From: owner-rq-rules-digest To: rq-rules-digest@hops.wharton.upenn.edu Subject: RQ Rules Digest: V1 #27 Reply-To: rq-rules Errors-To: owner-rq-rules-digest Precedence: bulk Content-Return: Prohibited Return-Path: owner-rq-rules-digest RQ Rules Digest: Thursday, 24 November 1994 Volume 01 : Number 027 RULES OF THE ROAD 1. Do not include large sections of a message in your reply. Especially not to say "Yeah, I agree." Those who do will be lynched. 2. Use an appropriate Subject line. RQR: will be prepended to it. 3. Do not engage in a point-by-point analysis or rebuttal of another person's message. It is too confusing for others to follow, qualifies as nit-picking, and it usually leads to flame wars. 4. There is no number 4. TABLE OF CONTENTS David Dunham via RadioMail RQR: Healing Truls Parsson RQR: Realism and Wounds (a variant system) Bruce Lionel Mason RQR: Realism and Wounds (a variant system) Hugh Foster RQR: RQR Dispel Damage boris RQR: RQR Dispel Damage Bryan J. Maloney RQR: Dispel Damage Keith Ivey RQR: Dispel Damage Keith Ivey RQR: Effects of reduced healing Bryan J. Maloney RQR: Damage and healing PAUL POFANDT RQR: Enchantment Conditions ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: David Dunham (via RadioMail) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 21:34:13 -0800 Subject: RQR: Healing >From: "Michelle Ringo" > With regards to your use of Healing, I have one additional > comment. We play that once you have used magical healing > then you cannot use First Aid. We have not reduced the > effectiveness of First Aid, but it is rarely used since > magical healing is used instead. Are you playing that way > as well or can people use both First Aid and Healing? In PenDragon Pass, I allow a single First Aid attempt and a single successful Heal spell per wound. The results are much as Malcolm Cohen mentioned -- most importantly, getting wounded is serious since you can be weeks healing, and need to find a decent Chirurgeon. Minor wounds are First Aided, more serious ones receive both, and Major Wounds are pretty much impossible to heal except through time. I don't think that Healsharp would affect the results. Also, since I use Pendragon, people don't die the instant they lose all HP (as in RQ). Most recently, a character died because they were exactly 1 HP short in combined First Aid and Heal. (If they'd been closer to home, they might have been able to get to a Sacred Grove in time*...) * A grove sacred to a healing goddess would let you cast a larger Heal spell. This concept is easily adaptable to RQ as well. ------------------------------ From: Truls.Parsson@eua.ericsson.se (Truls Parsson) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 94 08:35:16 +0100 Subject: RQR: Re: Realism and Wounds (a variant system) Bruce Lionel Mason wrote: >1b) Every character has a personal healing rate equal to LP/20 in d3s, >round fractions down. Eg someone with 27LPs has a heal rate of 2D3. Seems to be a typo here. As the rule and the example don't agree. Do you mean: a) LP/10 round down 27/10=2.7 => 2d3 b) LP/20 round up 27/20=1.35 => 2d3 c) LP/20 round down 27/20=1.35 => 1d3 - -The Troll ------------------------------ From: Bruce Lionel Mason Date: Wed, 23 Nov 1994 12:53:14 -0330 Subject: Re: RQR: Re: Realism and Wounds (a variant system) On Wed, 23 Nov 1994, Truls Parsson wrote: > Bruce Lionel Mason wrote: >> Eg someone with 27LPs has a heal rate of 2D3. > > Seems to be a typo here. As the rule and the example don't agree. > Do you mean: > >> > b) LP/20 round up 27/20=1.35 => 2d3 >-The Troll > Typo sorry, meant round up, b) is correct. Mea culpa. - ---Bruce ------------------------------ From: Hugh Foster <100326.446@compuserve.com> Date: 23 Nov 94 16:25:51 EST Subject: RQR: RQR Dispel Damage Dispel Damage: Here's the newbie, bothering the vets again. Would somebody summarize this for me ? ------------------------------ From: mabeyke@batman.b11.ingr.com (boris) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 94 16:11:55 CST Subject: Re: RQR: RQR Dispel Damage > Dispel Damage: Here's the newbie, bothering the vets again. Would somebody > summarize this for me ? I can do that. In the D.D. variation on Heal the points of the Heal spell must at least equal the damage of the wound, or there is no effect. So if someone has taken a leg wound of four points, a four point Heal must be used to help it at all, anything less is wasted MPs. My favorite variation so far (for which I haven't heard a snazzy name such as Healsharp or Dispel Damage) allows only the largest Heal cast on a wound to have any effect. Thus if two Heal 2s were cast on the wound above, the second would have no effect. If someone later cast a Heal 4, then two more points would be healed. I like this because one can still use a Heal 1 to stop bleeding (though with Brandon's mods to healing and injury [which I like best of your stuff, Brandon, BTW] this isn't needed). - -- Boris Mikey, aka |"Here the ways of men part: if you wish to Maurice Beyke | strive for peace of soul and pleasure, then mabeyke@batman.b11.ingr.com| believe; if you wish to be a devotee of Intergraph doesn't want | truth, then inquire." my opinions. Nietzsche ------------------------------ From: jacobus@sonata.cc.purdue.edu (Bryan J. Maloney) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 94 17:07:07 -0500 Subject: RQR: Dispel Damage "Dispel Damage"-type healing would work like the sorcerous "Resist Damage" spell. A level 4 DD would have a 50% chance of healing all the damage from a 4 point wound, adjust by 5% for disparities either way. ------------------------------ From: Keith Ivey Date: Wed, 23 Nov 1994 18:29:18 -0500 (EST) Subject: RQR: Dispel Damage