From: owner-runequest-rules@lists.ient.com (RuneQuest Rules Digest) To: runequest-rules-digest@lists.ient.com Subject: RuneQuest Rules Digest V4 #13 Reply-To: runequest-rules@lists.imagiconline.com Sender: owner-runequest-rules@lists.ient.com Errors-To: owner-runequest-rules@lists.ient.com Precedence: bulk RuneQuest Rules Digest Monday, March 26 2001 Volume 04 : Number 013 RuneQuest is a trademark of Hasbro/Avalon Hill Games. All Rights Reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS Re: [RQ-RULES] Familiars Re: [RQ-RULES] Familiars Re: [RQ-RULES] Familiars Re: [RQ-RULES] Familiars RE: [RQ-RULES] Familiars [RQ-RULES] Re:RQ/DnD Re: [RQ-RULES] Re:RQ/DnD Re: [RQ-RULES] Re:RQ/DnD Re: [RQ-RULES] Re:RQ/DnD Re: [RQ-RULES] Re:RQ/DnD Re: [RQ-RULES] Re:RQ/DnD Re: [RQ-RULES] Familiars Re: [RQ-RULES] Skalds, warriors and social standing... 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, 21 Mar 2001 23:34:25 -0500 From: Tal Meta Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Familiars Jeremy Martin wrote: > > If bound spirits can be made into familiars, what about one bound into a matrix > tattoed on the sorcerors arm? I'd probably rule that since it wasn't a separate creature, it couldn't be a proper familiar. Of course, an animate tattoo... that has certain possibilities.... - -- talmeta@cybercomm.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine ICQ - 12594453 AIM - talmeta Homepage - *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 12:56:40 +0800 From: Jeremy Martin Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Familiars Tal Meta wrote: > Jeremy Martin wrote: > > > > If bound spirits can be made into familiars, what about one bound into a matrix > > tattoed on the sorcerors arm? > > I'd probably rule that since it wasn't a separate creature, it couldn't > be a proper familiar. Of course, an animate tattoo... that has certain > possibilities.... Is the bound spirit the familiar or the thing that it is bound into the familiar? In the Griffin Island example of a spirit bound into a ring, is the ring the familiar, or the spirit? An animate tattoo would really be just a statue familiar made from fine wire that could sink into / hold onto wherever you put it, really. Spooky, though. Jeremy *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 12:57:31 +0800 From: Jeremy Martin Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Familiars Tal Meta wrote: > Jeremy Martin wrote: > > > > I've read through your website and know all about Nephar and your campaign (and > > recognized the Lost Caverns). I've always wanted to congratulate you on an > > interesting site and campaign. I gather from recent comments that the game ended? > > Thanx; yes, we finally ended it. Time for someone else in the group to > take up the GM torch for awhile. I'm planning on running the adventure > they didn't go on at a convention next month, though. Maybe in a year or > two we'll return to it. > > Still have to get around to posting the maps for the extended Caverns, > though. (Want to do them properly in DD2, the only part of the core CC2 > family I lack...) Actually, I'd like the rest of the journal updates... Jeremy *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 06:54:00 +0100 From: St=?ISO-8859-1?B?6Q==?=phane FRANCOIS Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Familiars > Is the bound spirit the familiar or the thing that it is bound into the > familiar? In > the Griffin Island example of a spirit bound into a ring, is the ring the > familiar, > or the spirit? I'd say both. During the process of familiar creation you give the spirit a body (the ring) and merge them through sorcery. At the end of the ritual you no longer have two entities, but a single one, the familiar. For exemple the spirit has no longer the ability to be released from the ring. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 09:48:34 -0500 From: Robert Stancliff Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] Familiars > It seems like a ring familiar that can cast its spells > or yours and doesn't really move or any such thing is a > little dangerous / unbalancing. On the other hand, > you're losing all the scouting and fighting capabilities. Just to confuse the issue, I will contradict my earlier statements and agree with you... it is rather scary because it can't be stopped without putting a spell on it or killing it. The reason most games have gestures is so that you can tie the caster up and stop him from casting. Games like D&D basically say that you Have to make certain gestures and if it isn't possible, for any reason, then you can't cast the spell (Hey Wiz, too bad about losing that finger, I'm sure you can find a new career). > If bound spirits can be made into familiars, what about > one bound into a matrix tattooed on the sorcerers arm? > Jeremy The point about all of the Create familiar spells is that they make the familiar a complete creature. It is supposed to be embodied, alive, and marginally mobile. There is a good analysis in the beginning of the Creature Book, if I recall. To make the spirit embodied it has to have a supply of non-living material that will become it's body, therefore the bound spirit is very likely to have to come out of the tattoo during the spell, leaving you with an empty bind. Bob Stancliff *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: 22 Mar 2001 16:15:37 +0100 From: Alain RAMEAU Subject: [RQ-RULES] Re:RQ/DnD Alignment is not mandatory (Star Wars, for instance, don't have such) and I don't intend to use it. Concerning class, the new D&D 3rd edition made a big step forward, with simple rules for multi-class characters, elite classes and free access to most of the skill (provided some are more expensives for some professions, but it is similar in RQ3 with the starting package per profession). Like you, I never really played much AD&D after discovering RQ. But I bought the third edition, and I really think it's worth a look, as the system is much more coherent than before. And if you look at the number of books sold, that's many potential players that could be interested to play in a nice background (Glorantha) while keeping their own D&D system. Alain. - ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 13:01:17 -0500 From: trentfs@ix.netcom.com Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] RQ/DnD As for representing inanities like character class and alignment in Glorantha, you got me. It's things like that made me stop playing D&D all those years ago... *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 11:57:46 -0500 From: Tal Meta Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Re:RQ/DnD Alain RAMEAU wrote: > > don't intend to use it. Concerning class, the new D&D 3rd edition made a big > step forward, with simple rules for multi-class characters, elite classes and > free access to most of the skill (provided some are more expensives for some > professions, but it is similar in RQ3 with the starting package per profession). Funny, ain't it, that Hasbro owns both RQ & D&D, ain't it? The similarities in the systems are almost enough to get me to switch. Almost. - -- talmeta@cybercomm.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine ICQ - 12594453 AIM - talmeta Homepage - *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 15:07:48 EST From: MurfNMurf@aol.com Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Re:RQ/DnD - --part1_6d.11245cf4.27ebb594_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 3/22/01 11:07:31 AM Central Standard Time, Talmeta writes: > Funny, ain't it, that Hasbro owns both RQ & D&D, ain't it? The > similarities in the systems are almost enough to get me to switch. > Almost. > > Well, as an aside to the RQ to DnD3 switch, keep in mind what a friend who just entered a DnD3 game told me: You only get 1 action per round. No dodge, parry, etc... -Ken- - --part1_6d.11245cf4.27ebb594_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 3/22/01 11:07:31 AM Central Standard Time, Talmeta writes:


