Subject: RQ Discussions, Number 22 First Distribution: July 26, 1991 Incidentally, the Digest will be on vacation from July 26th - August 2nd. ====================================================================== CORRECTION TO REVIEW OF "DAUGHTERS OF DARKNESS" (Vol.6 No.4) By MOB In Roderick Robertson's excellent review of the latest RQ release "Daughters of Darkness", he mistakenly calls the supplement a CHAOSIUM release. It is in fact an AVALON HILL release. CHAOSIUM had nothing to do with either THE LOST CITY OF ELDARAD or DAUGHTERS. Being "Gateway" releases, they did not require Greg Stafford's sanction, as all Glorantha releases do. The lack of his experienced hand is telling in both supplements. [I have added comments about this to my copy of Digest 06#04. -- ACB] There seems to be a common misconception that RQ is still produced by CHAOSIUM, when in actual fact RQ is entirely in AVALON HILL's hands; CHAOSIUM owns the copyright, but AVALON HILL owns the trademark. Glorantha manuscripts must be passed by Greg Stafford (who receives a fee every time a Gloranthan supplement is produced because he retains the copyright on this world), but this is the limit of CHAOSIUM's involvement. If you send a RQ manuscript to CHAOSIUM they will just forward it on to AH. ====================================================================== From: autodesk!John_Castellucci%3HARBOR@fernwood.mpk.ca.us Subject: RQ discussion I'm about to gather up my notes on Dragonewts and write them up in a usable form. The nucleus is an adventure centering on a journey to a Dragonewt city and some random encounters with Dragonewts. There is also a small section on society. My main sources are WB/RM and WF#14. I also shamelessly admit to stealing a lot of the society/philoshophy from Harryb Harrison's Eden books (what if saurians had evoloved intellegence). I probably stray far from GS's original path, but I believe that it's up to us to flesh out Glorantha. If anybody has any good ideas on the subject of Dragonewts please send them to me - tidbits, adventure ideas, whatever. I'll try and get this written up and to Adrew sometime this summer. John (johnhc@autodesk.com) ====================================================================== From: paul@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu (Paul Reilly) Subject: Re: RQ discussion 21 A short reply on Sorcery > From: Andrew Bell (bell@cs.unc.edu) > Subject: Ken McKinney's Sorcery >It seems to me that there are two fundamental _game_balance_ problems with >the default sorcery system, and your system mainly addresses one of them. I agree. [ good stuff about spell dificulty deleted ] >The second major problem is that if you can cast a powerful spell, there's >little that prevents you from doing so lots of times. For example, if you >can cast one damage boost 5 with duration 10, every ally you have will >soon have that spell on every weapon. I don't see how your system addresses I have thought about his problem and have tried a couple of solutions. The most recent one was to say that the magical currents through Glorantha at Sacred Time dispell almost all "temporary" magic. To counter this, I allowed sorcerors to concentrate on keeping personal spells (i.e. on them or stuff on them) up, up to POW in number. Second, I allowed them to enchant "spell tokens" for any Rune that would be physically near a spell and keep it up in Sacred Time. Third, that spells cast from a matrix onto that matrix (e.g. Damage Boost in a sword onto that sword) would stay up. This approach has some drawbacks but has the advantage of giving more Gloranthan flavor to the sorcery, and also helps make Sacred Time dangerous. Also, as Sacred Time approaches people cast bigger spells (more Intensity) because putting too much Duration in becomes redundant. This also gives a Gloranthan flavor as it makes people really keep track over Sacred Time. Sorcerors under this system accumulate no more than a year's worth of spells (which is still alot, but not enough to equip an army) and it also encourages matrices to have some relation to the spell cast. Other solutions at another time as I must run. -Paul Reilly ====================================================================== From: Subject: discussion material Well, I am rather new to the discussion group and sort of an unknown to most of you. I have been playing for many years, and playing runequest for a few short ones. I am looking for a Runequest group which would play regularly (not neccessarily every week). I have been playing Rolemaster and other games for a year and a half now without access to my favorite one. I have run RQ before, but I prefer to play. I am familiar with most of Glorantha. I also would like to purchase, bargain for, trade for etc. the cults of Prax book. Any help would be appreciated. OH YEAH, I live in Flagstaff AZ and would be willing to do a little traveling. (Like to Phoenix for a once a month game...) Thanks for the replies directly to me..... Brett Desper Bitnet Desper@nauvax INET: who knows, I just haven't memorized it yet. Television is like bad steak. It is niether rare nor well done. ====================================================================== From: Dakin Burdick Subject: RQ Digest submission A lot of interesting stuff has been popping up here recently. The Runic Sorcery system was quite impressive, IMHO. I think it would give a much more "authentic" feel to Gloranthan sorcery than the system in RQIII. I too, like every other RQ referee on the face of the Earth, have written my own sorcery system. I started from RQIII and started mutating it immediately. It really had very little going for it. Because of that sorcery system, I no longer play RQ; I went ahead and wrote my own system (600+ pages!). The sorcery system I settled on is somewhat similar to GURPS in that it uses prerequisite skills. First you have to be able to heal yourself. Then you can heal others and later you can heal many others. I used some