From: owner-runequest-rules@ (RuneQuest Rules Digest) To: runequest-rules-digest@lists.MPGN.COM Subject: RuneQuest Rules Digest V2 #68 Reply-To: runequest-rules@mpgn.com Sender: owner-runequest-rules@ Errors-To: owner-runequest-rules@ Precedence: bulk RuneQuest Rules Digest Saturday, April 10 1999 Volume 02 : Number 068 RuneQuest is a trademark of Hasbro/Avalon Hill Games. All Rights Reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS Re: [RQ-RULES] ShoreCon '99 Re: [RQ-RULES] A Question about Sandy's Sorcery Rules Re: [RQ-RULES] A Question about Sandy's Sorcery Rules [RQ-RULES] RuneQuest Rules Re: [RQ-RULES] Re : multiple attacks whilst riding Re: [RQ-RULES] RuneQuest Rules Re: [RQ-RULES] Re : multiple attacks whilst riding Re: [RQ-RULES] RuneQuest Rules Re: [RQ-RULES] RuneQuest Rules Re: [RQ-RULES] A Question about Sandy's Sorcery Rules RE: [RQ-RULES] Re : multiple attacks whilst riding Re: [RQ-RULES] Weekly DIs Re: [RQ-RULES] Webpage Update [RQ-RULES] Re: Mysticism 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: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 16:52:13 EDT From: IssariesGT@aol.com Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] ShoreCon '99 In a message dated 4/9/99 4:34:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time, talmeta@cybercomm.net writes: << I'm the RPG coordinator for ShoreCon '99, which will be held on September 9-12 1999 at the Hilton in Cherry Hill, NJ. In that capacity, I'm looking for GMs (and players, too) for RPG events at the convention. >> Hey Tal: I have relatives in the area at the air station. Let me know more details and I'll see if they are interested. kes *************************************************************************** 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, 09 Apr 1999 17:28:00 -0400 From: Tal Meta Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] A Question about Sandy's Sorcery Rules John R. Snead wrote: > > >Stygian College of Magic > > > >Arts - accessed via "St. Arkat". Once initiated into his > >cult, magic works quite differently. There are no Arts - > >or, rather, all arts are accessible to the user, up to his > >skill and Presence limits. However, learning each different > >sorcery spell costs 1 POW, as it is accessed like a Rune spell. > >Sacking the POW gives the Stygian 1d6+Magic bonus in the spell, > >or a minimum of 1. I'm reading it out of context, but I'd say that a sorcerer with a magic bonus of 10 who sacked 1 POW and rolled a 5 would have 15 points worth of manipulation in the spell in question (i.e. could cast Evoke Fire Intensity 5, Range 5, Multispell 5, etc.). Or that for each POW spent, the sorc gains magic bonus + 1d6% skill in the spell, but that's rather weak. - -- talmeta@cybercomm.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: Sat, 10 Apr 1999 00:23:04 +0200 From: Julian Lord Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] A Question about Sandy's Sorcery Rules John R. Snead: > 1) "like a Rune spell" means the Sorcerer must pray to regain a cast > Sorcery spell (unlikely because of the mention of the cast chance (which > would then be much lower than a normal Rune spell > > 2) Spend 1 POW/spell and then cast it like you would any normal sorcery > spell with no necessity to pray to regain it. > > Also, the "sacking the POW is clearly stacking the POW, Not necessarily. It might be a slip for "Sacrifying" the POW. I'd say that it would mean that even Arkati with negative magic bonuses are guaranteed 1% in the spells they sacrify for. > however, does that > mean that you need to spend a 2nd point of POW to get a 1D6+Magic bonus > cast chance to the spell? So, with spending only 1 point of POW you have > a 0% cast chance? IF Sandy meant "Stacking", I'd say that the magician would have a +1D6%+Magic Bonus increase to that casting of his spell for each extra point stacked. *************************************************************************** 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, 9 Apr 1999 18:40:11 EDT From: SirVishal@aol.com Subject: [RQ-RULES] RuneQuest Rules Does anyone have an electronic copy of the RuneQuest Rules? I was told that several versions have been passed around and I would like to obtain one. If you do, please send it to the following E-mail address: SirVishal@aol.com Thank you. I greatly appreciate it. *************************************************************************** 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, 9 Apr 1999 18:36:59 EDT From: SirVishal@aol.com Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Re : multiple attacks whilst riding In a message dated 4/9/99 9:11:03 AM Eastern Daylight Time, simonh@msi-uk.com writes: > Pete Nash : > > >This whole thread has made me think about how combat skills should be > >used. Your full skill is available in an environment which is natural to > >you. So I'm juggling with the idea that Praxian beast riders fight at a > >penalty when they are dismounted, since this is unnatural to them. > > Since when has walking been an unnatural environment for humans? > Praxians may spend a large proportion of their time mounted, but it's > certainly not all of it and when they're raiding some of them must > spend at least some time fighting on the ground. > > >Unfortunately this causes problems. Riding based cultures will require a > >'Perambulate' skill to reflect how they do things on foot. > > *Giggles* > > > .....