(Message inbox:10)
Return-Path: rowe@soda.berkeley.edu
Delivery-Date: Mon, 18 Oct 93 21:16:23 -0700
Received: from localhost.Berkeley.EDU by soda.berkeley.edu (5.65/KAOS-1)
id AA16480; Mon, 18 Oct 93 21:16:18 -0700
Resent-Message-Id: <9310190416.AA16480@soda.berkeley.edu>
Return-Path: sys@holland.sun.com
Delivery-Date: Tue, 17 Aug 93 22:37:02 -0700
Received: from plague-ether.Berkeley.EDU by soda.berkeley.edu (5.65/KAOS-1)
id AA29916; Tue, 17 Aug 93 22:36:55 -0700
Received: from Sun.COM by plague.Berkeley.EDU (5.65c/CHAOS)
id AA14729; Tue, 17 Aug 1993 22:23:35 -0700
Received: from snail.Sun.COM (snail.Corp.Sun.COM) by Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1)
id AA02152; Tue, 17 Aug 93 22:18:12 PDT
Received: from Holland.Sun.COM (isunnl) by snail.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1)
id AA00704; Tue, 17 Aug 93 22:18:01 PDT
Received: from glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM by Holland.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1e)
id AA13302; Wed, 18 Aug 93 07:17:55 +0200
Received: by glorantha.Holland.Sun.COM (4.1/SMI-4.1)
id AA29552; Wed, 18 Aug 93 07:15:32 +0200
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 93 07:15:32 +0200
Message-Id: <9308180515.AA29552@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, Wed, 18 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 21:16:17 -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: dickmj@essex.ac.uk (M Dicks)
Subject: Healing and stuff
Message-ID: <9308171039.AA02568@serdlc12>
Date: 17 Aug 93 15:39:08 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1397
Just thought I'd take time out to give my thoughts on this one.
I think we all agree that there is something wrong with RQ healing - it's too
easy, especially if you have an allied spirit - all you need do is have him
start to heal you 3sr's after you're hit, and because he doesn't have to prepare
the spell for future castings, he can keep going until you're back up to full
hit points without any signifiacnt time delay. With clever management, you can
have his first heal bring the damaged location back up to positive hp so that
you can use it again, and then worry about getting it back up to full hp.
I think that RQ2 had it right - unlimited healing allowed, but 5mr between
castings. This makes sense because the body is having it's natural healing
functions accelerated (at least, that's how I think of healing as working), and
so it needs time to adjust. By using this rule, the heal 6 spell becomes very
useful again, but you can still survive with a heal 2 (as long as you can get
out of the fight).
Another rule we use is that if a location is severed, then a heal spell that
will bring the location back up to 0 hp in one go is required to put it back on
(sometimes I think this is a bit harsh - comments?).
I think that people are forgetting that, according to the rules, all healing
must take place within 10 mr of the wound being inflicted - after thet, no more
healing will affect the wound. This of course makes the 5mr between healing rule
a real bastard! it gets even worse if it's 5mr between castings even if on
different locations - if your left arm is dropped to 0 hp, do you heal it and
risk not being able to heal a mortal blow, or do you risk not being able to
parry? Dilema!
And finally...
>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.
I don;t think that this is really relevant because, as I recall, healing is a
touch spell, and if you can touch your enemy with your hand, what is to stop you
from just thwacking him one round the head?!
Any thoughts?
-Arganth
---------------------
From: glidedw@sfsuvax1.sfsu.edu (Donald Wilton)
Subject: glorantha playing and alternatives!
Message-ID:
Date: 16 Aug 93 20:36:38 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1398
In the most recent rq daily, I noticed a complaint that glorantha doesn't
have the juice to keep going. While I liked Glorantha, I prefer
alternatives, since I dislike the whole good/evil, or Order/Chaos concept
to begin with. While we can't make official versions of any particular
game, no reason exists why we can't make our own world. If we come up with
a set of towns, monsters, etc. that exists as an alternate, through using
email, to mix our various experiences, we'll create something that catches
the sales gleam at Chaosium. while I don't know if we would get paid, we
might get to the "official (or is that officious?) Internet World status.
