From: owner-rq-rules-digest To: rq-rules-digest@hops.wharton.upenn.edu Subject: RQ Rules Digest: V1 #73 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, 9 February 1995 Volume 01 : Number 073 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 SPerrin@aol.com RQR: RQ Computer games SPerrin@aol.com RQR: RQ2vsRQ3 Steven E Barnes RQR: Spirit Magic Bryan J. Maloney RQR: RQ2 foci Steven E Barnes RQR: RQ2 foci Gregory C. Walsh RQR: Knockback recovery SPerrin@aol.com RQR: "Battle magic" as a ... Kirsten Jacobus RQR: Using the RQ2 spirit magic rules CryptoMatt@aol.com RQR: BattleMagic & Skills David Cake RQR: rq-rules@hops.wharton.upenn.edu ANDOVER@delphi.com RQR: Non-Glorantha RQ CryptoMatt@aol.com RQR: B-Magic & Backward Compatibility ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: SPerrin@aol.com Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 15:15:44 -0500 Subject: Re: RQR: RQ Computer games Brian Maloney asks: >>How would one do a non-Glorantha RQ game? Would you use the Unlimited Adventures paradigm, in which you have a semi-open platform to allow people to design their own adventures?<< Well, since the game would have to be licensed from Avalon Hill, I imagine we'd just use one of the non-Glorantha scenario packs as the background, such as Griffin Island or Vikings. The other idea is not a bad one, however. Steve Perrin ------------------------------ From: SPerrin@aol.com Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 15:15:27 -0500 Subject: Re: RQR: Re: RQ2vsRQ3 Nigel Smith writes: >>As someone else mentioned, AH would improve their player base if they got more supplements onto the shelves - especially scenarios.<< Yeah, that's what we kept telling Avalon Hill when they took over the franchise. They went with _Dr. Ruth's Good Sex Game_ (among others), thus getting an immediate reward but giving up creating a loyal player base. AH has NEVER understood the role playing market. Steve Perrin ------------------------------ From: akuma@netcom.com (Steven E Barnes) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 12:12:16 -0800 Subject: Re: RQR: Spirit Magic >Okay, for us ignorant sots, what ARE the Battle Magic rules from RQ2? > >How is it acquired? By having a priest use a rune spell called Spell Teaching. This put you in a kind of mind link for one week, and the knowledge was imprinted on your mind somehow. You could also teach spells to your bound spirits and allied spirit in a similar manner, but without the need for a spell. >What rules govern casting, foci, etc.? You were supposed to have an item with a focus symbol carved on it. Everyone I know ignored this rule however. As an example, you could place dozens of foci onto a staff, so it was quite different from the RQ3 foci. POW vs POW spells used the RR chart; and all spells failed on a roll of 96-00. - -steve ------------------------------ From: jacobus@sonata.cc.purdue.edu (Bryan J. Maloney) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 95 16:39:48 -0500 Subject: RQR: RQ2 foci Okay, so you were supposed to have a focus symbol. What was the effect of having the focus, what was the effect of not having it? I recall hearing some talk about "unfocussed casting" somewhere, once, long ago. ------------------------------ From: akuma@netcom.com (Steven E Barnes) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 14:06:04 -0800 Subject: Re: RQR: RQ2 foci >Okay, so you were supposed to have a focus symbol. What was the effect >of having the focus, what was the effect of not having it? > >I recall hearing some talk about "unfocussed casting" somewhere, once, long >ago. "...It is possible to cast any spell without a focus, but it takes two melee rounds to do so, the first being spent in carefully visuallying the runic symbol necessary for the spell and the target it must affect. Spells affecting the characters body do not require a focus. Part of the purpose of a focus is to help one concentrate POW to overcome resistance..." Many of the spells, such as Protection are listed as "Unfocused on self, focused on others" It also states that the knowledge needed to create the focus is included in the cost of learning the spell. Gee, 10+ years playing RQ2, and I had forgotten all about those rules... - -steve ------------------------------ From: "Gregory C. Walsh" Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 17:14:11 -0500 Subject: RQR: Knockback recovery I am probably as nice as it gets. Provided they don't run into anything, or hit someone else, or what ever, I make them make a DEX roll. If they fail, they fall down. Next melee round is run as normal except they must add 3 SR to their actions in order to get up off the ground. Despite this, someone ends up being the golf ball. Those extra 3 SR ensures that the golf club will hit the golf ball first; and if the "golf ball" PC is clumsey, well, enough said. Greg (I could give a blow by blow example but I have bet people have seen this before. Knockback makes for some