ideas from "Autobiography of a Yogi" (in terms of gaining internal power before being able to manifest said power externally) and went from there. The system keeps mutating, and is rapidly approaching D&D type spells (with a limit at about 3rd level). Magic is slow to learn, but I also allow mages to wear armor and use swords, etc. The system still favors fighters and mages; like RQ it is very hard to be a good thief. The Byzantine Earth sounds really good! I'd be interested in helping, just let me know what is needed (I have access to the Indiana Univ. Library, which is excellent). In my own world I use saints, angels and demons to good effect (people are more used to them than cult spirits). Also, I think this idea is a good example of the possibilities of playing in an alternate Earth rather than Glorantha. I've never liked Glorantha (gasp! heresy!) but I loved RQII. I I buywhat I can for RQ, even if I can't use all of it (but Eldarad and the new stuff is worthless), but I would especially like to see alternate Earth stuff. I boght the Ninja/Japan package and immediately resold it. I couldn't believe what a bad job they had done. The material itself was simply Bushido (the game) regurgitated in RQ fashion, and the art (of course) was awful. "Japanese Mom preparing Dinner" was the clincher. Who thought up that line? The worst disappointment was the art taken from Japanese prints. Any fool with a Xerox machine and a minimum of artistic talent could have done better at reproducing those prints, and those pictures might even have saved my copy from resale. Ah well, I don't want you to think all I do is complain, so I'll post one of my demons as well: NIGHTMARE (c1990 Dakin Burdick; all rights reserved) A Nightmare is a large black horse with red-hot coals for eyes and whose hooves cause puffs of flame with every step. They reek of brimstone, but can travel any terrain at 30 km./hour. SIZ:2d6+20 STR:4d6+20 CON:1d6+15 INT:3d6 POW:2d6+6 DEX:3d6 Armor: Skin like heavy leather Attacks: Rear & Plunge as Warhorse [45%] If the Nightmare makes a POW vs. POW roll against a victim, it can discorporate the target. Skills: Move Silently [20%], Spot Hidden [65%] NOTE: I got a lot of the ideas for my demons from the White Dwarf articles on them a few years back. Details on controlling the Nightmare follow: Hostility: 15% chance Payment: A pint of the summoner's blood (1d3 STR, regained as Hit Points). Service: It will serve the summoner for only one night. It can only be evoked after sunset and will dissolve into sulphurous mist if exposed to sunlight. Dakin Burdick burdickd@copper.ucs.indiana.edu ====================================================================== From: autodesk!John_Castellucci%3HARBOR@fernwood.mpk.ca.us Subject: RQ discussion 21 Andrew, how about compiling a document of all the Digest Subs and having availiable on the same basis as back issues. Ask people to send in any info that would like have included in a RQ players list. For example: John Castellucci johnhc@autodesk.com 70401,1067 Compuserve San Francisco, CA RQ II Glorantha From: The Editor Subject: The above My current policy is to not release information about subscribers unless they explicitly give me permission to do so. I am willing to make such information available, and have even thought of an easy way for me to do so. So, if you want to be on that list, send me a few lines containing whatever info about yourself you would like to have made available. ====================================================================== From: mad@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Ken McKinney) Subject: ken's sorcery system [This seemed appropriate for the discussion list, despite the personal address below, so I included it here. I trust you have no objection, Ken? My response will be in discussion 23...] Hey Andrew, Thanks for the comments on my sorcery system. I agree with your comments re: the game balance problems with the standard sorcery system. In addition, I think that some spells should be fundamentally more difficult to cast than other spells at the same intensity. That's why I put in the spell difficulty numbers. Your idea about changing the Law point formula is interesting. Lower the number of Law points one gets for a given skill, then allow people to buy additional Law points for reductions in skill percentage. I see some good and bad points about this: good : it removes the all/nothing approach -- someone always has a finite chance of casting a spell of any size, given sufficient magic points. It makes casting spells with lots of intensity or duration or range more difficult in general. bad: It's one more calculation the players have to make. I was wondering if my system was already too complicated. You have to ditch the ceremony skill or people just ceremony up their rolls when they cast long duration spells. Actually, I was thinking ceremony might be incompatible with my system anyway, in terms of game balance. Some of my spells have high magic point costs but, in my opinion, shouldn't be terribly hard to cast. Firebolt is an example. Your system makes them extremely hard to cast. A sorcerer who wanted to cast a 2d6 firebolt in the old system would need a Law skill of 50%, and would be able to cast at full percentage. In your system, he would have a -25% chance to cast the spell. (that is, his chance would be decreased by 25%). Actually, I guess I could just reduce the difficulty numbers on these spells and it would still work out. Come to think of it, what if difficulty numbers were eliminated and the balancing factor became solely the number of Law points for the spell? That would make the rules less complicated, but you wouldn't have spells which took lots of magic points but were easy to cast. I think that a long duration light spell, for instance, should fall into this category. Oh well. Re: the problem with Damage boost: I think that much of this problem is with the spell definition, and not the current sorcery