Any person could get the freeware world for RQ, and add to it. If enough
people show a preference for a particular thing, the market tends to
follow, or so I've heard.
Ideas sell rpgs, more that covers, unless you have a die hard attitude.
D&D trolls, have yet to understand that rq has a greater grasp on the
interplay of acting and role existence, that their hack game. Inherent
realism within the idea of magic, to express real mythological structures,
have greater value, to deal with the idea behind rpging, that simplistic
rules (I hope, 'cause this sure sounds verbose ;> )
Create an alias of the people who respond the Daily, in faovr of this, and
express your limitations regarding size of email. We go from there.
>From this, I apply myself to creating the basis of "my" RQ3 rules game,
that expresses what I want to. If you like it, vote with email, and I'll
send out the stuff. The official rq3 daily doesn't have to get filled up
with modules now does it }:> )
!________________________________________________________________
Rational vs. Irrational.
Irrational has good and bad. the very good seems Lunar, though touched
with a hint of Xiola Umbar. Illumination brings the power to perform
sorcery, as per Lunar rules. At the other end, would exist the Trolls, and
at the bottom of their pits, modified chaos. This exists as their
creation, culled from the horrors of the human mind. i think of the ooze
creature that killed a star on Star Trek. It stores up power from those it
eats, and releases it in the form of "gifts."
The alternative to all of this I call "rational." I don't feel that they
necessarily have more rationality in them, though they tend to avoid
rotten with bad luck adventuring. they have all of the attributres of RQ
Deluxe sorcerers. their society has existed as a roman Republic, without
slavery, or female inequality, for (well, since whenever). As atheists,
they draw mistrust. I rule that sorcery creates and maintains an atheist
outlook. Immortality, though it can occur on the spirit planes, occurs for
them only on the material. Religion seems needed to cross over
permanently, though visits happen with unfortunate frequency. They do not
possess Tap. Rationals may purchase Immortality, since trade encourages
neighbors not to kill them for the blasphemy of atheism. Insiders only
need apply, though you can trade with them.
!------------------------------------------------------------
I use the map of Pangea, the super continent. The spirit plane and all
others conform to this. The more irrational (in relation to modern
Einsteinian physics you get) d r i f t out of contact with existence
overhead, due to the Wars of the Gods. the amount of aid you can obtain,
depends on the amount of spirit plane overhead. this describes the basis
of War, and alliance of the Gods. Your character arrives when the alliance
shifts. Call it an eclipse of the sun, directly overhead, that causes all
religions to lose contact with the higher planes. this in turn gives the
Rationals great power, to find and destroy the Great Works. Not all agree
with this action, for enemy status brings a loss of trade. the split
creates the two camps of Rationals, the Intransigent, and the City. Cities
are walled with spells, and impossible to destroy (well, you know...).
Intransigent (did I get the spelling right?). the baddies live in Tall
spiral citadels, often buttressed by "creatures, manufactured from the
remains of men." Citadels try to pierce the planes and cause problems,
sometimes they do. They average a 1/2 kilometer in diameter, several 1/2 K
in heights....if you see a spire, to the clouds, and you take over 3 hours
to get there, turn back.
Any takers?
---------------------
From: JARDINE@RMCS.CRANFIELD.AC.UK
Subject: Criticals, Specials, Fumbles and E Prime
Message-ID: <9308171136.AA07604@Sun.COM>
Date: 17 Aug 93 11:37:00 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1399
I could n't give a monkey's about E Prime, E hat or even Log of e.
But if you are having problems with critical tables etc. try this simple
maths:
Critical chance is equal to current success chance divided by 20.
Special chance is equal to current success chance divided by 5.
N.B. round mathmatically in the above two cases.
