(Message inbox:8)
Return-Path: rowe@soda.berkeley.edu
Delivery-Date: Mon, 18 Oct 93 21:15:56 -0700
Received: from localhost.Berkeley.EDU by soda.berkeley.edu (5.65/KAOS-1)
id AA16434; Mon, 18 Oct 93 21:15:51 -0700
Resent-Message-Id: <9310190415.AA16434@soda.berkeley.edu>
Return-Path: sys@holland.sun.com
Delivery-Date: Mon, 16 Aug 93 22:39:20 -0700
Received: from plague-ether.Berkeley.EDU by soda.berkeley.edu (5.65/KAOS-1)
id AA13002; Mon, 16 Aug 93 22:39:15 -0700
Received: from Sun.COM by plague.Berkeley.EDU (5.65c/CHAOS)
id AA03677; Mon, 16 Aug 1993 22:25:52 -0700
Received: from snail.Sun.COM (snail.Corp.Sun.COM) by Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1)
id AA04049; Mon, 16 Aug 93 22:17:12 PDT
Received: from Holland.Sun.COM (isunnl) by snail.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1)
id AA22957; Mon, 16 Aug 93 22:17:02 PDT
Received: from glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM by Holland.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1e)
id AA28803; Tue, 17 Aug 93 07:16:55 +0200
Received: by glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1)
id AA20019; Tue, 17 Aug 93 07:15:41 +0200
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 93 07:15:41 +0200
Message-Id: <9308170515.AA20019@glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM>
From: RuneQuest-Request@glorantha.holland.sun.com (RQ Digest Maintainer)
To: RuneQuest@glorantha.holland.sun.com (Daily automated RQ-Digest)
Subject: RuneQuest Daily, Tue, 17 Aug 1993, part 1
Reply-To: RuneQuest@glorantha.holland.sun.com (RuneQuest Daily)
Sender: RuneQuest-Request@glorantha.holland.sun.com
Precedence: junk
Resent-To: appel@soda.berkeley.edu
Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1993 21:15:49 -0700
Resent-From: Eric Rowe
Status: O
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: wadsley@chipmunk.cita.utoronto.ca
Subject: One heal per wound rule.
Message-ID: <9308140606.AA11605@hawk.cita.utoronto.ca>
Date: 14 Aug 93 06:06:07 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1387
Restricting the use of magical healing to once per wound is very
attractive but it has problems.
Firstly, there is that nasty trick mentioned by Richard McAllister about
casting heal 1 on a wounded enemy. A bit like Seal Wound if I recall
correctly.
Secondly, I would hate to see P.C.'s sitting around with wounds waiting
until the healer got enough mp back to cast a heal of the correct
magnitude.
How about making it like the magical shield spells? - Only the
largest version cast counts. Thus a heal 3 cast on a wound with
heal 1 already cast on it only heals 2 more points of damage for a
total of 3 points. This way you could consistently cast Heal Wound
or Heal Body later as well.
As a related issue: How do people manage First Aid as a skill? Do
you allow repeated attempts until success occurs, one attempt per
user per wound until success or what? I don't like the idea of only
one attempt per wound. Even if the first attempt at bandaging was
botched, then perhaps another character could see that to be the case
and do a better job.
James.
---------------------
From: lstead@access.digex.net (Lew Stead)
Subject: Healing & Such
Message-ID: <199308141503.AA06314@access.digex.net>
Date: 14 Aug 93 07:03:31 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1388
> i also get the impression that healing-6 would qualify as a mondo
> spell, which should not be available to all. it takes away from the
> meaningfulness of a village having a healer, or the tribe having a
> medicine man, if such spells are easily obtained.
Well, a spell that takes up 1/2 of the average available INT isn't exactly a
slouch. And even if many adventurer parties have someone with it, that's
not a large number of people in the whole world.
> your one-heal rule might help toward fixing that, but i have a
> question ( rules not in front of me ): Does "First Aid" interfere
> with magical healing? I don't recall.
We added the no double healing rule to the RQ2 even before it appeared in
the errata. The logic was that if you applied first aid or magical healing
for two points in the arm, you've stopped the bleeding and bandaged or
stitched the skin. However, to heal the chip in the bone and knit the
muscle back together you needed something more powerful.
> An obvious way to increase RQ shelf presence would be to re-issue
> the old RQ2 titles unchanged with the original art and all. Why not?
Because they've already released most of them with new art and titles.
Really as a Gloranthan junkie who took an almost 10 year hiatus, the only
two new adventure supplements to appear in that period have been Sun Country
and Dorastor.
--
!--------------------------------------------------------------------------!
