply > to > >RQ. We also have a similar paper for RQ players. > > > >MYTHWORLD FOR RUNEQUEST PLAYERS > >by Paul Cardwell > > > > Anyone who has played any edition of RuneQuest > will > >have no trouble playing Mythworld. This is because > it > >started out as a suggestion for RuneQuest 3. > However, > >after considerable discussion, Greg Stafford > decided > >he wanted something a bit less detailed. By then, > we > >had lost track of who suggested what, and so I got > >legal permission to use the Gloranthan critters, > even > >though Mythworld does not use the Gloranthan > setting. > >It was a friendly separation; I refereed the first > >public demonstration of RQ 3 at Origins '83, the > day > >before doing the same for Mythworld. > > > > There are enough similarities to make the RQ fan > feel > >at home, even though there are major differences as > >well. Even some of the familiar items will have > >different names. Strike Rank becomes Action Rank > >because it applies to far more than weapon attack. > >POW is Mana (MNA) a more anthropologically precise > >term. In addition to the usual RQ primary (rolled) > >characteristics, there is also Trustworthiness, > which > >also serves as a morale factor, and Sanity because > it > >seemed the adventurer's life would not be one of > calm > >repose. > > > > Gender is a secondary characteristic. High STR > and > >SIZ is male, CON and DEX is female. > > > > MW is like RQ in the lack of levels (or each skill > >has a separate level), avoid is the same, as is > >casting and resisting spells. But Disruption is > >called Zap. Religion is similar to RQ. Conflict > of > >loyalties is more realistic than alignment. > > > > Although not as bad as D&D's no effect from injury > >until the last HP is used, RQ still lacks a few of > the > >in-between stages. Therefore, MW has a Pain > >Resistance Factor, the total of CON, INT, and MNA. > If > >successfully rolled, the character can continue to > >function until healed sufficiently or is > unconscious > >or dead. If the roll is missed but the character > is > >still conscious, all they can to is hurt until they > >try again on the next round. > > > > Rules provide for a lot more situations (one of > the > >main reasons it is separate rather than having been > RQ > >3). Weather is elaborately constructed, but > primarily > >of use only to the scenarist, and includes not only > >temperature, percipitation, wind speed, and cloud > >cover, but also provisions for wind-chill, > >temperature-humidity index, hypothermia, heat > stroke > >and exhaustion, and in the revision currently in > >testplaying, altitude sickness. There are even > three > >types of volcanoes (ash, lava, and pyroclastic > flow, > >with lahar provided for) and earthquakes are on the > >old Mercalli scale (by visible damage) rather than > >Richter (movement). > > > > Movement is in actual meters per second speed and > the > >Bestiary was once used by the Dallas Museum of > Natural > >History for an Olympics tie-in exhibit (because it > was > >the only place data on run, swim, fly speed and > >jumping distance could be found in one volume). > There > >are also stats for the whole life-cycle chronology, > >population densities, natural armor and weapons, > etc. > >in addition to the usual dice for generating the > >character, hit locations, and such. The > square-cube > >law is intact, as is the second law of > thermodynamics > >- characters can simply get exhausted. One can > >extrapolate stats for species not included in the > over > >200 species from beetle to grey whale. > > > > Magic is low-key as in RQ, but outside of species, > >trade, and religion specialties, anyone can > >theoretically learn any spell - there is no divine, > >sorcery, rune, etc. divisions restricting the > >repertoire. And like RQ, there is no restrictions > of > >activity and equipment by warrior, rogue, priest, > >mage, etc. > > > > All characters have a trade, and there is a > complete > >list of the tools of the applicable trades in the > >Outfitter book. > > > > There are over a hundred general skills which most > >characters will have to some degree or another, > plus > >those restricted to specific trades. As a result, > the > >character sheet is four pages long, although the > >fourth is for familiars and mounts, and most of the > >third is equipment inventory. Advancement is > similar > >to RQ with experience or training (including > >self-training from documents) possible. > > > > It is rather anti-hack'n'slash. The variety of > >skills provide options to combat. There is always > >some NPC in the scenarios who is essential to the > >successful completion of the mission. And the > referee > >is encouraged to bring in a substantial > constabulary > >if the band slips into brigandage. We are > currently > >working to find some way to reflect that in combat, > >most will not shoot - a factor in no way related to > >courage, as the same ones will not hesitate to > rescue > >under fire or take messages through enemy lines. > > > > The old edition is in a readable dot-matrix, no > >illustrations except covers, and stapled together - > a > >format typical of the early 1980s desktop > publication. > > The next edition will be better. The boxed set > >consists of Rules, Bestiary, Outfitter, Spells, > >Skills, an introductory scenario, an errata sheet, > and > >three Gamescience dice (D6, 8 & 20, the bare > minimum > >needed to play). The cost is $35.00 US plus $5.00 > >shipping outside the US. International Postal > Money > >Order preferred for overseas, as we have no online > or > >plastic capability. There are currently three > >supporting scenarios (one solo) in the old format, > but > >they are likewise being redone for the revised > >version. > > > > Anyone willing to playtest the revision is invited > to > >get a game and