From: owner-rq-rules-digest To: rq-rules-digest@hops.wharton.upenn.edu Subject: RQ Rules Digest: V2 #224 Reply-To: rq-rules Errors-To: owner-rq-rules-digest Precedence: bulk Content-Return: Prohibited Return-Path: owner-rq-rules-digest RQ Rules Digest: Tuesday, 26 March 1996 Volume 02 : Number 224 TABLE OF CONTENTS Alain_RAMEAU_at_03__paris__t Fatigue Sandy Petersen Sandy's Sorcery Sandy Petersen Some questions for the tough guys 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: Alain_RAMEAU_at_03__paris__tep@internet.total.fr Date: Tue, 26 Mar 96 13:09:58 MET Subject: Fatigue As previously told, I liked the additional Enc SR system to simulate fatigue and encumbrance. However, this sytem seems usable only in combat situation. The Fatigue Threshold system explained by Colin Watson seems good too, and may be used for non-combat situation also. However, I do not think it is fair that only failed actions (high rolls) costs fatigue. But I do not see any obvious solution to eliminate this problem. May be a mix of both could be playable. In fact, during combat, a heavily loaded character should move slowly (Enc SR system), and an exhausted one should have malus over his dice rolls (Fatigue Threshold system : each dice roll over Fatigue thresold should cost 10% malus per Enc SR, with a minimum of 5% malus if 0 enc SR, which favours very lightly loaded characters ?). Concerning the use of SIZ in calculation of Fatigue Point, I think SIZ can affect encumbrance capacity, not directly fatigue. Anyway all three may be included in the calculation and the Fatigue Threshold could be calculated by(STR+CON+SIZ)x2, or if SIZ not counted, by FPx3. Alain ------------------------------ From: Sandy Petersen Date: Tue, 26 Mar 96 11:46:54 -0600 Subject: Re: Sandy's Sorcery Alain RAMEAU >I will start by saying that I like some of the new ideas of this system such >as the new spell classification (fewer (?) spells but many options : Resist >(......), Bless (......) etc....), Presence limitation and Vows system, ... Thank you. The ideas are not all original with me, so I do not deserve all the credit. >I do not think it is useful to create new skills or Arts. the four basic ones >seem sufficient for me, and the three other could be handled differently I rather enjoyed creating new Arts, myself. If you don't care for them, nothing is easier than dropping them, with my blessing. RuneQuest has always been modular, and one of my goals in the new Sorcery was to retain that feature. >a) I prefer to keep skills instead of Arts, as I think it is too easy to get >all the Arts My own feeling was that since I was now limiting the amount you could manipulate a spell by the skill in that spell, that it would be way too limiting to _also_ limit the poor sorcery-using bastard with his Art skills as well. It's still hard to be a good sorcerer -- your spell skills need to be high. I wanted to have a fair number of sorcerers available, because magic is keen, and hence the changes. If you do not like having lots of sorcerers, but still want to use my system, you could up the POW cost to 2 POW per Art or whatever. >The new Art system is still either difficult (Brithini) or too easy (Malkioni, >even with St Malkion restriction of keeping 10% magic bonus). A Brithini takes app. 1.5 years of training to increase an Art to 90. If he must do Research instead, it takes about 4 years. Of course, time means little to a Brithini, so I imagine that most of them receive little guidance. You keep saying it is "too" easy? Compared to what? It's harder than becoming a priest. It's harder than becoming a shaman? I don't understand the objection fully, I guess. It _is_ easier than it used to be, but I view that as a Good Thing. >a) Permanence: the fact it is a skill or Art, plus the fact it costs POW for a "dispelable" spell, is worthless IMO. Don't use it, then. I almost didn't include it, (I was going to make it a new Enchantment ritual instead.) If I get anyone else opining that it doesn't need to be an Art, I might remove it. >I have specific questions on this Art of Permanence : Can we cast a temporal >spell if we do not have Permanence Art ? Yes, if you have Presence available. >Does it lasts 10 mns in this case? No. It lasts like any other temporal spell -- until you drop it. >Why the duration of the spell Smother is based on intensity, not Permanence >(Intensity could be used to lower CON resistance roll, if any) ? Because Smother is a really powerful spell -- it _always_ kills the target so long as the sorcerer keeps concentrating. If Intensity did nothing for the spell, then all the sorcerer would need to worry about would be Range or Multispell, and he could destroy large numbers of foes at a long distance, where they couldn't get back at him. Requiring the user to include a fair amount of Intensity with the spell is just my way of limiting the Range and Multispell aspects. I could have done it a different way; say, by requiring the user to use Intensity equal to half the CON of his targets. >b) Ease : I think this should not be a specific skill or Art, but should be >allowed to any sorcerer. The idea behind Ease was that sorcerers -- notoriously short of MPs -- would be willing to trade time for an MP or two. It's certainly not an integral or essential part of the system, and if you ignored it, I would not complain. Or, it could be replaced by a new Ceremony rule enabling you to trade the skill bonus for a lower MP cost instead. >c) Speed. This skill also should not be a specific skill or Art, but should be >allowed to everybody, at the cost of 1 additional MP per SR diminution (with >mini being 1 SR). So allow it for everyone if you like. >d) Concerning the maximum usable level of Arts, may be this could be skill/5 >instead of skill/10. It would let a sorcerer using my system get way too powerful too soon. A sorcerer with a mere 50% in an oft-used spell (which is trivial to get -- a brand-new sorcerer can start off with more than that) would be able to cast 10-point spells, which are extremely strong. A 90% sorcerer would have 18 point spells which are quite terrifying. > with a skill/10 limit, a 100% Magus would be limited to 10 levels ? Only in those spells in which he was 100%. And 10 levels is a mighty fine spell total -- note that a 10-point spirit magic spell (or even a 5-point one) is quite rare, and that a 5-point Runespell is equally rare. Also, remember that the 100% Magus _can_ increase his total beyond 10 Art levels by three means: 1) Ceremony -- up to double, for 20 levels. Gulp. 2) Specialization -- if your Mage is a specialist, his specialty spells will be 20 levels at 100%. Which is very good indeed. 3) Magic items -- sacrifice some POW or find a magic item that boosts a particular spell. You'll have increased levels in the spell in question. Sandy P. ------------------------------ From: Sandy Petersen Date: Tue, 26 Mar 96 11:50:30 -0600 Subject: Re: Some questions for the tough guys Manu, lost knight of Slontos >My main concern right now is poison and disease. Are Uz subject to poisons as >humans are? Inhaled or injected poison affects them just as us. Eaten poison varies. Some substances can affect them, but plenty don't. For instance, alcohol poisons humans (not much, I admit), but not trolls. They can even drink wood alcohol. Most vegetable poisons don't have a lot of effect on them, except those raised by the Aldryami (who generally take care to include an anti-troll effect in strychnine beans and the like). > And what about diseases? Is there also special diseases that affect Uz like >there are for the Aldryamis? Of course. Sandy P. ------------------------------ End of RQ Rules Digest: V2 #224 ******************************* 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