! Lewis Stead -=- The Raven Kindred of Asatru Southern Hearth !
! Internet:lstead@access.digex.net CI$:73777,2236 AoL:Moonrise1 !
! Snailmail to 11160 Veirs Mill Rd L15-175; Wheaton MD 20902 !
!--------------------------------------------------------------------------!
---------------------
From: drcheng@sales.stern.nyu.edu (David Cheng)
Subject: RQ-Con Booklets
Message-ID:
Date: 15 Aug 93 02:33:13 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1389
A bulletin I hope you'll find interesting:
The first of the RuneQuest-Con booklets are in the mail. Today,
I mailed the non-USA requests. Domestic booklets will be delivered
one of two ways: either with your copy of _Tales of the Reaching
Moon #10_, or individually (for non-Tales subscribers). Please
look for your booklet in the mailbox soon.
For those of you who don't subscribe to Tales, and who haven't
contacted me yet, please consider doing so. There's so much good
stuff being offered that I had to use an 8 pt font size.
Highlights (apologies to those who've seen this already):
* Home of the Bold, a 75+ player Live Action game set in Boldhome, 1624
* 10 RQ Tournaments
* 10 'official' seminars, including Stafford speaking about HeroQuesting,
a Gloranthan Cultural discussion, RQ Rules panel, and more
* Assorted Cthulhu, Pendragon, and EPT/Tekumel games
* _Masters of Luck and Death_, the HeroQuesting boardgame that
Chaosium never brought to print
* Live Action Trollball
* Orlanthi Storytelling Contest
* "Eat at Geo's" feast (including Troll Drinks)
... and a whole lot more.
RuneQuest-Con will be held January 14-16, 1994, in Baltimore, MD.
Please contact me for a pre-reg booklet. I'll be at GenCon in a
few days. You can't miss me: I'm the guy carrying the sign that
says "Ask me about RuneQuest-Con." Please come up and introduce
yourself.
*David Cheng drcheng@sales.stern.nyu.edu / d.cheng@genie.geis.com
Ask me about RuneQuest-Con! (212) 472-7752 [before midnight]
---------------------
From: f6ri@midway.uchicago.edu (charles gregory fried)
Subject: Re: RuneQuest Daily, Sat, 14 Aug 1993, part 1
Message-ID:
Date: 15 Aug 93 09:45:44 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1390
---------------------
From: f6ri@midway.uchicago.edu (charles gregory fried)
Subject: Dorastor?!
Message-ID:
Date: 15 Aug 93 10:34:59 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1391
Greg Fried here.
Dorastor?!! Can that be right?! Ken Rolston said January! Anyone else seen
it? I'm perplexed! If it's true, so much the better for the pace of
publication!
----
Donald Wilton:
Who says that Chaos = irrationality or adherence to the laws (!) of
contemporary chaos theory? I agree that it's nice to give players of
chaotic charaters something to go on, but is modern RL science the place to
start? (And I wasn't sure what the verb TO BE has to do with chaos ...)
Chaos in GLorantha includes a range of manifestations from Porchango (an
obviously 'chaotic' god), to Omphalam and Nysalor, who manifest no obvious
'irrationality' -- quite the contrary. Previous Gloranthan philosophy has
intimated that such diverse phenomena indicate that Chaos cannot be
understood as simple randomness or unpredictabilty....
BTW, the word chaos derives from the Greek, and the oldest reference to it I
know is in Hesiod's Theogony, line 116: And truly the first to be born was
Chaos, and then wide-bosomed Earth, a firm seat for all things for ever.
In Greek, chaos doesn't mean random disturbedness, but rather a yawning
abyss, a gap.... Sorry for the pedantry! Just stuff to muse on!
----
I guess I must sheepishly agree -- after an initial burst of enthusiasm --
that 4 new publications a year just isn't enough. And, moreover, I agree
that while I might love the new publications, they are really for RQ experts,
and not so good for seducing new converts. So what kind of noise should we
be making? Well, I've been communicating with a RQ fan in Italy. He
believes the RQLite would be crucial there for conquering the hords of D&D
barbarians, and I think the same is true here, with a wealth of modules to be
played with these accessible rules. Let's face it: we may love GLorantha,
but you practically need a degree in Gloranthan studies to make immediate use
of some of the recent publications. This is good for the die-hard fans, but
in the long run, the game will fail. We need to raise our voices for a RQ
that will capture new markets, without abandoning the Glorantha that makes it
more than just another set of rules.
GF out.