dramatic situations. But not many people seem to use knockback rules.) ------------------------------ From: SPerrin@aol.com Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 17:28:18 -0500 Subject: Re: RQR: "Battle magic" as a ... In response to: >>> the RR table, which breaks down at high POW values... >> >>I don't think it breaks down. That's because I think POW and other stats >>are exponential rather than linear. Mr. Barnes stands with the loyal >>opposition on that debate and he disagrees. C'est la vie. >When they stop making monsters like the Bat, with STR and POW >measured >in the 1000s, I'll agree with you. >-steve barnes Ah well, no one ever implied that the creators at the Chaosium, which includes myself from that period, were mathematicians. On the other hand, the Bat is supposed to be truly awesome... I have to agree that this is a bit much. Steve Perrin ------------------------------ From: jacobus@sonata.cc.purdue.edu (Kirsten Jacobus) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 95 19:54:49 -0500 Subject: RQR: Using the RQ2 spirit magic rules I think I'm going to try the RQ2 spirit magic rules (fails only on 96+ roll, subtracts magic points, needs focus or extra round to cast) on my group as a sort of "playtest of proposed experimental rules" to see how the players like them. None of my players are on this list, and none of them know anything at all about RQ2. So I'll see how they like these "new experimental rules", okay? Oliver, Carl, et al, you guys taking note? I'll also think about implementing some version of the non-MP rules for use with any sorcery-using characters (there might be one in the group) to see how these fly. ------------------------------ From: CryptoMatt@aol.com Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 20:54:19 -0500 Subject: Re: RQR: BattleMagic & Skills In RQR V1 #69, Keith Ivey responds to my comments about BattleMagic by saying; >The idea of a spirit magic skill is reasonable. I used it a >bit, but didn't GM enough to give it a proper playtesting. >But the special bonus for casting heals on oneself seems klugy. >What's the game-world rationale for it? Well, honestly, I can't think of any rationale except MGF, Maximum Gaming Fun. Easier heals lead to a higher survival rate, so the players have more fun. - -Matt ------------------------------ From: davidc@cs.uwa.edu.au (David Cake) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 11:01:43 +0800 Subject: RE: RQR: rq-rules@hops.wharton.upenn.edu >WRT: Going first is useful but not essential. > >In the Orlanthi RL versus ZZ Berserker fight the troll will almost always >strike first. But the Orlanthi takes it like a man on his iron hoplite shield >ops its a two handed sword he parries with. Anyway he braces against >knockback and follows through with a viscious slash that the berserk troll >cannot parry. Now think that the greatsword is iron and its troll kebabs >time. > >So going first is useful, but a tough guy can take it... (of course if he >blowshis parry its all over). > Which is why such fights can still be fun. But the important point is that going first is still a big enough issue in mayn combats that a good (and SRs are pretty good ) method of determining first blow is an asset to the game. After, we can always just say that it is an optional rule. Those that can't be bothered don't have to use them. Cheers Dave >Lewis ------------------------------ From: ANDOVER@delphi.com Date: Wed, 08 Feb 1995 23:07:44 -0500 (EST) Subject: RQR: Non-Glorantha RQ Fantasy Europe, judging by the map in the RQ III rules, is Europe between 650-700 AD. This is a good choice, because it is one of the least known (to historians and non-historians alike!) periods in the last 2500 years of Western history, but offers a lot of player character possibilities of types of players (culturally and socially) that can be explained! I have always hoped that this would be developed more! And this from someone who owns just about every bit of Glorantha stuff it is possible to own! Jim Chapin ------------------------------ From: CryptoMatt@aol.com Date: Thu, 9 Feb 1995 00:03:59 -0500 Subject: RQR: B-Magic & Backward Compatibility In response to Bryan Maloney saying; >Well, using "battle magic" with skill mechanics is pretty much what I'd >call "low-powered sorcery". Sorcerers have to learn a skill for each spell that they know, while my BattleMagic users learn one skill that will work for all BattleMagic. Just making sure that I said what I meant to say rather than something else entirely. ;-) And one more thing on the matter of backward compatibility... I, for one, would be extremely annoyed if RQ 4 were to make all of my expensive game suppliments obsolete. So, if the people behind all the RQ 4 project are listening, please make RQ 4 backward compatible. - -Thanks, Matt Thale ------------------------------ End of RQ Rules Digest: V1 #73 ****************************** 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.