let us know. We will send the work > so > >far on the Update Book, and probably a few specific > >questions for response. Let me know. > > > >Paul Cardwell > > > > > > > > > > > >____________________________________________________________________________________ > >Now that's room service! Choose from over 150,000 > hotels > >in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel to find > your fit. > >http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097 > >_______________________________________________ > >RQ-Rules mailing list > >RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > >http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > > _________________________________________________________________ > The average US Credit Score is 675. The cost to see > yours: $0 by Experian. > http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=660600&bcd=EMAILFOOTERAVERAGE > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > ____________________________________________________________________________________ No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started. http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail From carpgachair at yahoo.com Fri Mar 23 06:19:14 2007 From: carpgachair at yahoo.com (Paul Cardwell) Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 12:19:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] Mythworld In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <869183.58593.qm@web33501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> It wasn't really an ad, but rather a document we use that could apply quite well to RuneQuest as well with a few modifications. However, I would be willing for anyone to treat it that way. To order, simply send a check for $35.00 (international money order for $40.00 if outside US) to Hippogriff Publications, 1127 Cedar, Bonham, TX 75418 and a copy will be put in the mail immediately. If you like it enough to do cold-testing for the revision, e-mail me and I will send the current version of the Update (changes so far) for you and your group to test and feed back suggestions. Paul Cardwell --- Dana Myers wrote: > > I am not sure if the blurb on the bottom is an ad or > not, but if you still > have copies available can you drop me an email with > purchase instructions. > This is the first I have heard of Mythworld, and it > sounds interesting. > dnc_myers at yahoo.com > > Thanks, > ~Gloom ____________________________________________________________________________________ 8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time with the Yahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#news From carpgachair at yahoo.com Fri Mar 23 06:26:17 2007 From: carpgachair at yahoo.com (Paul Cardwell) Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 12:26:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] Mythworld In-Reply-To: <256202.75690.qm@web33506.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <835296.36498.qm@web33512.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Lev Lafayette wrote: > More begging for Mythworld... Send me a PDF copy and > I'll review it on RPG.net > > All the best, > Lev A PDF of Mythworld? Including the Update so far that thing is over 500 pages and well beyond the capacity of my antique computers! $35.00 isn't too much for 400+ pages of RPG resources and if you like it enough to help, I am quite willing to send the Update (so far) so you can help coldtest and give suggestions. At least the Update is still small enough to send by Internet. Paul Cardwell ____________________________________________________________________________________ The fish are biting. Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing. http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/arp/sponsoredsearch_v2.php From carpgachair at yahoo.com Fri Mar 23 06:58:59 2007 From: carpgachair at yahoo.com (Paul Cardwell) Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 12:58:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] Mythworld In-Reply-To: <835296.36498.qm@web33512.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <136864.58046.qm@web33510.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Paul Cardwell wrote: > A PDF of Mythworld? Including the Update so far > that > thing is over 500 pages and well beyond the capacity > of my antique computers! $35.00 isn't too much for > 400+ pages of RPG resources and if you like it > enough > to help, I am quite willing to send the Update (so > far) so you can help coldtest and give suggestions. > At least the Update is still small enough to send by > Internet. > > Paul Cardwell In full disclosure, that is 10 point type, no pictures, and relatively (to other systems) charts - just solid data. Unfortunately it is also a fairly readable dot-matrix type (it was 1985!). The revision, and the Update book, will be more legible. Paul ____________________________________________________________________________________ We won't tell. Get more on shows you hate to love (and love to hate): Yahoo! TV's Guilty Pleasures list. http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/265 From goldgrif at yahoo.com Fri Mar 23 09:31:54 2007 From: goldgrif at yahoo.com (steven mckenzie) Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 15:31:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Rq-rules] Mythworld In-Reply-To: <835296.36498.qm@web33512.