On Wed, 23 Nov 1994, boris wrote: > My favorite variation so far (for which I haven't heard a snazzy > name such as Healsharp or Dispel Damage) allows only the largest > Heal cast on a wound to have any effect. Thus if two Heal 2s were > cast on the wound above, the second would have no effect. If > someone later cast a Heal 4, then two more points would be healed. I assumed this *was* Healsharp. Don't most people play that if a sword has Bladesharp 2 on it you can still cast Bladesharp 4 on it without having to dispel the Bladesharp 2? The total damage boost is still only 4 points, of course. Is this interpretation contradicted in the rules somewhere? - --Keith Ivey Washington, DC ------------------------------ From: Keith Ivey Date: Wed, 23 Nov 1994 18:36:31 -0500 (EST) Subject: RQR: Effects of reduced healing I like the idea of making wounds more significant (Healsharp seems particularly appealing), but do those who have used such systems find that they have a lot more maimed PCs in their campaigns? I don't mind the occasional missing hand, but I don't want to GM an entire party of people with crutches and hooks. Anyone have any historical evidence on the prevalence of missing body parts among pre-gunpowder (yes, I know, but let's ignore Mostali for the moment) veterans? - --Keith Ivey Washington, DC ------------------------------ From: jacobus@sonata.cc.purdue.edu (Bryan J. Maloney) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 94 18:56:40 -0500 Subject: RQR: Damage and healing I've developed a way around healing and damage that has seemed to work fairly nicely and with no grumbling on the part of my players for the two years I've used it. Simply put, healing magic doesn't work very well in combat. In my current campaign, it doesn't work much at all in combat. All healing must be done in a time scale that takes you out of a fight to do it. Thus, fights are dangerous, characters have to be heroes instead of comic book characters, and I don't deal with questions regarding septicemia. ------------------------------ From: PAUL POFANDT Date: Thu, 24 Nov 94 12:43:38 +1100 Subject: RQR: Re: Enchantment Conditions G'day Enchantment conditions: > Once upon a time I had a discusion with Sandy and Charlie Krank >(at Gencon in the mid 80's) about enchantment conditions and trigers and >such. The way they actually used them wasn't exactly how they had written >them up in the rules. They used them much more fleaxibly, in terms of >trigger conditions and such, then the rules would appear to allow. I'm not not realy comfortable with 'flexible' rules. The reason I was drawn to RQ in the first place was it's well defined rules. I'm attracted to the 'science' of magic A shield may be enchanted with a Prot. 4 spell with Attack conditions of 'Anyone touching this shield except the wielder', Linked to a MP Storage Matrix which is filled by a Bound power spirit. Although I may know these details, what I'll tell my players is 'You have a magic shield that protects you when anyone strikes at you with a sword and hits your shield, but it only works twice a day' >They also provided really significant casting time bonuses for casting the >spell out of an enchantment. Before getting my hands on the RQ Errata, which changes MP Storage Matricies to 1d10 points per 1 POW, I had to come up with some justification for the high cost of the ench. My rulling was that if a spell, triggered by an Attack cond. was Linked to a MP mat. there was no extra SR costs for using the Linked MPs. ie a Prot. 4 spell normally takes DEX SR + #MPs to cast. I had rulles that Attack ench. go on SR1 with no delay for MPs if linked to a MP Stor. Mat. ie. on SR 1. As far as other types of conditions go, The way I've been running things is as follows: no extra skills are required (1 skill only Enchant) Each type of condition must be learned seperately Simple conditions are MP Link, Attack (any who touch item), User (any except caster/ caster only), Area (to extend the range of conditions from touch to given range) Complex conditions Attack (Specific race/person), User ( Any except/only race/person/cult) Rare condition Attack (Specific condition eg word_uttered/thoughts/weather conditions...) ect. More complex conditions are rare and the enchanter must travel far to find someone to teach him/her. Knowledge of conditions doesn't require other skills but each 'item' must be learned before it can be used. Any comments on the above? >I wrote up what I remembered/interpreted of >what they had said and still have it around here somewhere. I'll post it >when I find it. I'd appreciate seeing anything you have to offer. >I had expected Chaosium to publish a revised set of magic rules/tricks in >a book that Sandy was writing, but a hard disk crash killed that project >about the time it was almost completed. It's scary the number of 'project' that have been coming from Chaosium but seem to have been killed due to 'hard disk crashes'. I seem to recall hearing about three or four such incidents now... Catch Ya. Paul. ------------------------------ End of RQ Rules Digest: V1 #27 ****************************** This is the bottom of the RuneQuest Rules Digest. RuneQuest is a trademark of Avalon Hill, and Glorantha is a trademark of Chaosium. With the exception of previously copyrighted material, unless specified otherwise all text in this digest is copyright by the author or authors, with rights granted to copy for personal use, to excerpt in reviews and replies, and to archive unchanged for electronic retrieval. Send electronic mail to Majordomo@hops.wharton.upenn.edu with "help" in the body of the message for subscription information on this and other mailing lists.