(And before > >anybody starts calling me stupid, have you seen how ungainly the modern > >day Mongols are on foot? Bandy legged is an understatement!) > > You could say the same of the Neppalese, who grow up on mountainsides and > have severe problems running on flat ground. I'd be very carefull what I > said around a Ghurka though! > > >The theory could hold for mermen/sea monsters fighting above the water > >too. > > I have a big problem taking your suggestion that praxians are as > uncomfortable on foot as mermen are on land. How do you think these > guys live their lives? Do they set up their teepees while mounted? > Do they collect plants, weave baskets, work leather, cook food and > make weapons while mounted? > > At most they might spend a quarter of their waking lives mounted up. > Probably an awfull lot less. > > > Simon Hibbs I think it's an excellent idea and that you may have misinterpreted the point a little. Since the fighting skill was developed mounted, that is the ideal environment for a Praxian beast rider to engage in combat. However, when dismounted, the rider will inevitably experience some awkwardness that should translate into a penalty of some kind. Surely, walking isn't "unnatural" but if you trained all your life on horseback or the like, wouldn't you feel at a kind of loss on foot? *************************************************************************** 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, 09 Apr 1999 19:20:06 -0400 From: Joseph Elric Smith Servant to Arioch Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] RuneQuest Rules I hate to pick a nit, but isn't illegal to pass around electronic copies? or am I just misinformed? THanks Ken SirVishal@aol.com wrote: > Does anyone have an electronic copy of the RuneQuest Rules? I was told that > several versions have been passed around and I would like to obtain one. If > you do, please send it to the following E-mail address: > > SirVishal@aol.com > > Thank you. I greatly appreciate it. > > ********************************* *************************************************************************** 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, 10 Apr 1999 01:19:24 GMT From: sbarrie@julian.uwo.ca (Scott Barrie) Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Re : multiple attacks whilst riding On Fri, 9 Apr 1999 13:57:10 +0100, Simon Hibbs wrote: >Pete Nash : >>The theory could hold for mermen/sea monsters fighting above the water >>too. > >I have a big problem taking your suggestion that praxians are as >uncomfortable on foot as mermen are on land. How do you think these >guys live their lives? Do they set up their teepees while mounted? >Do they collect plants, weave baskets, work leather, cook food and >make weapons while mounted? Mermen and Praxians could have different starting values. Say, Mermen start at 10%, and Praxians start at 50% (pulling numbers out of a hat). Scott B. Barrie University of Western Ontario Physics Grad Student ICQ: 31902206 *************************************************************************** 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, 09 Apr 1999 21:43:45 -0400 From: Tal Meta Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] RuneQuest Rules SirVishal@aol.com wrote: > > Does anyone have an electronic copy of the RuneQuest Rules? I was told that > several versions have been passed around and I would like to obtain one. If > you do, please send it to the following E-mail address: This begs the question: which version? I know there are at least 2 different versions of RQ4 out there, but nothing of 1, 2 or 3. - -- talmeta@cybercomm.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: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 21:51:41 -0400 From: "Bob Stancliff" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] RuneQuest Rules > I hate to pick a nit, but isn't illegal to pass around electronic copies? or am > I just misinformed? > THanks > Ken You are correct. A copywritten text may only be quoted by the excerpt of passages for the purpose of review or discussion unless the consent of the copyright holder is expressly given. A much fuzzier situation is the passing of files that are derived from another body of work but do not duplicate any portions of it, such as variant rules for a game such as RQ, or the RQ4 'work in progress' that died a horrible death, so copy permission was given *************************************************************************** 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, 9 Apr 1999 22:05:56 -0400 From: "Bob Stancliff" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] A Question about Sandy's Sorcery Rules > >Stygian College of Magic > >Arts - accessed via "St. Arkat". Once initiated into his > >cult, magic works quite differently. There are no Arts - > >or, rather, all arts are accessible to the user, up to his > >skill and Presence limits. However, learning each different > >sorcery spell costs 1 POW, as it is accessed like a Rune spell. > >Sacking the POW gives the Stygian 1d6+Magic bonus in the spell, > >or a minimum of 1. > > -John Snead jsnead@netcom.com wrote: > The above passage come from Sandy's *wonderful* Sorcery rules. The rest > Of the rules are both excellent and clear, but I'm a bit confused here. > If anyone has any clues about how exactly the above should be interpreted > let me know. I believe that this is correct: > 2) Spend 1 POW/spell and then cast it like you would any normal sorcery > spell with no necessity to pray to regain it. The access (knowledge?) is gained by the sacrifice, not (just?) by normal study of written tomes. Casting is by normal sorcery rules. It looks like you don't have to study, but the sacrifice could be in addition to study. If you sacrifice to learn it, do you have to use Free INT to store it or is it a Divine Spell that acts like sorcery? > Also, the "sacking the POW is clearly stacking the POW No, this is more correctly: 'Sacrificing the POW gives an initial spell skill of 1d6+Magic Bonus in the spell (minimum of 1%).' Bob Stancliff (stanclif@ufl.edu) 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: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 23:56:52 -0500 From: "Rich Allen" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] Re : multiple attacks whilst riding > > >So I'm juggling with the idea that Praxian beast riders > > I have a big problem taking your suggestion that praxians are as > > uncomfortable on foot as mermen are on land. How do you think these > > guys live their lives? Do they set up their teepees while mounted? > I think it's an excellent idea and that you may have > misinterpreted the point a little. Since the fighting > skill was developed mounted, that is the ideal > environment for a Praxian beast rider to engage in combat. However, when > dismounted, the rider will inevitably experience some awkwardness > that should translate into a penalty of some kind. I agree with Simon. But I think a better way to handle this would be to split up the skills. Mounted Spear would be a separate skill from Spear, and skill progression would occur separately. This means that the riding based cultures have better skills for combat when mounted, and lesser combat skills when on foot. I don't think this negates the need for penalties for mounted combat, just don't apply them on someone who is using a "mounted" version of a skill. 