Subject: RuneQuestings, Volume 2, Number 8
This issue:
Re: RQ Spell Power? (Andrew Bell)
[Ed's note: you can now contact me at bell@cs.unc.edu, although I should be
at acb@cs.duke.edu for a while. For UUCP folk, ...!mcnc!unc!bell will do
the trick.
Since no one else has sent any contributions in over a month, I guess
this entire digest will be my own. Yay rah.]
---
Subject: Re: RQ Spell Power?
From: bell@cs.unc.edu (Andrew Bell)
In volume 2, number 7, Adrian Joseph writes:
>... one very important point about battle magic (all magic I think) is
>that it's visible (at least) when cast.
I don't remember spell casting being particularly obvious; this may be a
local variant, but I don't believe it's standard. It should be
fairly easy to tell someone's got a fireblade on their sword, but telling
if someone has bladesharp or bludgeon on shouldn't be so easy. I would also
be loathe, even with visible effects, to tell viewers how many points the
spell is. Thus you see someone casting a spell on their weapon; how many
points of dispel do you use? You're going to spend more power eliminating
that spell most of the time, or you're going to risk wasting magic points
and time on useless casting. You're better off with dullblade in this case.
The best time to use enhancement spells, also, is when you outnumber your
foes. For example, when fighting a giant, he can't take the time to dispel
all your spells even if he has DM. You can also use enhancement spells when
fighting unintelligent or non-spellcasting foes, and any spells that affect
you (strength, vigor, etc.) should require an overcoming roll to dispel.
Don't forget, also, the missile-affecting spells. Speeddarted arrows are
much more likely to penetrate armor, and multi-missiled arbalest or heavy
crossbow bolts can be devastating. Firearrow also dramatically increases the
damage of arrows.
In RQ III the change in the distribution of spirit magic means that very few
characters even have dispel magic, so the situation is much different there.
---
Subject: A minor change in the RQ III rules
From: bell@cs.unc.edu (Andrew Bell)
In the RQ III Snakepipe Hollow adventure, the introductory notes show a
change in the definition of the silence spell. Normally I would pass this
off as a typo, but judging how unpopular the normal spell is in our group,
I think this improvement to silence was intentional.
The new silence spell adds 15% to your sneak ability per point.
---
Subject: Spell fumbles and Monty Haul
From: bell@cs.unc.edu (Andrew Bell)
In article 2.6, Jeff Okamoto says:
> I think the current rules for fumbles and criticals are fine.
> There is no need to add insult to injury or hand out Monty Haul effects
> just because of a single die roll.
Actually, the principle of "special effects" on a single die roll does have
precedent: the fumble charts for combat. Criticals are handled in a
standard fashion, but fumbles go to a random chart, where all sorts of
things can happen -- like a Zorak Zorani with True Maul, strength, and
multiple bludgeons up can critical himself for immense amounts of damage. (We
were fighting lightly armored trollkin, too; it's not like the True Maul was
necessary...said character now has a 2 POW after DIing...)
The system that has the most appealing fumble system for spells (to me) is
Rolemaster. In that system, the more difficult the spell you were casting,
the worse its effects on you, and the more powerful you are, the less the
effects of the fumble are. I'd like to see a similar thing for RuneQuest,
so I'll try to come up with one and post it to this journal.
By the way, Jeff, I'm sorry if I seem to be picking on you. I agree with
the majority of your comments. Hopefully the system I just described would
satisfy your (and my) desire for a clean system, and still add a little
variety (and risk) to spell-casting.
---
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.
RuneQuest is a trademark of Chaosium, Inc.
Send submissions, mailing list changes, requests for old article lists, etc.
to:
acb@romeo.cs.duke.edu
acb@dukeac.ac.duke.edu
bell@cs.unc.edu
...!mcnc!duke!romeo!acb
...!mcnc!unc!bell
Request old articles by volume number and issue number.