(Message rqd:5)
Return-Path:
Received: from Holland.Sun.COM (sunnl) by homeland.Holland.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1)
id AA04442; Wed, 2 Jun 93 17:17:35 +0200
Received: from glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM by Holland.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1e)
id AA23729; Wed, 2 Jun 93 17:17:20 +0200
Received: by glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1)
id AA04927; Wed, 2 Jun 93 17:16:03 +0200
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 93 17:16:03 +0200
Message-Id: <9306021516.AA04927@glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM>
From: RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (RQ Digest Maintainer)
To: RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (Daily automated RQ-Digest)
Reply-To: RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (RuneQuest Daily)
Subject: RuneQuest Daily, Wed, 02 Jun 1993, part 4
Precedence: junk
Status: OR
The RuneQuest Daily and RuneQuest Digest deal with the subjects of
Avalon Hill's RPG and Greg Stafford's world of Glorantha.
Send submissions and followup to "RuneQuest@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM",
they will automatically be included in a next issue. Try to change the
Subject: line from the default Re: RuneQuest Daily... on replying.
Selected articles may also appear in a regular Digest. If you
want to submit articles to the Digest only, contact the editor at
RuneQuest-Digest-Editor@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM.
Send enquiries and Subscription Requests to the editor:
RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (Henk Langeveld)
---------------------
From: gal502@huxley.anu.edu.au (Graeme Lindsell)
Subject: More Musings on Runes and the Invisible God...
Message-ID: <9306020746.AA01542@cscgpo.anu.edu.au>
Date: 2 Jun 93 11:48:01 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 921
>From: 100270.337@CompuServe.COM (Nick Brooke)
>__________________
>Richard C. Staats:
>
>> I always thought of the Invisible God as kind of a Great
>> Compromise creation, and in my campaigns, I treat sorcery
>> as a type of magic that only came into Glorantha as a
>> result of the Great Compromise. This flows along nicely
>> with some of the more recent articles on the use of Runic magic.
>
>I am in partial agreement with you here. Certainly, modern sorcery (as its
>more scientifically-minded practitioners describe it) couldn't have worked
>before Time, when the Elements etc. were still free-willed and there was no
>defined Natural Law within which the sorcerer could work. That said,
>Malkion came as Prophet of the Invisible God during the pre-Time Ice Age.
Taking a gander through GoG last night I noticed that the Invisible God's
runes are Law, Magic and Infinity (powerful combo). If the above is true
then before Time his runes must have omitted Law, or it was of less
importantance.
Sorcerers then may have gained their power/insight through their link with
the Infinity rune, rather than Law. Perhaps before Time Law was difficult
to relate to physical reality, while Infinity was easier to use than it is
now. This could even have been Hrestol's revelation: that Law, which
previously referred only to the Brithini social customs, now had a greater
relevance, but that infinity (freedom?) could now have social applications
as well...'course, I'm probably blowing smoke here.
Has there ever been a Time Rune, or is it (as I believe) part of the
Law rune?
Regarding Infinity: does anyone know why Flamal gets it in GoG? I can see
why Uleria and the Invisible God do, but Flamal doesn't seem any more
significant than many other gods.
>
>Perhaps the nature of his Supreme Being changed over time? Note that the
>One God has two aspects defined in the Prosopaedia, those of Creator and
>Invisible God. Malkion may have worshipped a different version of the One
>God from that which Hrestol contacted/discovered -- who, please remember,
>was only "needed" inside Time when the Old Malkioni Way could no longer
>satisfy worshippers (cf. CoT; Glorantha Book).
In this case, would the Infinity Rune be the Creator aspect, Law the
Invisible God?