A Fumble is any roll greater than or equal to 95 + the critical chance,
or 00 in any event.
I haven't got a table with me so that I cannot check to see if these figures
are entirely accurate arround the edges but they are close enough to use
without really effecting game balance and it saves all that tedious mucking
about with tables. Also, it improves your divide by 5 and 20 skill (these
are both really easy to do so give it a try).
-----
Lewis
-----
P.S. Note that if your skill is less than 10% the above give 0% critical and 95%fumble where the table gives 1% and 96%, but thats Chaosium for you've always
got a chance no matter how small.
---------------------
From: stafford@VAX2.Winona.MSUS.EDU (John Stafford)
Subject: Re: Chaos(ium)
Message-ID: <01H1UFD3A85U002ENV@VAX2.Winona.MSUS.EDU>
Date: 17 Aug 93 02:03:59 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1400
While the issue of chaos in Glorantha is significant,
the triva buffs might like to know that Greg came up
with 'Chaosium' while living near the coliseum in
the Bay area while experiencing creative 'chaos' in
his life (family, Glorantha, etc.) It was one of
those names that seemed appropriate in all respects.
---------------------
From: JARDINE@RMCS.CRANFIELD.AC.UK
Subject: Questions for the Wise
Message-ID: <9308171546.AA00703@Sun.COM>
Date: 17 Aug 93 15:52:00 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1401
Two Questions which might provoke a bit of thought and discussion (especially
the second one).
Does Orlanth provide Flight reusably to Issaries and Valind or is it *one-use*
as it is for Storm Voices?
Create Market causes damage, so why does Issaries give it to Chalana Arroy
cultists?!?!
---------------------
From: nrobinso@sirius.UVic.CA (Neil Robinson)
Subject: Magical Healing
Message-ID: <34438.nrobinso@sirius.uvic.ca>
Date: 17 Aug 93 17:33:56 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1402
I think I agree that magical healing is by far too powerful as it stands
in RQ, at least for low level groups. The simple 'highest spell affects
an area' will help tone it down. We often run out of healing after a
combat, but are quickly brought up to snuff overnight once our POW is
recovered. The only thing that has really slowed up down for any
length of time are wraiths with their stat-draining.
Oh, and we make extensive use of potions, when we can get them.
We find that one-use divine magic can sure improve your healing ability,
but you only use it when a character is facing death. And only a few
of our party have the POW to spare for such sacrifices.
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: ddunham@radiomail.net (David Dunham , via RadioMail)
Subject: Re: Healing Once
Message-ID: <9308171703.AA25015@radiomail.net>
Date: 17 Aug 93 17:00:32 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1403
>From: wadsley@chipmunk.cita.utoronto.ca
>Subject: One heal per wound rule.
>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.
True, this is a problem; perhaps the larger heal replaces the smaller heal.
In practice, however, an enemy is unlikely to stop in the middle of a fight
and heal someone.
By the way, Elric also allows only one Heal spell per wound (and that's
only of d3 points!).
>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.
a) this is exactly the point -- adventuring every day with no time out for
healing is a little silly.
b) my rule is that you have to heal a wound within some time period, or you
can't do it at all.
>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.
Right, see above.
>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.
RuneQuest allows multiple attempts. (Pendragon, however, does not.)
P.S. I've seen a couple requests for more info about PenDragon Pass (where
I came up with the heal-once rule). An older version was summarized in
Tales of the Reaching Moon 6. I plan to submit something to the Digest at
some point.
David Dunham
---------------------
From: ddunham@radiomail.net (David Dunham , via RadioMail)
Subject: Re: Dorastor here
Message-ID: <9308171703.AA25036@radiomail.net>
Date: 17 Aug 93 17:00:51 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1404
>From: f6ri@midway.uchicago.edu (charles gregory fried)
>Subject: Dorastor?!
>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!
