From: owner-runequest-rules@ (RuneQuest-Rules-Digest) To: runequest-rules-digest@lists.MPGN.COM Subject: RuneQuest-Rules-Digest V1 #48 Reply-To: runequest-rules@mpgn.com Sender: owner-runequest-rules@ Errors-To: owner-runequest-rules@ Precedence: bulk RuneQuest-Rules-Digest Friday, March 20 1998 Volume 01 : Number 048 RuneQuest is a trademark of Avalon Hill Games. All Rights Reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS [RQ-RULES] Sorcery/Chefs [RQ-RULES] Sorcery varients RE: [RQ-RULES] Sorcery varients Re: [RQ-RULES] Sorcery/Chefs [RQ-RULES] House rules & Char. creation 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: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 15:46:47 GMT From: "Nikk Effingham" Subject: [RQ-RULES] Sorcery/Chefs First, the Chef was cool! More! More!!! Now onto Sorcery: Marc: >I have to disagree with this. If said Magus really had 5000% in all >the magic skills, he could have sooooooooo many matrices and other >magic items that he would not need to have any spells in memory, and >would have all the 15 points of INT available as free INT. OTOH, >said apprentice would likely have no matrices and need to hold spell >in mind all the time. Surely, however, a Magus should be powerful because he has 5000% in all sorcery skills, not because he has magical trinkets lying around. Give the magical trinkets to his apprentice and BINGO they become as powerful as one another. Sorcery should be more than who has the more matrices. Secondly, sorcerors have the toughest time of all with increasing POW - - a distinct lack of spirit combat and no Worship spells to give them access to all the POW they need to make the matrices gives sorcerors a bum deal on all accounts. Thirdly, This still doesn't solve the problem of an apprentice and a magus being able to both manipulate spells to a maximum of 18 levels. I've never seen or met a sorceror under RQIII with an INT less than 17, it just wasn't worth it. Speaking of which, power level is greatly compromised by RQIII - a beginning character capable of casting a Damage Boost 17? (that's 18 INT with one taken up for the spell). That'd cut through enhchanted plate combined with ringmail as if it was butter!!!!! FAR too powerful. >That sounds like a problem with the GM, losing control of the game. >I ran a couple of campaigns with RQ3 and never had that problem. If >the player was really boosting the duration up that much, how much >time could it really take to roll some dice a few times every ( 1 >day, 3 days, 2 weeks, take your pick ) of game time? It's the bookeeeping though. If you have more than two sorcerors in a party you spend half your time altering the calender to say when spells expire.... Also, who wants to play a character who spends a large portion of their time just recovering from casting their long duration spells? >> RQIII stinks. I wouldn't touch it with a barge pole. Having played >a >> Western Campaign for a while now, I've seen the difference and am >> now content that converting to Sandy's Sorcery was worth all the >> hassle. >> > >Obviously, I don't agree with you here. Everyone in my 2 RQ3 >campaigns had a good time, and liked the system. Why go for second best? >> Lastly, a Western sorceror from the Rokari Church was just the >same >> as an Eastern Sorceror, who in turn was just the same as asn >> Otkorioni sorceror, or a Carmanian Sorceror. Boring. The rules >> stopped personalization of sorcerors, so each one wandered around >> with the same sort of spells. > >Again, I see this as a problem with the GM, not the system. There >is no reason that the GM can't limit the spells( or even skills ), a >character has access to, based on the culture the character grew up( >or lives ) in. Thats a question of world design, not game design I STONGLY disagree. Firstly, most of the sorcerors I have seen in published RQIII supplements are, basically, exactly the same. Little variation. This is probably more due to the limited number of sorcery spells in RQIII than anything else. Secondly, I think that it is the responsbility of any decent rules system to aid the game. It should be more than a vehicle, it should actively craft the game you play. Allen: >I have to disagree with you on the universality of Sandy's magic. It >is great for Western sorcerers but really bites for anything else. >Since I don't play Western, it bites. How so? I found it appealing to have characters limited by Vows. I see no reason why the system should only work for Malkoini, it works fine also for trolls and Otkorioni IMO and from my experience. You should consider adding specialized Vows as well as Journeys from Philip Hibb's excellent modifications to the system. > The problem I have with many >of Sandy's fixes is that they seem more concerned with keeping the >characters less powerful than his favorite heroes than with allowing >them to be someone important and able to cause more than token >effects. ? I'll pass on what this means. Sandy never seems to have engineered Heroes to be more powerful than others IMO. See Gunda the Guilty, he created her to be powerful but killable. I think I may have missed the point on this one. 