rules. I think they were too stuck on the "1 point of intensity equals 1 point of effect" paradigm when they set up the rules. At this point I'm going with the general idea in my system that the best you can get is "5 intensity = 1d6 effect", which trims down damage boost nicely. Re: your point that sorcerers casting long duration spells on all their buddies is a problem. Agreed. What if you had to do a 1 point ritual enchant on an item/person before long duration spells would "take" on it. Say additionally that the enchantment has to be made by the person casting the spells. Also say that the body of a sorcerer and his familiar is automatically enchanted thus in the apprentice bonding/create familiar rituals. This takes the sorcerer out of his role of "long term party enhancer" without keeping him from casting long duration spells on himself. But some long-duration spells aren't game imbalancing. Say a sorcerous glue spell that fixes a vase for the duration. Shouldn't a sorcerer be able to cast something like this, a spell which lasts a long time but then wears out and ends, without expending something permanently? Is there a way to play-balance the spells like Damage boosting without making all long-duration spells costly? That's what I would like to see. I mean, with my system the way it is now a sorcerer will have to really orient his character around being the damage boost person, and have high skill levels, to keep the other player's knives sharp. In my experience most players would rather be personally powerful than play in a support role. Since I force them to make the choice (put points into flameblade or fireball; the difficulty levels make it impossible for anyone to do many things well) my feeling is the problem is solved. In addition, a sorcerer probably won't have the correct runic associations to do the equivalents of damage boost, mystic vision, spell resist, skin of life, and damage resist all on the party. So the problem of the sorcerer augmenting the party is reduced a little more. I dunno, maybe I'm misunderstanding how people are going to use my system. I assume that the sorcerers in the party are about as skilled as the other members. I got a note from someone using my system yesterday; His characters each had about 10 runes and 10 spells at 75% or better! This is way above the power level I expected (imagine a Runelord type with this many skills) but they each ended up having a couple of really easy spells which they could cast at 100%+, and a couple of really awsome spells that they could cast around 50-60% of the time. While this is "higher level" than the game I would run, they seem to be enjoying it. I haven't bothered to figure out how many years their sorcerers would have had to study to get skills at this level. Regards, Ken ====================================================================== From: Michael Kossowsky Subject: re: Ken's sorcery system - Discussion entry On the whole, I like the Ken's sorcery system - it's Runic (thus more 'Gloranthan'), it 'feels' more like magic then the current system, plus it introduces more game balance. It does have one - to me - 'flaw'. As a GM and as a player, I prefer to start a character with very little or no previous experience (RQ2 bias here), and then watch them slowly grow. Your system makes a PC sorcerer starting off at the same time as his Orlanthi buddies completely non-feasible. Just to be able to cast the most basic spell of value, a PC has to have Law, 2 or 3 Runic skills and a spell. Assuming that the spell has a diffculty factor of 20 or 30, then for a pc sorcerer to have the same chance of 'hitting' as his Orlanthi buddie with starting skill in his broadsword, he need 20 in his minimum rune and a 20 or 30 in his spell! So, you might say that this isn't a flaw - sorcerers should be very rare and, yes, they just don't make for good starting characters, only heavily pro-rated oned with 10 - 20 yrs previous experience. Also, it seems to me that in the default sorcery system and in Ken's system there is a problem with saying that the sorcery skills are only advancable by study/training. Let's compare these skills to computer programming - I sit in front of my C editor for the first time - I don't have a hope of doing anything. So, I sit with my C manual for a bit, and learn a couple of commands, some basic structure and syntax rules (i.e. study), but then I sit in front of my editor/compiler again and start programming - I get a whole bunch of errors, I look back at my manual, figure out where I went wrong and go on - this happens quite a bit, but after a while, I stop getting so many errors, I begin to be able to write a program with those 10 commands with only 1 or 2 errors, and I can spot them very quickly - I have improved by experience! But, I am still limited by the 10 commands I know, so if I want to be able to advance any more, I'm going to have to get some more training in C. Now I know 20 commands, plus records and files, once again I can get experience, etc...... So, what I am proposing without having thought out a method for yet, is a system whereby, in between training/study sessions, a certain amount of experience could be gained. I am not sure if one could gain more from experience at the earlier stages or the later - I could come up with arguments for both. Well, what do y'all think? -Michael studbnet@iljct ====================================================================== The RuneQuest(tm) mailing list is a courtesy of Andrew Bell. All opinions and material above are the responsibility of the originator, and copyrights are held by them. Unless specified in the specific article, all RQ Digest material is freely redistributable on a not-for-profit basis as long as author credit is included. RuneQuest is a trademark of Chaosium, Inc. Send submissions, mailing list changes, requests for old article lists, etc. to: bell@cs.unc.edu ...!mcnc!unc!bell Request old articles by volume number and issue number.