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: Sat, 10 Apr 1999 11:21:47 +0100 From: "Dom Twist" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Weekly DIs IMG the week counts down from when you last used it not 1 per week every week. The Allied spirit or another PC or whatever would still work. Assuming the Divine behind the Intervention was prepared to co-operate. Sounds a bit like mortal upityness to me. DT >The Runelord could do the whole thing at the end of the week. He'd have to >precisely time it so that the first DI happened on the very last second of >the week, and the second DI could be invoked one second later, which would >be the first second of the new week. > >This incredibly lame and objectionable example of power-gaming has been >brought to you by the letter "Y", as in "Y did I write this?". :-) *************************************************************************** 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, 10 Apr 1999 06:39:32 -0400 (EDT) From: Nikk Effingham Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Webpage Update >That's very nice and I'd like to visit, but you didn't give us the address to >your webpage. >- Eric *long pause* Ah. Yes. Indeedy... Normally it's in my signature, which i don't have anymore... The address is: http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Lair/7556/ 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, 10 Apr 1999 22:59:26 +0200 From: Nils Weinander Subject: [RQ-RULES] Re: Mysticism Me: > >> 3. Active mystics, like martial artists. They >> practice non-mystic techniques in a mystical >> context. Julian: > >(It should be said that 3. is "PC-type" Mysticism ... ;-) >ie a jokey/unrealistic cop-out for RPG purposes ... >ie 3. is very cool !) Well, #1 is boring, #2 are the bad guys... However, #3 is not a copout, it's a different way to do things. The orthodox mystic refutes the world in order to reach the ultimate. When she does, she gets access to seemingly limitless transcedental power. However, this power must also be refuted. To use it in the material world is to be entangled once again. When even this temptation is resisted, the mystic achieves the eternal bliss of liberation. The active mystic (#3), practices meditation and body mastery, just like the orthodox mystic, but with the objective to integrate with the ultimate. When she does she can channel and project the transcendental power. However, integration is not a mystical method, so this is not mysticism (in the gloranthan sense of the word), but related as it works with the mystical ultimate. And, the casual onlooker won't see the difference between these two. They do the same routines and look very similar. >Also, obviously, there are grey areas between these categories. >There are orthodox Mystics who are not completely successful with >their meditations, just as there are "active" Mystics who are >unusually good at them, and who hear a persistent and annoying >Inner Call away from the World. And there are active mystics >who court failure, etc.. Very true. The not quite successful orthodox mystics will sprout magical powers, probably of a somewhat random nature, as controlling and directing this force is not in their skill toolbox. Also, we shouldn't forget that the orthodox mystics do have "negative" magic, in the form of increased resistance against magic attacks, detection and physical harm. A highly skilled mystic can literally spend a century meditating naked on a mountain top, surrounded by ice storms, without aging, freezing or starving. >I don't think that it's using the powers which is non-Mystical >in itself. Rather, it is a willing relationship with material things >which motivates their active use that takes the magician >away from the mystic Void. Any active use of power is a willing relationship, which entangles you with the world. There's a fine line between active use and "non-use" at times though. For example, in the Vithelan myth, he antigod warlord Oorsu Sara (who btw is the greatest failed mystic) is killed by the Liberation Bolt, but it is not actively summoned/created by Mashunasan. Mashunasan does nothing at all, he just happens to be so damned mystical that _nothing_ in the universe can affect him. Oorsu Sara is so powerful and well versed in the transcendental that only his destruction stops him from harming the unharmable. >Of course, in 3rd-type Mysticism, the Mystic becomes >exceptionally _well_ involved with the material world, >as a kind of left-handed path to Transcendance ... That is _exactly_ what it is. The #3 mystics strive to be perfect _within_ the world. They don't need to detach themselves completely as they approach from another angle. ______________________________________________________ Nils Weinander | Everything is dust in the wind nilsw@ibm.net | http://www.geocities.com/Paris/8689/ *************************************************************************** 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 #68 ************************************ *************************************************************************** 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.