Yes, I've seen it, and it looks good. Excellent maps and graphics (the
illustrations of Ralzakark completely changed my conception of him). Great
nasty stuff, and a nice low-level stead-based campaign. I haven't read the
final draft in its entirety yet, but I think this is another top-notch
Gloranthan product.
---------------------
From: stormbull@cix.compulink.co.uk (Tim Westlake)
Subject: A question
Message-ID:
Date: 17 Aug 93 17:29:22 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1405
Dear RuneQuesters
as someone who has been away from Rune Quest for a long time and has
recently re-joined the fold, I am slightly puzzled by the path that the
game has taken whilst I wasnt watching it! I know the Avalon Hill
aquired the rights to the game and have produced RQ III and a lot of
supliments, what I dont understand is the relationship between RQ III
and RQ IV. Also, I would like to pick up a number of the RQ III
suppliments, but as my rules are all RQ II is this worth while or should
I get a set of the RQ III rules as well and will these be redundant in 6
months to a years time due to RQ IV ......
help, I think I'm drowning ...... :)
Tim
---------------------
From: jarec@cix.compulink.co.uk (Simon Basham)
Subject: Healing
Message-ID:
Date: 17 Aug 93 18:16:02 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1406
Personally I believe that the only way to go with Healing is to limit the
availability of Healing magic. I did briefly try limiting it to one Heal
per wound but quickly found that the necesary book keeping detracted from
the game.
In my present game only one member of the party has any form of Healing
magic and this provides a wonderful piece of party integration as well as
limiting Healing. One member of the group who came from another RQ campaign
did try walking into a Chalana Arroy Temple waving lots of money and asking
to be tought Heal 4 only to be politely told that they only had Heal 3
available and there was a 2 season waiting list and anyway your not an
initiate etc...
Also I don't know if anyone uses this but I force people performing magical
Healing on other to make a POW vs. POW roll. I can't remember if this is
by the book or not but it sure places a new slant on things.
First Aid...Well I always limit its use to a few rounds after combat, after
that the wound has started to close up a bit naturaly. Instead of First
Aid I always interpret it as immediate damage limitation. I certainly never
allow its use after Magical Healing.
Also for all you RQIV junkies, I don't use the non lethal damage rules.
The additional book keeping just isn't worth it IMHO.
Jarec@CIX.Compulink.Co.UK
"May the wind be ever at your backs"
---------------------
From: f6ri@midway.uchicago.edu (charles gregory fried)
Subject: Healing; GenCon
Message-ID:
Date: 17 Aug 93 20:16:30 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1407
Greg Fried here.
The discussion of overly gross healing magic brings me to a fix that I have
mentioned before here for magic-overkill, but I will repeat agian now for the
benefit (?) of those who may not have seen it before:
Whenever a character wishes to learn a spell (spirit, divine or sorcery --
but here we are discussing lots of Healing), the character must employ
his/her POW to overcome a quantity related to the number of points in the
spell sought. Use the following formula to find the quantity to be overcome:
(x + y) squared = the quantity to be overcome by the character's POW to gain
the spell. "x" = the points in the spell (e.g., Healing 6 would give a value
of 6 for x). "y" should be assigned a positive or negative value, depending
on factors relating to how easy or hard it is for a member of a cult to learn
a certain kind of spell. I recommend a numerical scale of -2 to +2, to be
assigned on the basis of whether the cultist's god is "associated" with
spells of the kind the character is attempting to gain (y = -2), or
"friendly" to such spells (y = -1), or "neutral" (y = 0), or hostile (y =
+1), or "enemy" (y = +2). For example, Chalana Arroy is "associated" with
healing; a character would only have to overcome a 16 to gain Helaing 6. I
would say Humakt and such are "hostile" to healing, and would find it hard to
get more than 3 or 4 points. Earth cults would be "friendly" to healing,
Orlanth "neutral", etc.