PS in one of the earlier digests, an up to date list of the runes from
GoG was published. Can anyone tell me which one it was, so I can get it
from soda?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Graeme Lindsell Email: gal502@huxley.anu.edu.au
Research School of Chemistry Phone: (06) 249 3575
Australian National University Fax: (06) 249 0750
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------
From: Pierre.Boulet@lip.ens-lyon.fr (Pierre Boulet)
Subject: RQ4 mailing list
Message-ID: <9306020829.AA02636@lip.ens-lyon.fr>
Date: 2 Jun 93 12:29:48 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 922
hi,
I wanted to send a mail to the RQ4 playtest mailing list, but it came
back to me after 3 days of wandering in the net. So, I wrote to Loren
and asked what was the problem. Here is the answer:
> From LOREN@marketing.wharton.upenn.edu Tue Jun 1 19:40:28 1993
> To: Pierre.Boulet@lip.ens-lyon.fr (Pierre Boulet)
> Organization: Wharton Marketing Department
> Subject: Re: problem with the list
> Reply-To: loren@wmkt.wharton.upenn.edu
> Priority: normal
> X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail v2.3 (R5).
>
> I'm going to have to remedy the problems with the mail host program.
> We subnetted our department the other day and the mail host software
> doesn't seem to be able to deal with DNS hosts that are off the
> local subnet. I have questions/complaints pending to the author of
> the mail host software. If you would be so kind, please forward this
> information to the RQ daily. I'm too swamped with work to send mail
> to them right now.
>
>
> --
> +++++++++++++++++++++++23
> Loren Miller LOREN@wmkt.wharton.upenn.edu
> There's a thin line between TQM and Mutiny
>
hope it helps you,
o------------------------------------------------------------------o
| __ _ |
| /__/ . _ _ _ _ /_/ _ / _ /- |
| / / /_'/ / /_' /__/ /_/ /_/ / /_'/ pboulet@lip.ens-lyon.fr |
| |
| (* Reality is for those who can't face Science Fiction *) |
o------------------------------------------------------------------o
---------------------
From: henkl@holland.sun.com (Henk Langeveld - Sun Nederland)
Subject: Rune Smileys + Re: Malcolm: RQ3 sorcery patching
Message-ID: <1993Jun2.131446.27247@holland.sun.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1993 13:14:46 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 923
malcolm@num-alg-grp.co.uk (Malcolm Cohen) writes:
>The problems I have with RQ3 sorcery are:
> Free INT -- does not have the right "feel", effects are not nice
> Intensity skill -- chance of casting a spell of intensities >1 is the same
> for intensity 2 as for intensity 20.
> Duration skill -- chance of casting a spell of duration 1 year is the same
> as for 20 minutes.
I see what you're getting at...
>The basic solution to this is to allow any manipulation of the spells
>characteristics, not limited by "Free INT". Further, I consider each
>MP-worth's of manipulation (both increased intensity, increased range and
>increased duration) to increase the difficulty of the spell by 5% (i.e. reduce
>the spell-casting success roll).
So a sorceror casting damage boost 4 with a basic spell skill of 34% would
have a chance of 14% with this rule. I like it.
This looks like a very natural alternative to the "Free INT" rule, making
that obsolete (Sorry Joerg :-). Although I would still keep INT as a limit
to the number of known spells.
And now for something completely different:
Here's my list of Runic Smileys...
<>< - spirit
oK - man
[] - earth
+- - death
O - Sky
e - tales of the leaking moon... (sorry David ;-)
@ or
# - darkness I don't really like either
3@ or same problem...
3# - chaos
Any *original* suggestions for this list?
--
Henk | Henk.Langeveld@Sun.COM - Disclaimer: I don't speak for Sun.
oK[] | RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM
---------------------
From: henkl@holland.sun.com (Henk Langeveld - Sun Nederland)
Subject: Re: Bound spirits
Message-ID: <1993Jun2.132818.28100@holland.sun.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1993 13:28:18 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 924
Suggestion to limit the (ab)use of bound spirits:
Make it impossible for bound spirits to regenerate MPs
while being bound. This would have the same effect
as putting a slave collar on a person...
--
Henk | Henk.Langeveld@Sun.COM - Disclaimer: I don't speak for Sun.
oK[] | RuneQuest-Request@Glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM
---------------------
From: s.phillips@vme.gla.uk.ac
Subject: *** RE-SUBMITTED, RETURNED MAILING ***
Message-ID: <_2_Jun_93_14:48:26_A115B9@UK.AC.GLA.VME>
Date: 2 Jun 93 13:48:26 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 925
NOTE: This mailing was originally sent last Friday but was returned
as I forgot to allocate it a subject. (Thats what I get for trying
to be fancy, using a WP to edit my stuff then transferring to the
mainframe via Kermit. Why is nothing simple in this HiTec world?)
