From: owner-rq-rules-digest To: rq-rules-digest@hops.wharton.upenn.edu Subject: RQ Rules Digest: V2 #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: Friday, 15 September 1995 Volume 02 : Number 073 TABLE OF CONTENTS combat timekeeping Miscellaneous magic ideas RULES OF THE ROAD 1. Do not include large sections of a message in your reply. Especially not to add "Yeah, I agree" or "No, I disagree." Or be excoriated. If someone writes something good and you want to say "good show" please do. But don't include the whole message you praise. 2. Use an appropriate Subject line. 3. Learn the art of paraphrasing: Don't just quote and comment on a point-by-point basis. When paraphrasing you demonstrate exactly how well you understand the point someone was trying to make. 4. There is no number 4. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "J. Eric Baldeschwieler" Date: Fri, 15 Sep 1995 17:27:06 -0700 Subject: re: combat timekeeping [OK here goes, I'll add my two cents] > Has anyone tried disposing of the melee round... > If anyone has tried something like this, I would appreciate hearing about > it; if you haven't, comments are still welcome. Yes. Although not in RQ. Such systems work fine, but have two problems: 1) GM overload - Tracking the actions of 20 or so NPCs becomes MUCH harder! Especially if things like movement are also "phaseless". 2) The "Flight Simulator Effect" (tm): Too much detail in combat detracts from the rest of the game. Remember the old board game "Air Wars"? It took hours to run 20 seconds of air combat. The simulation was detailed and the game was a success, but it was not role playing. The "best" combat system I've ever GMed (SPG a Leading Edge Product) was like this. After resolving a battle it was time to go home... 3) [free bonus] Complexity scares off many players. - ------- The fatigue system you started to detail sounds like a great example of [2]. - ------- All of that said the fixed # of blows in RQ really bugs me. A man with a saber should attack more often then a guy with a pole axe and a guy with dex 21 or str 21 should probably also be faster. Anyone have a simple solution to these issues? How about maneuvering and distance things? EG A combat between a guy with a dagger and a guy with a poleaxe is really all about the guy with the dagger trying to get close enough to use it... [Sounds like I'm doomed to build another flight sim doesn't it?] [Anyone want to see my latest attempt at the #of blows thing?] ------------------------------ From: rturney@netcom.com (Raymond D Turney) Date: Fri, 15 Sep 1995 19:06:26 -0700 Subject: Miscellaneous magic ideas A few random suggestions about magic rules. 1. Spirit magic and sorcery should use the same spell list, with different common names. Reason: it is hard enough to write up one set of balanced spells, and it is not clear that having a second set of spells adds what it costs in complexity, increased opportunity for bugs to appear, etc. To explain how this might work, I offer: There are three different major approaches to magic: intellectual, theurgic, and spiritual. If you ask a sorceror, intellectual knowledge of magic is superior. If you ask a deist, gods rule. And obviously, the spirit is superior to all mere gods or ideas ... A spell known intuitively or spiritually comes to the user with a range and duration dependent on his spiritual power. Say range=Pow*5, duration = POW in minutes. The normal means of extending range is to use high POW founder spirits, to discorporate and close with the enemy on the spirit plane, or to send bound spell spirits after him. Critical spell success multiplies range by ten and makes duration until dispelled. Cost of a spell in MP is equal to the intensity, which is the MP cost of the spell if Battle/Spirit Magic. Most spells available to deities are also available to spiritual understanding. But they are rare, and cost the POW cost of the sacrifice to learn from a god, * 4. Total intuitive spells known is limited by the familiar INT limit, and total intensity limited by the need to "know" all points cast. A spell known theurgically is the familiar divine magic. It works automatically, with the POW of the caster * 5 as its base range, and a base duration = POW in hours. The normal means of extending range is to "pump" it with a number of MP equal to the number of POW points sacrificed to get it. Spells available are the normal RQ divine list, plus any spirit/battle magic in the pantheon, sacrificed for as divine at a rate of 1 point of divine sacrifice for 4 points of battle/spirit magic effect. Intellectual understanding of magic, also known as sorcery, provides a base range of skill * 5 in meters, and a base duration of skill in minutes. Intellectual crits multiply range by 10, and make duration until dispelled. In addition, there are separate range, duration, etc sorcery skills. Basic success with these confers the equivalent of a crit on skill with the spell itself. Specials on Range multiply by 10 again, Crits go as far as the caster can see. Crits on Duration require crits to dispell, specials on durations require special successes to dispell. There is also an elegance skill, success in which cuts the MP cost of a spell to 1/2 normal with a normal success, 1/5 normal with a special, and to 1 with a crit. MP cost to use range and duration if successful is equal to base MP cost of casting the spell. The limit on intensity if factored into skill %age in the spell itself, at a rate of one potential intensity point per 15% skill in the spell cast. Spells which are not normally variable do not vary with skill in this manner, and may not be cast until enough skill is gained to cover the fixed MP cost of casting as if it were intensity {actually, they may not be cast for effect, though the motions may be gone through in practice}.. Success chance is automatic for divine magic, POW * 5 for spirit magic, and lowest skill % age of all skills used for intellectual magic/sorcery. Note that range, duration, and elegance are all hard skills, which take 2 checks for one gain roll to increase. What spells are available in a sorcery tradition varies ... Red Goddess/Arkati/Nysalor magic has two aspects. One side effect of illumination is to all a character to join any cult he pleases, as a result of the freedom from fear of retaliation by cult spirits. The second side effect is to allow a character to convert his spiritual magical knowledge to intellectual knowledge {actually not to convert it, but to enable him to use it as such} in effect giving the illuminate access to his spirtually known spells as if they were sorcery known at POW * 5 skill. Sorcery skills may be applied to these spells if known. But they are still subject to the INT limit on spiritually known spells. And each spell where the two understandings are merged costs 1 POW point sacrificed to the appropriate deity}y. What advantages do I see in this: a) simplicity - many of the benefits of Steve Maurer/RQ IV sorcery are made available without the fiddling of allocating range/duration, etc. A skill based magic system exists, for those who like such things. b) all three systems have somewhat different advantages, without any one of them possessing a potentially decisive military advantage in range, etc. In this system, sorcerors still get more in the end, deists get magic that works automatically {without being outranged} by sacrificing POW rather than personal effort, and spirit mages still can learn quick and aquire awesome capabiliteies. c) Red Goddess magic on the personal level fits smoothly into the system, without requiring massive changes Even given the fact that this issue has been discussed to death, exhumed, discussed to death, exhumed, etc, I submit that this or something like it should be seriously considered by people interested in patching the RQ magic rules. Thank you for reading this. Raymond Turney {May the light of our Blessed Red Goddess bring enlightenment to all} Apologies to others if they have seen this ... but my first posting of it never got back to me, and I never saw comments on it, so I assume it to have been lost in cyberspace. ------------------------------ End of RQ Rules Digest: V2 #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. WWW material at http://hops.wharton.upenn.edu/~loren/rolegame.html