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <622146.51503.qm@web56614.mail.re3.yahoo.com> a lotta hype? for a game? --- Paul Cardwell wrote: > --- Lev Lafayette > wrote: > > > More begging for Mythworld... Send me a PDF copy > and > > I'll review it on RPG.net > > > > All the best, > > > Lev > > > A PDF of Mythworld? Including the Update so far > that > thing is over 500 pages and well beyond the capacity > of my antique computers! $35.00 isn't too much for > 400+ pages of RPG resources and if you like it > enough > to help, I am quite willing to send the Update (so > far) so you can help coldtest and give suggestions. > At least the Update is still small enough to send by > Internet. > > Paul Cardwell > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > The fish are biting. > Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search > Marketing. > http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/arp/sponsoredsearch_v2.php > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules at crashbox.com > http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules > "Sorcery! We are all sorcerers, and live in a wonderland of marvel and beauty if we did but know it." ~Charles Godfrey Leland So far, therefore, as the public profession of magic has been one of the roads by which men have passed to supreme power, it has contributed to emancipate mankind from the thraldom of tradition and to elevate them into a larger, freer life, with a broader outlook on the world. This is no small service rendered to humanity. And when we remember further that in another direction magic has paved the way for science, we are forced to admit that if the black arts has done much evil, it has also been the source of much good; that if it is the child of error, it has been the mother of freedom and truth. Sir James George Frazer (1854?1941). The Golden Bough. 1922. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Finding fabulous fares is fun. Let Yahoo! FareChase search your favorite travel sites to find flight and hotel bargains. http://farechase.yahoo.com/promo-generic-14795097 From postmaster at runequest.za.org Tue Mar 27 18:44:25 2007 From: postmaster at runequest.za.org (postmaster at runequest.za.org) Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 08:44:25 -0000 Subject: [Rq-rules] Valley of Deatrh Message-ID: <37698.196.8.104.37.1174985380.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> I am currently running a campaign where the three characters are in charge of roughly a century of men, campaigning in a bit of a civil war. The characters are alternatly the centurion, his optio and the main scout. So my next session I am planning, I was thinking of guiding them through a haunted valley - where the remains of an ancient battle and teh spirits around cause it to be shunned. (The century is mostly of foreign stock, and even the so called locals who have joined have moved beyone the bounds of once familiar countryside). The valley will be pretty much strew with ancient bones, bits of bronze weaponry, maybe it will be very dry and ssome of the courpses mummified. Initially I was going to make it the haunt of gouls, but I am now thinking more of a haunting. Maybe there was some big betrayal or simething and the ghosts will press the characters into avenging them (on the decendants of the victors). Still have to decide on the details, but to my main point: My rules are at a friends house, and I can't remember. Would a ghost have to enter spirit combat to force some sort of geas on a character. Alternatly I was thinking of the place being so desolate and dreadful that the characters just roll against POW and if they fail, they see the dead as if they were alive and still batteling. Maybe have them lose POW points or worse case scenario they think the battle is real and join in, maybe get stuck there/kill comerades, become part of the curse. Any thoughts of how I should handle this, for the characters as well as for their legionairres (I do not want to roll for 100+ men) Cheers Tony From postmaster at runequest.za.org Wed Mar 28 17:30:09 2007 From: postmaster at runequest.za.org (postmaster at runequest.za.org) Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 09:30:09 +0200 (SAST) Subject: [Rq-rules] [Fwd: Valley of Death] Message-ID: <6275.196.8.104.37.1175067009.squirrel@wwm.runequest.za.org> Trying this post again as it did not arrive first time. ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- Subject: Valley of Death From: postmaster at runequest.za.org Date: Tue, March 27, 2007 10:49 am To: rq-rules at crashbox.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am currently running a campaign where the three characters are in charge of roughly a century of men, campaigning in a bit of a civil war. The characters are alternatly the centurion, his optio and the main scout. So my next session I am planning, I was thinking of guiding them through a haunted valley - where the remains of an ancient battle and teh spirits around cause it to be shunned. (The century is mostly of foreign stock, and even the so called locals who have joined have moved beyone the bounds of once familiar countryside). The valley will be pretty much strew with ancient bones, bits of bronze weaponry, maybe it will be very dry and ssome of the courpses mummified. Initially I was going to make it the haunt of gouls, but I am now thinking more of a haunting. Maybe there was some big betrayal or simething and the ghosts will press the characters into avenging them (on the decendants of the victors). Still have to decide on the details, but to my main point: My rules are at a friends house, and I can't remember. Would a ghost have to enter spirit combat to force some sort of geas on a character. Alternatly I was thinking of the place being so desolate and dreadful that the characters just roll against POW and if they fail, they see the dead as if they were alive and still batteling. Maybe have them lose POW points or worse case scenario they think the battle is real and join in, maybe get stuck there/kill comerades, become part of the curse. Any thoughts of how I should handle this, for the characters as well as for their legionairres (I do not want to roll for 100+ men) Cheers Tony