Failing to overcome the spell means you failed to learn it, must still pay
all expenses incured in learning (and spend the necessary time!), but you may
attempt it all over again. The GM might allow the character to sacrifice
permanent POW to gain a more favorable y value.
Joerg worked out an algorythm for the value to be overcome, and if anyone
wants this more sophisticated method, let me know.
Lewis, I think this system improves on your sensible ideas by not assigning
fixed parameters to spell learning.
James, for First Aid, I allow only one attempt by each healer. A second
healermay make an attempt after the first fails, but if the second healer has
a First Aid skill less than or equal to the first healer, the second healer
must roll a critical to succeed. If the second healer is better, subtract
the first healer's skill from the second's before the second makes the first
aid attempt! This system can be used for other skills that your players may
'gang up' on you for, such as searching, tracking, devising. This fix
approximates the fact that if one person tries to do something and fails,
it's unlikely that anyone except someone more skilled will succeed
afterwards.
---
Neil Robinson:
If Dorstor (yes, it's out) would get to you so slow, why not order from AH
directly? Toll free: 1-800-999-3222 (US funds only; got plastic?!).
---
Anyone:
I'm thinking of motoring up to GenCon on Saturday from Chicago. If anyone in
Chicago (sorry -- I'm not going out of my way) would like to share expenses
of travel, email me personally.
GF out.
---------------------
From: mace@lum.asd.sgi.com (Rob Mace)
Subject: Re: Rules, rules, rules
Message-ID: <9308190112.AA20001@lum.asd.sgi.com>
Date: 18 Aug 93 11:12:40 GMT
X-RQ-ID: 1408
Neil Robinson writes:
> 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!
It gets faster with practice.
> 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.
No. For standard RQ2 it should be:
Attack chance = 240 - 50 = 190%
Parry chance = 150 - (190 - 100) = 60%
You did two things wrong.
- Parry greater then 100 does not reduce attack.
- You should use the final modified attack chance when determining the
reduction of parry. (I don't think this is explicitly spelled out in
RQ2 but I think it is what they meant.)
> 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.
Just play a while and you will probably learn to do the divide by 5 and 20
off the top of your head. If this does not work for you then just multiply
the hundreds by 5 for crits, 20 for specials and look the rest up on the
table.
One mod that we have used is that your special/crit chance is based off of
your modified attack chance minus any amount you used to reduce a parry.
So you can decide how much you are working to get by their parry and how
much you are working to get a special/crit.
Currently we are using a different system for high level combat.
Basically you can divide results into four categories.
0 = Failure
1 = Normal Success
2 = Special Success
3 = Critical Success
Parry Result
0 1 2 3
A 0 A a b c
t
t 1 C B a b
a
c 2 D C B a
k
3 E D C B
A = Miss
B = Parried normal hit
C = Normal hit
D = Special hit
E = Critical hit
a = Miss and if applicable parrying item does normal damage to attacking item
b = Miss and if applicable parrying item does special damage to attacking item
c = Miss and if applicable parrying item does critical damage to attacking item
Fumbles are treated as failures for the purpose of this table and the
fumble result is applied.
This type of rule tends to speeds up high level combats.
> 2nd Question:
> Can you talk while engaged in spirit combat? If no, can you still talk
> to your allied spirit?
In RQ2 mind links are temporarily broken so you can't talk to your allied
spirit through it. I don't know about talking out loud.
Here are some rules we use:
- In the pow verses pow roll you must both succeed and roll less then 50
to take power from the other. This flattens the bell curve of spirit
combat results. In other words it makes the result less predictable.
- Spirit protection spells can be cast on someone in spirit combat but
it has no effect on any spirit combats currently in progress. In
other words the spirit is already past the defenses.
- People engaged by spirits can do other actions(i.e. swing sword,
cast spell etc.) in any round in which they choose not to attack in
spirit combat. The spirit can still and probably will attack. In
other words you can make one type of offensive action each round.
This allows people with high pow to ignore and not be tied up by
wimpy spirits.
Rob Mace