From: owner-rq-rules-digest To: rq-rules-digest@hops.wharton.upenn.edu Subject: RQ Rules Digest: V1 #37 Reply-To: rq-rules Errors-To: owner-rq-rules-digest Precedence: bulk Content-Return: Prohibited Return-Path: owner-rq-rules-digest RQ Rules Digest: Wednesday, 7 December 1994 Volume 01 : Number 037 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 Jonas Schiott RQR: Knowing the Rules, Matrix Mania... Steve Bonnot RQR: Tentative RQ Con 2 Scedule David Cake RQR: spells vs criticals etc. Eric Rowe RQR: Bay Area Hosts Needed for RQ Con 2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jonas.schiott@vinga.hum.gu.se (Jonas Schiott) Date: Mon, 5 Dec 1994 15:01:41 +0100 Subject: RQR: Knowing the Rules, Matrix Mania... Truls: >Maybe I should instead say why o why can't they get a good editor :-) Well, it's not as if the writers had any choice. Anyway, the editor for the books you mention doesn't work there (AH) anymore. In fact, nobody does. Great, huh? :-) __________ Carl-Johan: >I am starting to face a problem with to much cheap MP resources for some of my >PCs. A 1d10 MP matrix costs about a suit of standard armor (1500-2000L), >and I don't want to just raise prices. I would like to have a mechanism for >handling this problem and make high POW matrices more precious. Why _not_ just raise prices? Or just impose some other restriction: the enchanter is busy this year, doesn't like you anyway, you're the wrong cult, there _are_ no magicians willing to sell their POW for money in this town...etc. As you can see, I'm not inclined to suggest a _rules_ mechanism for this. :-) __________ Concerning multiple replies to the same question, I agree with Hugh Foster: >quite often the answers are a bit different >and the various comments are useful and interesting. Which is not to say that it should be overdone. I mean, filling _one_ digest with replies is OK by me, but after that you'd better have something original to contribute. ___________ Paul Pofandt doesn't like changing the conditions on already created magic items: >It feels too much like defining an item, then re-defining it >again later. It also feels a good deal like upgrading your computer by plugging in a new chip. Hmm, maybe sorcerors, with their "natural laws" approach to magic, could pull off such a feat. But a priest tampering with a Holy Object, invested with the Deity's power? Naahh... ( Jonas Schiott ) ( Institutionen for Ide- och lardomshistoria ) ( Goteborgs Universitet ) ------------------------------ From: Steve Bonnot Date: Mon, 5 Dec 1994 08:58:53 -0800 Subject: Re: RQR: Tentative RQ Con 2 Scedule Thanks for the schedule of the CON. See you all there. Steve Bonnot ------------------------------ From: davidc@cs.uwa.edu.au (David Cake) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 1994 17:11:07 +0800 Subject: Re: RQR: spells vs criticals etc. >What I want to know is: if protective spells only cover your skin (not your >armour and equipment) why is Damage Resistance applied *before* armour? >You'd think the damage should be reduced by armour before it's resisted by >the spell. This would make Damage Resistance a useful complement to normal >armour (rather than being a rather redundant adjunct or risky alternative >to armour). > While as a rules suggestion this is not new (because this is the rule from RQ:AIG), and has been well discussed in the past on the rq4 list, I think it is interesting to note its independent suggestion, including much the same reasoning. I think that the result of the discussion was that this was a good rule, providing that the Intensity of the Damage Resistance does not get as high as it did in RQ3 (which under RQ3 rules, of basically Intensity = skill%/10, it will not). There was some concern that Damage Resistance was unusually good when combined with other protection spells, but I think the general concern that while worrisome it was not a really big concern. Cheers Dave Cake >___ >CW. ------------------------------ From: Eric Rowe Date: Tue, 6 Dec 1994 01:03:13 -0800 Subject: RQR: Bay Area Hosts Needed for RQ Con 2 Howdy all, Some of the people attending RQ Con 2 are coming a great distance and plan to stay in the bay area for either a few days prior to or after the convention. So that they can afford to come I am hoping some of you bay area residents will open up your floorspace to them. If you can possibly let someone crash at your place for a few days around the Con please let me know. (rowe@csua.berkeley.edu or 510-649-8601) While I'm on that subject, one esteemed guest is already here. Ian Whitchurch has written At the Edge of Darkness, a theatrical module, that he will be running four times for us. Since he has come all the way from Australia I'm looking to help him avoid expensive hotels for the next month and a half. If you've got 12ft of floor space available and are willing to put up with stimulating conversation for a few days please let me know ASAP. I'm trying to get a whole lot of volunteers to minimise his expenses. Thanks, eric ------------------------------ End of RQ Rules Digest: V1 #37 ****************************** 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.