From: owner-runequest-rules@ (RuneQuest-Rules-Digest) To: runequest-rules-digest@lists.MPGN.COM Subject: RuneQuest-Rules-Digest V1 #11 Reply-To: runequest-rules@mpgn.com Sender: owner-runequest-rules@ Errors-To: owner-runequest-rules@ Precedence: bulk RuneQuest-Rules-Digest Wednesday, February 4 1998 Volume 01 : Number 011 RuneQuest is a trademark of Avalon Hill Games. All Rights Reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS [RQ-RULES] [runequest-rules] Fetch Re: [RQ-RULES] Vows/Illumination [RQ-RULES] Shades/Fetch/Illumination Re: [RQ-RULES] Elementals (mostly)/Illumination(not much) [RQ-RULES] Fatigue Re: [RQ-RULES] Fetches, Illuminatiuon, Vows Re: [RQ-RULES] Shades/Fetch/Illumination x2 Re: [RQ-RULES] Shades RULES OF THE ROAD 1. Do not include large sections of a message in your reply. Especially not to add "Yeah, I agree" or "No, I disagree." Or be excoriated. If someone writes something good and you want to say "good show" please do. But don't include the whole message you praise. 2. Use an appropriate Subject line. 3. Learn the art of paraphrasing: Don't just quote and comment on a point-by-point basis. 4. No anonymous posting, please. Don't say something unless you're ready to stand by it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 08:51:03 +0100 (MET) From: ferro@clipper.ens.fr (Frederic Ferro) Subject: [RQ-RULES] [runequest-rules] Fetch Shamanism : Fetch This may be more a "world-oriented" question than a "rules-question" but I have never understood how the Fetch (which is called "Inner Spirit" in the French translation) was supposed to work : does it have its own personality (like a Bound Spirit) or is it only a kind of extension of the shaman's soul in the Astral Plane ? My Webster dictionary gives this definition of the Fetch : >fetch n [origin unknown](ca. 1787) >1: doppelgänger >2: ghost If this is a "doppelgänger", it is only a shadow of the Shaman and it shouldn't have its own Proper Name. Fred - ---- mailto:ferro@clipper.ens.fr http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Lair/1054 http://www.eleves.ens.fr:8080/home/ferro/index.html "HOiPHILOIOUDEISPHILOS" *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 00:09:30 -0800 (PST) From: Erik Nolander Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Vows/Illumination Hi, Tal Meta wrote (in response to Nikk Effingham): > > I'm working on the idea that it might be possible for there to > > be a new Illumination power that exists that makes you capable of > > ignoring Vows and their constrictions. I don't believe that most, > > many or even a sizeable portion of Illuminates possess this power, > > but I think that it might exist. > > I've been under the impression (from Sandy's rules, leastwise) that > Illuminates can break CERTAIN vows, but not all of them, or even in the > same ways. I agree (I think...). However, from a rules point-of-view, there isn't much difference between a Vow or a geas. An Illuminate would logically then have the same freedom with breaking Vows as he has with geases. What separates them is the fact the most cults that possesses geases doesn't require the worshipper to take one, whereas most sorcerers are more or less forced to take Vows. Thus, taking a geas would be seen as a sign or piety, but taking a Vow is more of a necessity. Maybe the geas/Vow-breaking power is not automatic to all Illuminates (this may be in the rules - I don't have them with me at the moment). This power would only be available to the *really* Illuminated, whatever that means ;). I don't know, I'm rambling. Incidentally, though, I've just posed a question about Illumination on the GD. If it gets no response, I'll repost it here. > My gut says that while Illumination is a mentally transforming level of > consciousness, it shouldn't be the equivalent of a 'carte blanche' to do > anything and everything. Illumination won't let you breahte water, > afterall... No, that's true. But then, my feeling is that Illumination is not for everyone. It *is* a very special state of mind, and therefore could be treated as quite powerful. That's all for now, Erik Nolander _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 10:56:39 GMT From: "Nikk Effingham" Subject: [RQ-RULES] Shades/Fetch/Illumination SHADES: I always found most of the elementals next useless. A gnome is useless for anything other than devouring walls and consuming imobile objects, as in combat you can merely walk away from it (woe betide you if it actually gets close mind you). A sylph is good for one round, in which it often kills one person before getting killed itself (fly spells are so much more useful than flying sylph express). Undines and Shades are just utterly useless, and the same for Slamanders. The fact is that not only do the RQIII elementals have no offensive powers for combat, but that they have no armour to porotect themselves with an so only the larger elementals last any decent amount of time. For instance, shouldn't the amount of damage a Salamander causes be dependent upon size???? Saying this, if you play underneath the new sorcery rules, elementals are freely available even at low levels and so making them thatr powerful will greatly increase the powers of sorcerors. FETCH I think most shamans do have large fetches, especially looking at the example shamans in most RuneQuest supplements. Anyhow, a POW tick isn't that difficult to get, and a shaman will be in various spirit cults, gaining various Worship (spirit) spells, each of which will give him a POW tick every season at the very least. If a shaman leads three spirit cults she'll get about 18 POW ticks per year from ceremonies alone, if she makes half of them that's 9 POW per year! So that's why I reckon they have large fetches. ILLUMINATION >I've been under the impression (from Sandy's rules, leastwise) that >Illuminates can break CERTAIN vows, but not all of them, or even in >the same ways. I don't think that you can break certain Vows, but most of them. If, and only if, you are an Illuminate with this particular power. New powers have always been hinted at in the Illumionation descriptions, as is the fact that some Illuminates don't have all the powers. I think Vows like Flee [element] are unbreakable as they are based upon a ritual that affects you magically. I think vows like Abjure [whatever] and Celibacy are the types of things that can be ignored. >My gut says that while Illumination is a mentally transforming level >of consciousness, it shouldn't be the equivalent of a 'carte >blanche' to do anything and everything. Illumination won't let you >breahte water, afterall... No, I don't think it is. But Vows are a form of mental discipline. I think that the Illuminate would be able to ignore them on the grounds that "Heh, I AM mentally disciplined and don't have to adhere to some artificial Vows to show it". >But that's just me . The powergamer in me would love it, but as a >GM it'd make me shudder. (I had a shaman in my last campaign who was >on the road to Illumination.. missed the roll by 1 once). Powergamer? I don't think so. Having seen Humakti Illuminates and Yelmalion Illuminates, I don't think sorcerors who can drink alcohol and have sex, or even go as far as wield weaponary or casting rune magic (all of which they have to learn in the first place), would be too power gaming. Nikk E. Nikk Effingham eng7nje@leeds.ac.uk http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Lair/7556/ "If absolute power corrupts absolutely Where does that leave God?" -- George Daacon *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 09:13:07 -0800 (PST) From: Erik Nolander Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Elementals (mostly)/Illumination(not much) Hi, - ---Nikk Effingham wrote: > > SHADES: > > I always found most of the elementals next useless. A gnome is > useless for anything other than devouring walls and consuming imobile > objects, as in combat you can merely walk away from it (woe betide > you if it actually gets close mind you). A sylph is good for one > round, in which it often kills one person before getting killed > itself (fly spells are so much more useful than flying sylph > express). Undines and Shades are just utterly useless, and the same > for Slamanders. OK, they may be useless in combat, but they could actually serve more mundane purposes. For example, I'm sure that more than one sorceror back in the Ol' West has his house/dwelling/tower kept at an agreeable temperature, courtesy of Your Friendly Household Fire Elemental. Who wouldn't fall for an ad like this one: * Tired of doing Your garden work every Wildday? * Want to have a hot bath, without having to wait Malkion-knows-how-long for the water to boil? * Why not stop by Kaddi's Elemental Warehouse, the most fully stocked elemental supplier west of Glamour! * Elementals Summoned, Bound and Delivered at Your Convenience! * Kaddi's Elemental Warehouse - If You Can Find It, We Can Bind It!! * Treacle Road 134, Sog City. Well, at least I would! For documented uses of elementals, cf. the undines reported to propel the Cradle in the Cradle scenario, and also Grandad's boat in the "Troubled Waters"-scenario in RoC. > ILLUMINATION I agree wholeheartedly to what Nikk wrote. Cheers, Erik Nolander _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 05 Feb 1998 08:56:08 +1100 From: Cory Davis Subject: [RQ-RULES] Fatigue Hi all We use the fatigue rules to place a maximum on the armour and weapons you can realistically carry without disadvantage, we just add up armour and weapon enc and add 5 and make sure that its less than your fatigue. Then we ignore the rest of the fatigue rules, the players always drop packs, and other heavy items before combat. My players are pretty happy about the way it works, even though they lose alot of backs, crossbows and the odd bulky piece of treasure. Cory *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Feb 1998 18:55:23 -0500 From: Tal Meta Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Fetches, Illuminatiuon, Vows Frederic Ferro wrote: > > Shamanism : Fetch > > This may be more a "world-oriented" question than a > "rules-question" but I have never understood how the Fetch (which > is called "Inner Spirit" in the French translation) was supposed > to work : does it have its own personality (like a Bound Spirit) > or is it only a kind of extension of the shaman's soul in the > Astral Plane ? I always GM'd that the fetch had a personality., even if only a slight one. Our party's shaman's fetch resembled a ferret when it would manifest to guard his body, and on one occasion where the shaman lost a spirit battle with a demon (and the demon came home to roost in his body) the rest of the party were keyed in that SOMETHING was wrong when the spirit-ferret puffed out and back-hopped away from the shaman's body hissing as it faded back to the spirit plane... Erik Nolander wrote: > I agree (I think...). However, from a rules point-of-view, there > isn't much difference between a Vow or a geas. An Illuminate would > logically then have the same freedom with breaking Vows as he has > with geases. >From what I've been led to believe via supplements and crosstalk on the lists, Illumination basically lets you present whatever 'face' you need to your deity in order to not be found wanting. When you break a geas, you're breaking a contract with , who may or may not be watching you every second. When you break a Vow, there's nobody watching you but you... and how easy is it to hide from yourself (forget I asked ). > Maybe the geas/Vow-breaking power is not automatic to all > Illuminates (this may be in the rules - I don't have them with me > at the moment). This power would only be available to the *really* > Illuminated, whatever that means ;). Somebody was tossing around the idea that certain 'schools' of illumination grant certain powers that others don't. Another idea might be to establish 'degrees' of illumination, or let 'em sack POW or something for each - -- talmeta@cybercomm.net - Former sysop / netgod, now 'net bum. Do I look like someone who cares what GOD thinks?! / I have no webpage. / Curiosity killed the cat... Loathesome rituals BROUGHT IT BACK! / Will work for cash. / Insert Nifty ASCII graphic here. / Give me Slack, or give me Food. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 04 Feb 1998 20:45:46 -0500 From: Tal Meta Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Shades/Fetch/Illumination x2 Nikk Effingham wrote: > I always found most of the elementals next useless. A gnome is > useless for anything other than devouring walls and consuming > imobile objects, as in combat you can merely walk away from it > (woe betide you if it actually gets close mind you). A sylph is > good for one round, in which it often kills one person before > getting killed itself (fly spells are so much more useful than > flying sylph express). Undines and Shades are just utterly > useless, and the same for Slamanders. My players and I got plenty of use out of elementals. I can remember at least twice when charging horsemen got nailed by gnomes that opened in front of / under them, or when villans chose to flee INSIDE a diving gnome. The pained looks from my players when the attacking salamander ignored them to burn their arrows / bowstrings, or chose to spook the horses, causing them to bolt, rear, etc.. Or the times when sylphs pushed people down stairways, off the decks of ships, or the undines that carried treasure laden bodies into the surf (daring the party to pursue), or battered the bottom of their galley, forcing them to stop for repairs often. Granted, shades were not as general purpose, but I've got plenty of ideas for them next time. > The fact is that not only do the RQIII elementals have no > offensive powers for combat, but that they have no armour to > porotect themselves with an so only the larger elementals last any > decent amount of time. For instance, shouldn't the amount of > damage a Salamander causes be dependent upon size???? They've got STR and SIZ... give them a damage bonus. And perhaps 1 AP per cu meter as well? > Saying this, if you play underneath the new sorcery rules, > elementals are freely available even at low levels and so making > them thatr powerful will greatly increase the powers of sorcerors. Not that sorcerers need alot of additional power. Our party's sorcerer was well nigh untouchable towards the end of the campaign (which was when Banish started appearing ). > I think most shamans do have large fetches, especially looking at > the example shamans in most RuneQuest supplements. Anyhow, a POW > tick isn't that difficult to get, and a shaman will be in various > spirit cults, gaining various Worship (spirit) spells, each of > which will give him a POW tick every season at the very least. If > a shaman leads three spirit cults she'll get about 18 POW ticks > per year from ceremonies alone, if she makes half of them that's 9 > POW per year! So that's why I reckon they have large fetches. I suppose. The players in my campaign, for the most part, avoided religious entanglements like the plague. Blueface is the only shaman I remember that had a huge fetch . Erik Nolander wrote: > OK, they may be useless in combat, but they could actually serve > more mundane purposes. For example, I'm sure that more than one > sorceror back in the Ol' West has his house/dwelling/tower kept at > an agreeable temperature, courtesy of Your Friendly Household Fire > Elemental. Water elementals to keep water flowing from the well, with shades to cool it and salamanders to heat it; sylphs to provide cooling breezes, etc. I've done this too. :) - -- talmeta@cybercomm.net - Former sysop / netgod, now 'net bum. Do I look like someone who cares what GOD thinks?! / I have no webpage. / Curiosity killed the cat... Loathesome rituals BROUGHT IT BACK! / Will work for cash. / Insert Nifty ASCII graphic here. / Give me Slack, or give me Food. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Feb 1998 20:51:28 EST From: JULIAKIR@aol.com Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Shades Will have to disagree with you here. > I always found most of the elementals next useless. A gnome is useless for anything other than devouring walls and consuming imobile objects, as in combat you can merely walk away from it (woe betide you if it actually gets close mind you). How do you see it coming? Mobility spells make them into true terrors. >A sylph is good for one round, in which it often kills one person before getting killed itself If somebody is attacking your elemental then they are not attacking you, and that is a good thing anytime. Also, try some Protection spells on your elementals and watch your enemies cringe. (fly spells are so much more useful than flying sylph express). Never had one Dispelled from under you, did you? >Undines Wrong. Very tough in water. Launch at opponent as from a pressure valve. Use as a wall to protect from missle attack. Etc. >and Shades are just utterly useless Very Wrong. An area effect Fear spell useless? , and the same for Slamanders. Very, Very Wrong (At least 1/2 of 3d6 per round to general hit points with no armour) *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ End of RuneQuest-Rules-Digest V1 #11 ************************************ *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. RuneQuest is a Trademark of Avalon Hill Games. With the exception of previously copyrighted material, unless specified otherwise all text in this digest is copyright by the author or authors, with rights granted to copy for personal use, to excerpt in reviews and replies, and to archive unchanged for electronic retrieval.