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: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 12:37:16 -0500 From: stancliff@commnections.com Subject: [RQ-RULES] Sorcery varients I have generally avoided this discussion, but it is time to comment. RU>Surely, however, a Magus should be powerful because he has 5000% in RU>all sorcery skills, not because he has magical trinkets lying around. RU>Give the magical trinkets to his apprentice and BINGO they become as RU>powerful as one another. Sorcery should be more than who has the more RU>matrices. This is a valid point which was addressed in RQ4 by limiting manipulation to (least skill / 10 ??) as Sandy appearantly did. Another question is whether this manipulation should be limited or should very skilled Magi have manipulations greater than 20 or 25. RU>Secondly, sorcerors have the toughest time of all with increasing POW RU>- a distinct lack of spirit combat and no Worship spells to give them RU>access to all the POW they need to make the matrices gives sorcerors RU>a bum deal on all accounts. Sorcerers are not prohibited from summoning or fighting spirits, but this doesn't guarantee a Pow check. Using attack spells in combat is another choice which will work, but most sorcerers avoid. RU>Thirdly, This still doesn't solve the problem of an apprentice and a RU>magus being able to both manipulate spells to a maximum of 18 RU>levels. I've never seen or met a sorceror under RQIII with an INT RU>less than 17, it just wasn't worth it. Exactly, it isn't worth it. In RQ3 students are limited by skill and ceremony limits; given time and MP's they will eventually succeed. Caught in a tight spot, they are helpless, where an adept would likely get the spell off. RU>It's the bookeeeping though. If you have more than two sorcerors in a RU>party you spend half your time altering the calender to say when RU>spells expire.... Also, who wants to play a character who spends a RU>large portion of their time just recovering from casting their long RU>duration spells? The student has to limit the number of spells he is willing to support in relation to the amount of bookkeeping he is willing to track. When a spell is cast note the spell, the parameters of manipulation, and the expiration date. When the spell expires, make sure the recipient is willing to pay for renewal, assume high ceremony usage, and see how many tries are needed, time is trivial since it is out of combat. MP storage will be shared by the recipient and his friends so MP's are only a limit in new games. In general, all spells should be extended to a duration of at least one week (10 pts), and one season is better (13 pts). This reduces bookkeeping and keeps the Intensities smaller for game balance. Under RQ4 or Sandy's rules students can't throw a one week spell without a manipulated spell matrix. Even at (skill% / 5) for manipulation, the duration could barely reach a week. This means that a student can only afford time to maintain his own spells. RU>>> Lastly, a Western sorceror from the Rokari Church was just the RU>>> same as an Eastern Sorceror, who in turn was just the same as an RU>>> Otkorioni sorceror, or a Carmanian Sorceror. Boring. The rules RU>>> stopped personalization of sorcerors, so each one wandered around RU>>> with the same sort of spells. RU>I STONGLY disagree. Firstly, most of the sorcerors I have seen in RU>published RQIII supplements are, basically, exactly the same. Little RU>variation. This is probably more due to the limited number of sorcery RU>spells in RQIII than anything else. Secondly, I think that it is the RU>responsbility of any decent rules system to aid the game. It should RU>be more than a vehicle, it should actively craft the game you play. This is a valid argument; personalizing the source of teaching personalizes the student. There is a need for defining additional differences for sorcery schools. RU>>I have to disagree with you on the universality of Sandy's magic. It RU>>is great for Western sorcerers but really bites for anything else. RU>>Since I don't play Western, it bites. RU>How so? I found it appealing to have characters limited by Vows. I RU>see no reason why the system should only work for Malkoini, it works RU>fine also for trolls and Otkorioni IMO and from my experience. You RU>should consider adding specialized Vows as well as Journeys from RU>Philip Hibb's excellent modifications to the system. I have a problem with Vows making the character stronger, they should be applied similar to cult geases to mark advancement and access to new knowledge. Under RQ3 or RQ4 you would take one vow when you become a student, apprentice, adept, etc. You don't need Presence (or most of the new skills) to improve sorcery, the manipulation limits are more than enough to give the restrictions desired, and this alternate view of vows will allow personalization of schools and individuals. RU>> The problem I have with many RU>>of Sandy's fixes is that they seem more concerned with keeping the RU>>characters less powerful than his favorite heroes than with allowing RU>>them to be someone important and able to cause more than token RU>>effects. I think that manipulation should probably be restricted by (skill / 5) so that a master can manage an 18 pt manipulation and students can manage a decent spell duration. This gives immortals the potential for immense manipulations if you don't enforce an upper limit, so the referee has to monitor potential problems as the game progresses. Bob Stancliff (Stancliff@commnections.com) (http://commnections.com/upgrades) *************************************************************************** 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, 19 Mar 1998 13:04:52 -0500 From: "Choinski, Burt" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] Sorcery varients I've looked at Sandy's systems, and a bunch of the other variants and will probably go with a modified RQ3. Basically, max manipulation equals skill/10, but the MP expended in the spell are tied up until the duration ends (since they form the framework of the spell). I may use some of Sandy's new spells, however. :) -- Burton - --------------------------------------------------------- Burton Choinski, Peritus Software Services Inc. bchoinski@peritus.