Still, a little late but ...
---------------------------------------------------------
FROM: HARRY SIGERSON (& SAM PHILLIPS)
---------------------------------------------------------
Hello all
It's me again. Just a few thoughts on the recent
dailies.
First MOB
When our lot played the Garhound Contest only two
PCs entered and they came bottom of the league. Two of
the others were too busy raking in the cash as bookies
for anything so noble as entering a competion.
Stikklebrixx won and poor Cary was second. Dejected he
joined the Pcs on an adventure only to end up on the
slab as it were in the Rabbit Hat Farm adventure.
"Thems the breaks" seemed to be the PCs sympathetic
opinion.
RE POW gain rolls.
I tend to come down on the side of role playing
for deciding on POW gain rolls. The Buller who chucks
a quick Disruption before closing to hand to hand fight-
ing obviously considers any success as fortunate and
opportunistic and of little spiritual importance. Why
should his god think any more of either? Magic cast for
an important aim, spirits bravely or desparately fought
and ceremonies conscientiously performed get POW gain
rolls. Power playing has never been a problem in my group
and the occasional player who has tried it has gotten
short thrift from the group as a whole. But the cry of
"Damn! Bad luck, you really deserved to get that one."
has never been a stranger. So I have decided to start
a policy of having one, two or three POW gain rolls each
adventure which the group as a whole will vote for.
Whoever played his character best or behaved most
spiritedly(pun completely intended) inmatters;religious,
magical,or otherwise unmundane (what a clumsy word). I
would allow normal POW gain rolls on top of this. But
since I consider overcoming the POW of someone weaker
than yourself a very unchallenging thing to do I tend
to ignore it for the purposes of POW gain roll check.
It's like the player I knew who once bought and killed
twenty chickens to get the needed experience points for
the next level! (Yes I once played Dire & Dreadful, but
it was years ago Your Honour, I was young and
impressionable.)
RE Humakt.
I once had a nomad Humakt he was vicious once battle
was joined but was slow to anger. Hated Chaos, though his
cult had no official axe to grind, because of his nomad
upbringing. His dedication to the Truth was simplistic
he spoke it as he saw it. Do not break with your, clan,
tribe or friends and damned be he who breaks with you.
Above all else honour your Sword Brother. HE was very
much a creation of his culture and had little if any
tolorance of his civilised bretheren, who were as strange
to him as the Lunars.
What ever happened to the idea of Humakti having
Sword Brothers? The person who guided you and advised
you on the way to Initiatehood and beyond. I had two
Humakti and they were sword brothers. Everyone
knew that if you took on one you took on both. They were
like the rock the group was anchored on, and it
generated some briliant moments! As well as some
genuinely sad moments when one of them was destroyed
by a powerful spirit.
Vis a vis Elemental and Stat Associations for Runic
Sorcery. (SIZ = Darkness, STR = Earth)
We tend to agree with Joerg on this matter but not
because Trolls are huge (plenty of creatures are big)
but because Darkness is huge, particularly when your in
the middle of it!
(Note: This doesn't mean we fully understand all this HiBrow stuff,
only that we like to throw our tuppence in so as to look like
we do and so feel part of something. Something special. <%?)> )
Joerg again: "luck rolls .. a concept I havent used once
in four years of .. Runequest)". Why not, Joerg? We have
always found them rather good for those situations when
only the favour of the gods can make a difference. How
would you GM a gamble? A fluke? Remembering to bring that
vital piece of equipment which you thought you had but
you forgot to write onto your character sheet?.. Mind
you, we may be guilty of the POW roll not to be spotted
(A major RQ heresy and a contradiction in terms).. But
then again maybe we haven't ever been that stupid.
-- POW*3 says we didn't.
Cheers all,
Harry'n'Sam
--Not Scotland but Sartar..