From: owner-runequest-rules@ (RuneQuest Rules Digest) To: runequest-rules-digest@lists.MPGN.COM Subject: RuneQuest Rules Digest V1 #105 Reply-To: runequest-rules@mpgn.com Sender: owner-runequest-rules@ Errors-To: owner-runequest-rules@ Precedence: bulk RuneQuest Rules Digest Tuesday, May 26 1998 Volume 01 : Number 105 RuneQuest is a trademark of Avalon Hill Games. All Rights Reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS Re: [RQ-RULES] DMD - Obad Hai for RQ/Greyhawk Re: [RQ-RULES] DMD - Obad Hai for RQ/Greyhawk [RQ-RULES] Ranged Healing Re: [RQ-RULES] Using Arts with Rituals [RQ-RULES] Alchemy [RQ-RULES] Re: Using Arts with Rituals [RQ-RULES] Re: Using Arts with Rituals Re: [RQ-RULES] Re: Using Arts with Rituals RE: [RQ-RULES] More Debate on Touch spells 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: Sat, 23 May 1998 00:13:18 -0400 From: Tal Meta Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] DMD - Obad Hai for RQ/Greyhawk Whoops. Sorry folks. Thought I'd hit the cancel button fast enough. :( *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 06:24:56 -0700 From: Joseph Elric Smith Servant to Arioch Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] DMD - Obad Hai for RQ/Greyhawk I think you got the title wrong or is there more to the shalm then I remember? :) ken Tal Meta wrote: > Thirty-fourth in my series of Greyhawk gods in RQ format... > > LENDOR > Mastery, Fate, Law, Motion > *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 12:41:12 -0400 From: Andrew Barton Subject: [RQ-RULES] Ranged Healing > Sandy's version of Treat Wounds CAN'T do long-distance healing (using my cheating system), though, unless you can find some method of doing long distance First Aid. My sorceror sometimes uses a multispell of all five sense projection and phantom spells to produce a distant image of himself. He does this to keep in touch with his wife while overseas, but presumably he'd be fully able to use First Aid, perhaps needing an extra concentration roll. Andrew *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 23 May 1998 14:30:52 -0500 From: stancliff@commnections.com Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Using Arts with Rituals RU>Multispelled Enchantments? But does someone have an idea for meta-magic whic RU>*explains* why it can't be done? Something other than prohibition of monty RU>haulism? We know that it can't be done, and we have valid RPG reasons for no RU>allowing it, but are there RQ reasons, or game universe (not necessarily RU>gloranthan) reasons? As I have said before, the rules define the game world... this is even more true than saying the game world defines the rules. Glorantha is one of the few worlds that predate the game system to play it. Whenever this has happened, the world has been richer for it's literary origins, but it also means that the rules have to reflect and support the cultures and events that the stories tell. When a game is defined, a great effort goes into balancing historical references with literary sources and playtesting to get a game that feels right in terms of man vs man, or man vs monster for weapons and magic effects. Balance isn't really an issue of holding players back, it is the justification for why entires areas of society work one way instead of another. Anything that is powerful has to be difficult or it will be too common and unbalance the other aspects of the game world. If it is too difficult it will never happen because there is no profit in it. Simplifying enchantments will make them more common, more people will have them, the prices will drop, specialists will start mass production, common people will own powerful magic, etc.! In my game I have had to adjust the rewards for Strengthening, Armoring, and Magic Point enchantments to change the balance from something I could see was too restrictive or too generous to a level that made all of them worthwhile without being too easy. Anything you do to the enchantment rules will make them easier, more common, and have a stronger influence on your game world. More NPC's and players will use an easier rule and the results will speed up power escalation. You ask whether there is a game world or rules reason not to make enchantments easier. The only real answer is that the cultural material does not show that these things are easy, therefore the rules should not allow them to be easy. Enchantments are the tools of the powerful and the heroquestors, they are coveted and sought after. They should not be common or cheap or else the rich will gather too many and they will be available in any store. This is bad from a story view and changes the basic nature of the world. 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: Sun, 24 May 1998 22:35:52 +0200 From: Julian Lord Subject: [RQ-RULES] Alchemy > > Art of Alchemy > > I'm unfamiliar with this Art... did Sandy release a new version of > Sorcery and I not hear of it, or is it one you creaated? No. The rules for Alchemists say there is such an Art, and I'm assuming that such an Art would in fact manipulate Ritual spells. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 24 May 1998 23:05:43 +0200 From: Julian Lord Subject: [RQ-RULES] Re: Using Arts with Rituals Stimulating post from Bob Stancliff: > As I have said before, the rules define the game world... this is > even more true than saying the game world defines the rules. Glorantha > is one of the few worlds that predate the game system to play it. > Whenever this has happened, the world has been richer for it's literary > origins, but it also means that the rules have to reflect and support > the cultures and events that the stories tell. > When a game is defined, a great effort goes into balancing historical > references with literary sources and playtesting to get a game that > feels right in terms of man vs man, or man vs monster for weapons and > magic effects. Balance isn't really an issue of holding players back, > it is the justification for why entires areas of society work one way > instead of another. ... etc. I think that you're right, Bob, except that I'd argue that the rules don't so much *define* the game world as *simulate* it.I feel that your argument, while *completely* valid IMO, doesn't address what I perceive as a failing of the meta-rules of magic in RQ. That manipulation of ritual magic should be difficult is a given; but what we have now is a situation wherein *some* Arts _can_ be used to manipulate rituals (Enchant,Alchemy,...) while others can't (Ease,Speed,Multispell,...). In the absence of a meta-rule, cultural explanation, mythic reason, or anything of the sort, RQ seems arbitrary. Unavoidable, I suppose. I have no meta-rule to propose, of course, ... *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 25 May 1998 11:54:00 -0500 From: stancliff@commnections.com Subject: [RQ-RULES] Re: Using Arts with Rituals RU>I think that you're right, Bob, except that I'd argue that the rules don't s RU>*define* the game world as *simulate* it.I feel that your argument, while RU>*completely* valid IMO, doesn't address what I perceive as a failing of the RU>meta-rules of magic in RQ. It is technically correct that "all rules simulate a reality, whether a fantasy or the natural world", but most players learn about a game world through the rules and have no other source of input, so the rules do often define the world as well. RU> what we have now is a situation wherein *some* Arts _can_ be us RU>manipulate rituals (Enchant,Alchemy,...) while others can't RU>(Ease,Speed,Multispell,...). In the absence of a meta-rule, cultural explana RU>mythic reason, or anything of the sort, RQ seems arbitrary. Unavoidable, I s I am not the first to say that I don't know what you are referring to. There are no RQ3 rules that allow sorcerers to do anything with enchantments that other magic users can't. Also remember that Ceremony, Enchant and Summon are not Arts. If you are referring to Sandy's rules, then you are at his caprice and whim, and since I haven't read them all, I won't comment except to say that Sandy admits he is not done changing them. RQ2 had some Alchemy rules which are grossly out of date and were never reprinted. Sorcery certainly didn't manipulate them. Most of us seem to assume that you are using Alchemy rules from some outside source that we are not using, so it is hard to follow your discussion. 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: Tue, 26 May 1998 01:25:31 +0200 From: Julian Lord Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Re: Using Arts with Rituals > RU> what we have now is a situation wherein *some* Arts _can_ be us > RU>manipulate rituals (Enchant,Alchemy,...) while others can't > RU>(Ease,Speed,Multispell,...). In the absence of a meta-rule, cultural explana > RU>mythic reason, or anything of the sort, RQ seems arbitrary. Unavoidable, I s > I am not the first to say that I don't know what you are referring > to. There are no RQ3 rules that allow sorcerers to do anything with > enchantments that other magic users can't. Also remember that Ceremony, > Enchant and Summon are not Arts. > If you are referring to Sandy's rules, then you are at his caprice > and whim, and since I haven't read them all, I won't comment except to > say that Sandy admits he is not done changing them. > RQ2 had some Alchemy rules which are grossly out of date and were > never reprinted. Sorcery certainly didn't manipulate them. > Most of us seem to assume that you are using Alchemy rules from some > outside source that we are not using, so it is hard to follow your > discussion. Whoops, I suppose that's right ... I don't refer to RQ3 sorcery 'cos it stinks, ie it doesn't work. Ceremony, Enchant and Summon aren't Arts? From a roolz POV this is right. From the POV of cause and effect? Wrong. Sandy's sorcerors can use the Arts (and Rituals) more easily than the other magicians of Glorantha. This is implicit in the rules rather than explicit, IMO, but of course debatable. RE Alchemy: I'm assuming that the manipulation of Arts/Rituals is an effect of Alchemy, 'cos this seems logical to me. This is v. debatable in the absence of Alchemy *rules*. PS I prefer Sandy's caprice and whim to most peoples' reason and logic. Just my POV. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 26 May 1998 08:27:49 +0100 From: "Hibbs, Philip" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] More Debate on Touch spells >> Melnibonean magic would need a lot of tweaking (no spell casting, >> summoning and demonic or elemental pacts only)... >Well, even the Elric rules have a cast magic system now. Don't get me started on that one! philip.hibbs@tnt.co.uk or phibbs@compuserve.com http://members.tripod.com/~PhilHibbs/ You never know what is enough unless you know what is more than enough. - William Blake *************************************************************************** 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 #105 ************************************* *************************************************************************** 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.