From: owner-runequest-rules@ (RuneQuest Rules Digest) To: runequest-rules-digest@lists.MPGN.COM Subject: RuneQuest Rules Digest V2 #47 Reply-To: runequest-rules@mpgn.com Sender: owner-runequest-rules@ Errors-To: owner-runequest-rules@ Precedence: bulk RuneQuest Rules Digest Monday, March 8 1999 Volume 02 : Number 047 RuneQuest is a trademark of Hasbro/Avalon Hill Games. All Rights Reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS [RQ-RULES] Mysticism [RQ-RULES] Sandy's Grimoire Re: [RQ-RULES] Mysticism Re: [RQ-RULES] Mysticism [RQ-RULES] Relearning spells RE: [RQ-RULES] Relearning spells Re: [RQ-RULES] Mysticism Re: [RQ-RULES] Sandy's Grimoire Re: [RQ-RULES] Sandy's Grimoire RE: [RQ-RULES] Sandy's Grimoire Re: [RQ-RULES] Sandy's Grimoire Re: [RQ-RULES] Sandy's Grimoire RE: [RQ-RULES] Relearning spells RE: [RQ-RULES] Sandy's Grimoire Re: [RQ-RULES] Sandy's Grimoire 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, 6 Mar 1999 13:10:36 GMT From: "Nikk Effingham" Subject: [RQ-RULES] Mysticism Has everyone seen Sandy's rules for Mysticism? I hope so, they sure are good so pick up a copy if you haven't. I was wondering, after reading these rules, if anyone has any ideas on other branches and forms of Mystical and Transcendent followings? I'm posting this to this digest rather than the Glorantha digest because I'm more interested in seeing a working RQ rules mechanic for other forms of Mysticism, so excuse any Gloranthan references, I think this question holds true for other game worlds as well. We know that the Mystics who practice the form of Mysticism Sandy's rules describes are generally our eastern, martial arts-esque type of people, but we also know that there are lots of other mystical arts (in Glorantha at any rate) that are practiced - such as Illumination adn Enlightenment. I was wondering if people had any ideas for the powers/abilities/eventual goals of other mystics. I'm NOT looking for, and don't believe, that most mystical sects give you abilities to enhance combat, cast fireballs etc... but do give you SOMETHING for all your hard work. Simply saying that a mystical path "connects you to the comic forces" or what have you doesn't do it for me. Consider Dayzatar, I think that his form of worship is mystical in nature. The power you get - a really neat afterlife when you die. Abstaining and taking geases increases your "Get a really neat afterlife" skill, whilst selecting his Rune Magic decreases it. OK, not what most players want for their characters, but I still think that just because they're mystics doesn't mean we can't express their powers in game terms - even if that power has no noticeable game effects (imagine after playing your mystic for five years, have him die and know all your hard work paid off by him getting to the afterlife he wanted - not what I would call satisfying). Does anyone else have any other example mystical paths? And what benefits you gain from them (tangible or otherwise)? Gloranthan or otherwise? I was thinking that all mystical paths could work akin to Sandy's Mysticism - you have a skill, you can increase it and then spend it on the Mystical powers. For example, take Illumination. We could change the rules so that you have the Illumination skill and rather than increasing it with meditation like Sandy's eastern mystics do, you increase it by listening to riddles etc... You spend it not on powers to increase your physical ability etc... but on the Illuminate powers we already have (immune to gift/geases etc...). I think this would work and would be quite slick as a game mechanic goes. What does everyone else think? Nikk *************************************************************************** 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, 6 Mar 1999 13:13:39 GMT From: "Nikk Effingham" Subject: [RQ-RULES] Sandy's Grimoire Two things, doesn't it say in Sandy's grimoire that a way of keeping track of an object is to bind a spirit into the object and then cast Apprentice Bonding upon it? Since apprentice bonding requires the person (in this case, the spirit) it is cast upon to willingly sacrifice 1 POW surely this doesn't work as you can't order a bound/dominated being to sacrifice POW for you. Secondly, in a game i ran last week I used a multispelled Venom and Diminsh CON on one player. He was more frustrated over the order of spell effects than anyone was on this digest when it was discussed : ) Nikk *************************************************************************** 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, 7 Mar 1999 00:01:00 +0000 From: Michael Cule Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Mysticism In message , Nikk Effingham writes >Has everyone seen Sandy's rules for Mysticism? Nope. Available on the web? - -- Michael Cule *************************************************************************** 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, 8 Mar 1999 09:18:36 GMT From: "Nikk Effingham" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Mysticism > In message , Nikk Effingham > writes > >Has everyone seen Sandy's rules for Mysticism? > > Nope. Available on the web? Craig Pays Website I do believe, along with Sandy's Sorcery rules, Sorcery sect rules, Ritual Magic, Shamanism and Grimoire. Nikk *************************************************************************** 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, 8 Mar 1999 09:27:51 GMT From: simonh@msi-uk.com (Simon Hibbs) Subject: [RQ-RULES] Relearning spells Ashley Munday : >Personally I don't like the idea of a magus with 150% in a spell taking 50 >hours and only having an INT x 3 chance of rememorising the spell after all >that. I suppose it depends on what you think the relationship is between the spell knowledge in memory and the spell skill. They are clearly intended to be different things. To my mind, the spell knowledge stored in your character's INT isn't knowledge in the conventional sense. It's more like a new instinct, or a sixth sense (or seventh, or eighth). It's the difference between having eyes to see with and having a Search skill. Suppose a sighted man with a high Search skill is blinded. He can nolonger see and cannot use his Search skill, but should his eyesight be restored he can now use the skill again. 