Re: Re: Direct RQ to HQ Battle Magic/Common Magic conversions?

From: Peter Larsen <plarsen_at_...>
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:20:55 -0500


At 01:53 PM 2/23/2004 +0000, Ian Cooper wrote:
>Agent Groove wrote:
> > Does it make sense to the members of this list that spells like
> >Bladesharp and so on would be Spells (as in, common Wizardly magic)
> >that would have originated in Esrolia?

>I don't think the spells from Esrolia is the
>way to go for all battle magic - it emphasises one magic type too
>much. Sure one or two might have such a source but postulating that
>it is the prime source seems a little over the top. My preference is
>to localize Heortling common magic, not to globalize it. YGMV.

         I realize it's hardly a direct RQ conversion scheme, but a lot of what used to be battle magic probably is subsumed in Combat Affinities. So your average Destor initiate is often augmenting Close Combat for +2 or +3 rather than improvising feats. Obviously, if you worship a non-fighting god, you might pick up a Common Magic trick or two to "round out" your character, but a theist who expected to do a lot of fighting would be wise to get a Combat Affinity from somewhere. I may have read it wrong, but it looks like initiates and devotees can now buy affinities from other subcults without the time commitment, making it easier to have broad magic (the devotee won't get the feats, though) -- assuming you worship a god who fills a variety of roles. (If you're a Humakti whose bored with the affinities Killin' Things, Killin' More Things, and Killin' Things Which Should Be Dead Already, you're pretty much out of luck; you will have to settle for Tellin' People How to Kill Things and Findin' Things to Kill.)

Peter Larsen

Powered by hypermail