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, 19 Mar 1998 12:15:18 -0600 From: Marc Robertson Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Sorcery/Chefs Nikk Effingham wrote: > Marc: > > >I have to disagree with this. If said Magus really had 5000% in all > >the magic skills, he could have sooooooooo many matrices and other > >magic items that he would not need to have any spells in memory, and > >would have all the 15 points of INT available as free INT. OTOH, > >said apprentice would likely have no matrices and need to hold spell > >in mind all the time. > > Surely, however, a Magus should be powerful because he has 5000% in > all sorcery skills, not because he has magical trinkets lying around. > Give the magical trinkets to his apprentice and BINGO they become as > powerful as one another. Sorcery should be more than who has the more > matrices. I can't argue with that point. I guess my only defence is that in the campaigns I ran in RQ3, no player character sorceror got to the point of having apprentices. I controlled all the masters, and so didn't let low level sorcerers have any magic items they didn't earn via their adventures > > > Secondly, sorcerors have the toughest time of all with increasing POW > - a distinct lack of spirit combat and no Worship spells to give them > access to all the POW they need to make the matrices gives sorcerors > a bum deal on all accounts. It's been awhile since I ran RQ3( trying to get back into it ), but I recall giving the players a POW roll whenever they successfully resisted in a magical attack, either as attacker or defender. As GM, I saw to it that they had PLENTY of chances to be the defender ;-) > > > Thirdly, This still doesn't solve the problem of an apprentice and a > magus being able to both manipulate spells to a maximum of 18 > levels. I've never seen or met a sorceror under RQIII with an INT > less than 17, it just wasn't worth it. > > Speaking of which, power level is greatly compromised by RQIII - a > beginning character capable of casting a Damage Boost 17? (that's 18 > INT with one taken up for the spell). That'd cut through enhchanted > plate combined with ringmail as if it was butter!!!!! FAR too > powerful. > Here, I agree with you. I'm just not sure exactly what to do about it. Limiting the amount of manipulation is a good idea, I'm just not sure about the 1/10, especially as the skill level gets up to 90%+ [snip] > 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 - -- All opinions expressed are my own Marc Robertson email: Principal Analyst robertson@acm.org DST Technologies Kansas City, MO USA *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 10:12:24 -0500 From: stancliff@commnections.com Subject: [RQ-RULES] House rules & Char. creation This is a cross post from a direct conversation. The initial topic dealt with an eight year old Sword Lord... Subject: (Fwd) Re: House rules & char. creation From: "Jane Williams" To: "Bob Stancliff" > It looks like I need to brush up on my 'King of Sartar', this is > Saronil, son of Sartar, we are talking about, right? No. This is (checking spelling) Harsaltar the Terrible, son of Salinarg. KoS p141-142. > This same kind of skewed training is appearant with several legendary > characters like JarEel, who leads an armed invasion over a mountain at > age 14. Yep. Though she had actually been bred to be a Hero, which always helps. > It is safe to assume that these high born people have legendary > characteristics and category bonuses, but it still takes about three to > four years of game time to master a skill. Sounds about right. > I can only speculate that without the need to work to survive, A very important distinction, and the reason it doesn't happen too often. > a steady regimen of 50 hours of training per week could make impressive > results if started by the age of three. I seem to remember this was about the age the English Yeoman used to start learning archery. Result: Agincourt. They didn't get 50 hours per week, though. In fact, the Sunday practises were cut down even more by the invention of Football, which was therfore banned for a while. =============================================================== The points I responded to... > > I should try to recreate this with my character creation system. It > > will need some modifying to reflect such an early age; there are no > > cultural bonuses if you haven't grown up in the culture yet. > Agreed. I hate the things anyway: why do they only apply to weapons? I think the game designers saw it as a gift to give people a head start with weapons for fighter characters. In the RQ4 version I edited, they list bonuses for Scout<>, Survive<>, Ettiquite<>, and one or two other skills. I add these to the published bonuses in Crucible and RQ3. If you look at the old base skills, these represent the base culture bonuses for everyone; 10% in ALL Craft<>, good Climb and Perception skills. I just argue that these were never adequate for a 12 year old, much less for a 15 year old. Most of the bases should be doubled or tripled before starting training at 12 with attention given to kid skills like Catch, Throw, Climb, Run, and Jump. The greatest shortfall of the RQ3 experience charts was the lack of personalization. On my web page I put forward the view that the tables should be the number of experience checks you get with the skill each year. The points are not guaranteed, but they do follow the distribution. The nice part is that young people go up very quickly on all skills and start to slow down above 40%. It is a pain to do all of the dice rolls, but I rolled up a 43 year old shaman to test the system and was very happy with the results. At the end, he was a master of about twelve skills, and the best one was just about 105%. As a shaman, his skill interests were very broad with several lores, if he had specialized more, he would have been quite impressive at age 30-35. For RQ3 you have to raise the number of points assigned to about 40, with my expanded skill list from RQ4 you have to raise the number assigned to about 50 to allow some competence on the side skills. Bob Stancliff (Stancliff@commnections.com) (http://commnections.com/upgrades) *************************************************************************** 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 #48 ************************************ *************************************************************************** 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.