'Forgeting' a spell from meory means you nologer have that particular spiritual 'sense' or ability, but you still have the skill. If you relearn the spell then you can use your skill again. Simon Hibbs P.S. I just read Terje's post after writing this. He seems to be thinking along similar lines. I like his analogy with tools. *************************************************************************** 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, 8 Mar 1999 10:20:29 -0000 From: Ashley Munday Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] Relearning spells Typical, I posted the tool analogy and used it to try and highlight the difference between what the Free INT contains and the skill in casting it does... shot by my own analogy, but at least I'm convinced by it! :-) Personally, I'm now starting to wonder if you can write the Free INT chunk of a spell down in anything. (Not that anyone in my campaign ever did...) Ash - -----Original Message----- From: simonh@msi-uk.com [mailto:simonh@msi-uk.com] Sent: 08 March 1999 09:28 To: runequest-rules@mpgn.com Subject: [RQ-RULES] Relearning spells Ashley Munday : >Personally I don't like the idea of a magus with 150% in a spell taking 50 >hours and only having an INT x 3 chance of rememorising the spell after all >that. I suppose it depends on what you think the relationship is between the spell knowledge in memory and the spell skill. They are clearly intended to be different things. To my mind, the spell knowledge stored in your character's INT isn't knowledge in the conventional sense. It's more like a new instinct, or a sixth sense (or seventh, or eighth). It's the difference between having eyes to see with and having a Search skill. Suppose a sighted man with a high Search skill is blinded. He can nolonger see and cannot use his Search skill, but should his eyesight be restored he can now use the skill again. 'Forgeting' a spell from meory means you nologer have that particular spiritual 'sense' or ability, but you still have the skill. If you relearn the spell then you can use your skill again. Simon Hibbs P.S. I just read Terje's post after writing this. He seems to be thinking along similar lines. I like his analogy with tools. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. *************************************************************************** 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, 8 Mar 1999 10:16:47 -0500 From: "Bob Stancliff" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Mysticism > Has everyone seen Sandy's rules for Mysticism? I hope so, they sure > are good so pick up a copy if you haven't. > Nikk Where does he post them? Most of us haven't a clue. *************************************************************************** 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, 8 Mar 1999 10:22:30 -0500 From: "Bob Stancliff" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Sandy's Grimoire > Two things, doesn't it say in Sandy's grimoire that a way of keeping > track of an object is to bind a spirit into the object and then cast > Apprentice Bonding upon it? Since apprentice bonding requires the > person (in this case, the spirit) it is cast upon to willingly > sacrifice 1 POW surely this doesn't work as you can't order a > bound/dominated being to sacrifice POW for you. Most cult spirits or friendly ancestors could be willing, but cult spirits don't apply to sorcerers, and friendly ancestors are difficult for a sorcerer to come up with. Sandy is human too... It is very common to forget a modifying rule in the glow of a neat idea. > Secondly, in a game i ran last week I used a multispelled Venom and > Diminsh CON on one player. He was more frustrated over the order of > spell effects than anyone was on this digest when it was discussed : ) Somewhere between irate and enraged? *************************************************************************** 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, 08 Mar 1999 11:54:00 -0500 From: Tal Meta Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Sandy's Grimoire Bob Stancliff wrote: > > > sacrifice 1 POW surely this doesn't work as you can't > > order a bound/dominated being to sacrifice POW for you. > Most cult spirits or friendly ancestors could be willing, > but cult spirits don't apply to sorcerers, and friendly > ancestors are difficult for a sorcerer to come up with. > Sandy is human too... It is very common to forget a > modifying rule in the glow of a neat idea. Yes, but who is to say that a magic spirit might be so unwilling to learn sorcery? In the spirit's opinion, it might be a fair exchange (assuming you play spirits as having personalities, and not just as mindless spell cannons...) - -- talmeta@bellatlantic.net - Heretic & Dilettante ICQ - 12594453 AIM - talmeta1 Homepage - *************************************************************************** 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, 8 Mar 1999 17:19:54 -0000 From: "Hibbs, Philip" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] Sandy's Grimoire >Yes, but who is to say that a magic spirit might be so >unwilling to learn sorcery? In the spirit's opinion, it might >be a fair exchange (assuming you play spirits as having >personalities, and not just as mindless spell cannons...) Magic spirits have full Free INT, so must be played as intelligent creatures. Sandy's use for them, though, was as tracking devices for important objects, and I can't see this being a desirable occupation. Opinions expressed may not even be my own, let alone those of any organisations, nations, species, or schools of thought to which I may be affiliated. http://www.snark.freeserve.co.uk/ Failure is not an option, it's integral to the o/s. *************************************************************************** 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, 8 Mar 1999 13:11:06 -0500 From: "Bob Stancliff" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Sandy's Grimoire > > Most cult spirits or friendly ancestors could be willing, > > but cult spirits don't apply to sorcerers, and friendly > > ancestors are difficult for a sorcerer to come up with. > Yes, but who is to say that a magic spirit might be so unwilling to > learn sorcery? In the spirit's opinion, it might be a fair exchange > talmeta@bellatlantic.net - Heretic & Dilettante I really didn't discuss Magic Spirits, Tal. While you express a view that agrees with mine as of last year, I have checked the creatures book again, and am no longer convinced that Magic Spirits are like immature ghosts. It is less likely that they speak a human tongue. Other than that... it could happen. I have trouble with Magic Spirits existing, since they fill no clear niche in the world. If they were weak ghosts, then they wouldn't need to be mentioned. If they are not ghosts, then how do humans speak with them and why do they know human spells. My original belief was that they were souls that were ready to be reborn, having been stripped of their past lives except for some lingering knowledge. Now I have no firm opinion. I do believe that most sorcerers could find a friendly ancestor spirit if they summoned enough of them, but they are far less common than for Daka Fal's. The rest would have to be appeased quickly, or the sorcerer could have some tough fights. Bob Stancliff *************************************************************************** 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, 8 Mar 1999 13:13:53 -0500 From: "Bob Stancliff" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Sandy's Grimoire > Magic spirits have full Free INT, so must be played as intelligent > creatures. Sandy's use for them, though, was as tracking devices for > important objects, and I can't see this being a desirable occupation. Having an apprentice spirit in a powerful magic item is a great thing. The side effect is that you have some knowledge of it's location. Bob *************************************************************************** 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, 8 Mar 1999 16:15:50 -0600 From: "Rich Allen" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] Relearning spells > Personally, I'm now starting to wonder if you can write the Free INT chunk > of a spell down in anything. (Not that anyone in my campaign ever did...) Based on Simon's analogy of spell knowledge and eye sight, I look at it this way. If the sorcerer retains the _skill_ to cast a spell, but can loose and regain the _ability_ then there's still a skill that can be written down. This would be the basics of casting the spell, and notes gained through personal experience with it. This would aid only in regaining the ability to cast it, nothing to do with actual skill percentages, since those aren't lost. Thanks for that analogy, by the way, Simon. That put it perfectly in perspective for me. Rich Allen *************************************************************************** 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, 8 Mar 1999 16:22:10 -0600 From: "Rich Allen" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] Sandy's Grimoire > I have trouble with Magic Spirits existing, since they I have a related question... How does the ability to store sorcerer spells in a familiar or Magic Spirit mesh with the idea that a spell's skill and the ability to cast the spell are seperate? The _ability_ to cast a spell is being stored externally? Is this like aquiring a third eye, but grafting it onto your cat instead of your own forehead, and then being able to see out of it whenever you feel like it? Rich Allen *************************************************************************** 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, 08 Mar 1999 17:29:18 -0500 From: Tal Meta Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Sandy's Grimoire Hibbs, Philip wrote: > > Magic spirits have full Free INT, so must be played as intelligent > creatures. Sandy's use for them, though, was as tracking devices for > important objects, and I can't see this being a desirable occupation. Well, there's no need to -tell them- that they're being so used. Call it a fringe benefit. :) - -- talmeta@bellatlantic.net - Heretic & Dilettante ICQ - 12594453 AIM - talmeta1 Homepage - *************************************************************************** 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 V2 #47 ************************************ *************************************************************************** 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 Hasbro/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.