---------------------
From: paul@phyast.pitt.edu (Paul Reilly)
Subject: Re: RuneQuest Daily, Sat, 14 Aug 1993, part 1
Message-ID: <9308152111.AA00509@minerva.phyast.pitt.edu>
Date: 15 Aug 93 21:11:18 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1392
Paul Reilly here.
Do we have anyone else on the list in the Pittsburgh area?
All for now (thesis calling),
paul
---------------------
From: s.phillips@gla.ac.uk
Subject: RuneCzar,PenDragon Pass,RQ Shelf presence...
Message-ID: <16_Aug_93_13:06:57_A10494@UK.AC.GLA.VME>
Date: 16 Aug 93 12:06:57 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1393
Hello from Sam Phillips..
I want to wish Ken Rolston all the best. Despite all harsh words printed
on the daily, many of which have been directed (rightly or wrongly) at him
we all realise and appreciate a man who loves Runequest.
-- Keep lovin' Runequest!..
PenDragon Pass.. Tell me more. I am interested in all things Lite.
RQ Shelf presence.. I for one would not want to sacrifice quality at the
expense of quality. At the end of the day the quality HAS been maintained
in all areas of RQ material (apart from some artwork). This is important and
should be hailed as a force of light in this world of darkness. We wouldn't
want TSR running RQ would we!..
(--arghh! for quality read quantity. No not on that one on the other one.
please forgive me. This old terminal cannot delete past the current line.)
Cheers! Sam. x
Not Scotland but Sartar.
p.s. I mean no disrespect to the Uz and other creatures of darkness in the
above statement. I do not speak for Yelm or any of his pantheon.
thankyou.
---------------------
From: JARDINE@RMCS.CRANFIELD.AC.UK
Subject: Healing
Message-ID: <9308161223.AA13857@Sun.COM>
Date: 16 Aug 93 12:29:00 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1394
Ref: X-RQ-ID: 1378 (David Dunham), 1380 (John Medway) & 1385 (Rich ?)
I agree with the general effort to clamp down on healing magic,
it is unfortunate that it tends to D&Dize the game so that non-leathal
wounds are trivialized and are no more than a passing inconvenience
provided that the M.P.s hold out.
I agree with the no-more-than one heal per wound philosophy.
But why insist that the first spell takes precidence when all
through RQ the general rule is that the more powerful spell takes precidence.
Thus a bladesharp 2 followed by a bladesharp 3 cast on the same weapon
results in a bladesharp 3. Why not follow the same approach with healing?
This kills off the gross powerplay of casting healing 1 at your opponent
to *seal his wounds* and it simply and elegantly allows the only one heal per wound rule to work. Also it allows characters to quickly cast a heal 2 on
a fallen comrade to stop them bleeding to death and allow the party healer
to finish curing A before moving on to B. So why does everyone get so up
tight when this is the obvious and simple solution. (Rich are you sure that
the one heal per wound rule was dropped from RQ3 for this reason, because if
so then the designers didn't think very hard.)
First Aid
I believe that first aid should augment both magical and natural
healing as this lessen the reliance on magic and encourages the Staffordian
low healing approach. I personally think that magical healing screws up
later attempts at first aid though so you cannot first aid a wound after it has been magically healed.
However on the down side I believe that first aid should not work so fast and that the HPs regained through first aid should only return at a rate of one point per day. BUT they should still count against death and permanent maiming
This way you will see adventurers hanging on the brink of death for a
couple of days having to be tended and nursed back to health. This would
have a very far reaching effect on the way characters actted as unless they
had access to heal 6, heal wound or heal body they would be more reluctant
to risk major wounds, whereas minor scrapes could be quickly patched.
Availablity of healing magic
I would like to see the availablity of healing magic restricted by
cult far more, at the momment cults either have or have-not access to the
heal spirit magic spell. This binary cut is unrealistic, it would be much
easier for a Chalana Arroy initiate to get access to big heals like 6 or more
than it would be for a Humakti or Orlanthi. Thus I propose a system where
the maximum value of a heal spell was limited by cult.
Example:
Chalana Arroy Unlimited (but remember that spell spirit have d3 POW
per point of spell so 10 to 12 is the practical
maximum even with spirit screen and some luck).
Humakt Heal 2
Orlanth Heal 4
Ernalda Heal 6
Xiola Umbar Heal 8
etc.
Generally Warrior cults with healing will have only from 2 to 4 points
available depending on myths and runic associations (why should Humakt have
any healing at all?). Generally under this system parties would value Ernalda
and Xiola Umbar cultists much more than they do at the moment.
Availablity of other Spirit Magic
The above concept could be extended to all other variable spirit magic
spells, such as bladesharp, protection, shimmer, etc.
Example:
Cult Bladesharp Protection Strength
Humakt Unlimited 8 4
Orlanth 8 8 4
Storm Bull 6 6 Unlimited
Anyway the above are just suggestions from the top of my head but I
think that the general principle of limitation is very valid and deserves
further thought and discussions.
-----
Lewis
-----
---------------------
From: nrobinso@sirius.UVic.CA (Neil Robinson)
Subject: Rules, rules, rules
Message-ID: <52467.nrobinso@sirius.uvic.ca>
Date: 16 Aug 93 22:34:17 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1395
We've recently started a high-level campaign with the main characters
being Rune Lord-Priests. Basically it gives our regular GM a breather.
Suddenly we have characters loaded with Rune magic and hordes of
Battle magic spells. A five-person combat (3 PCs, 2 scorpion-broos)
takes hours - and we are having to deal with new rules questions all
the time. Good thing combats are rare!
Here's an example:
A PC attacking with at 240% (he was Berserk at the time) attacks
the broo, who is parrying at (150%) and has a DB of 50%.
Attack chance = 240 - 50 (from parry > 100) - 50 = 140%
Parry chance = 150 - 140 (from attack > 100) = 10%
Is this right? We play RQ II with some III thrown in as we see fit.
Also, we are basing the specials/crits on the final chance to hit - which
is fine but means far more math (Anyone with a good DOS-Windows-OS/2
RQ combat system out there?) to work it out all the time.
2nd Question:
Can you talk while engaged in spirit combat? If no, can you still talk
to your allied spirit?
3rd Question:
Anyone know why Humakt doesn't provide 'Free Ghost'?
Last Request:
Can someone provide a brief synopsis of Dorastar: Land of Doom?
It will take a few months until the local gaming store gets it. If
it wasn't for me, I don't think they would carry ANY RQ.
Neil Robinson | "Never underestimate the power of human
nrobinso@sirius.uvic.ca | stupidity." - L. Long
2996 Dysart Rd. Victoria B.C. V9A 2K2 (604) 385-1642
---------------------
From: jacobus@sonata.cc.purdue.edu
Subject: Re: RuneQuest Daily, Sat, 14 Aug 1993, part 1, especially e'
Message-ID: <9308162350.AA10088@sonata.cc.purdue.edu>
Date: 16 Aug 93 13:49:57 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1396
I couldn't resist replying to the following:
>My studies in sematics informed me of E prime. Alfred Korzybski invented
>the E prime rule in 1933. E prime states that you can only state
>irrational things in sentences with the use of the verb TO BE. You also
>can't state static things, you can only state things inherently agreeing
>with modern chaos theory.
>I feel that chaotic or illuminated players that use the rule, will find
>the experience different enough, that playing these kinds of characters
>more enjoyable. I have refrained from the verb in this missal, as I shall
>in future offerings.
While the above may sound plausible to those who have not actually studied
linguistics, epistemics, and epistimology (the super-set of "semantics") in any
depth, deeper examination reveals a flaw in the basic theory of E'--that
irrational statements require the use of some form of "to be". I quote: "You
can only state irrational things in sentences with the use of the verb "to be".
However, for example, I can state the following: The queen of England controls
the international cocaine market. Henry Kissinger directs day-to-day
administration while Elizabeth oversees broad policy.
Another example: We can readily blame the Jews for all of the world's
problems. They secretly control all world finances and as I speak, they extend
their subterranean empire into the very heart of virtue, corrupting all which
stands in their way.
Another example: I possess all property rights to the throne of France. The
French government must surrender all powers to me. The title of Dauphin and
all rights pertaining thereto belong to me and nobody else.
Another example: I can fly. Sometimes I grow wings and call myself Avanti.
At these times, beams of radiant light emerge from my heart to bathe the
faithful.
Another example: God made me his Only Begotten Son to walk the Earth in the
21st century. Follow me and obey my every order and salvation belongs to you.
Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
E' (to give the painfully anal spelling) has some benefits, but more as mental
aerobics and gymnastics or as an exercise to clarify and broaden writing style
than to prevent "irrational thought". As I have eminently demonstrated, one
CAN make irrational statement without ever using the verb "to be".
In other words, relegate E' to the scrap heap of cute crackpot ideas of the
1930s.
PS: Korzybski did not know everything there is to know about language use, and
fell very far short in many linguistic points, ESPECIALLY when dealing with the
verb "to be". He appears to displayed gross incompetence in distinguishing
between the various functions the verb possesses: adjectival, as a modifier
(which would make "to be" function as would a suffix in a more inflected
language than English), etc., in addition to the "identification" function
which Korzybski obsessed over.