Funny, ain't it, that Hasbro owns both RQ & D&D, ain't it? <g> The
similarities in the systems are almost enough to get me to switch.
Almost.


  Well, as an aside to the RQ to DnD3 switch, keep in mind what a friend who
just entered a DnD3 game told me: You only get 1 action per round. No dodge,
parry, etc...
 -Ken-
- --part1_6d.11245cf4.27ebb594_boundary-- *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 15:34:56 EST From: SPerrin@aol.com Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Re:RQ/DnD - --part1_32.1255e7b5.27ebbbf0_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 3/22/01 12:24:09 PM Pacific Standard Time, MurfNMurf@aol.com writes: > > Well, as an aside to the RQ to DnD3 switch, keep in mind what a friend > who > just entered a DnD3 game told me: You only get 1 action per round. No > dodge, > parry, etc... Not quite correct. Keep in mind that dodge and parry are subsumed into AC. And under certain circumstances and with the right skills/feats you can get a lot more than one action in a round. Steve Perrin, who just played in a short-lived campaign and is working on some D20 projects because that's where the money is. - --part1_32.1255e7b5.27ebbbf0_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 3/22/01 12:24:09 PM Pacific Standard Time,
MurfNMurf@aol.com writes:

 Well, as an aside to the RQ to DnD3 switch, keep in mind what a friend
who
just entered a DnD3 game told me: You only get 1 action per round. No
dodge,
parry, etc...


Not quite correct. Keep in mind that dodge and parry are subsumed into AC.
And under certain circumstances and with the right skills/feats you can get a
lot more than one action in a round.

Steve Perrin, who just played in a short-lived campaign and is working on
some D20 projects because that's where the money is. - --part1_32.1255e7b5.27ebbbf0_boundary-- *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 17:04:51 -0500 From: "Joseph Elric Smith: Servant of Arioch: Lord of the Seven Darks" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Re:RQ/DnD This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0145_01C0B2F2.3530E340 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Well all I can say is if it has you name on it I will buy it for sure, = always been a big fan of your and st. Andr=E9 s ken Gygax is to Gaming what Kirby was to comics. Alas poor Elric I was a thousand times more evil then you. ----- Original Message -----=20 From: SPerrin@aol.com=20 To: runequest-rules@lists.ient.com=20 Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 3:34 PM Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Re:RQ/DnD ISteve Perrin, who just played in a short-lived campaign and is = working on=20 some D20 projects because that's where the money is.=20 - ------=_NextPart_000_0145_01C0B2F2.3530E340 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Well all I can say is if it has you = name on it I=20 will buy  it for sure, always been a big fan of your and st. = Andr=E9=20 s
ken
 
Gygax is to Gaming what Kirby was to comics.
Alas poor Elric I = was a=20 thousand times more evil then you.
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 SPerrin@aol.com=20
To: runequest-rules@lists.ient= .com=20
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 = 3:34=20 PM
Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] = Re:RQ/DnD

ISteve = Perrin, who just=20 played in a short-lived campaign and is working on
some D20 = projects=20 because that's where the money is. = - ------=_NextPart_000_0145_01C0B2F2.3530E340-- *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 23:36:50 +0000 From: Michael Cule Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Re:RQ/DnD In message <32.1255e7b5.27ebbbf0@aol.com>, SPerrin@aol.com writes > Steve Perrin, who just played in a short-lived campaign and is > working on > some D20 projects because that's where the money is. God, that's sad.... - -- Michael Cule *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 11:27:35 +1000 From: Bruce Probst Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Familiars On Thu, 22 Mar 2001 12:56:40 +0800, Jeremy Martin wrote: >Is the bound spirit the familiar or the thing that it is bound into the familiar? In >the Griffin Island example of a spirit bound into a ring, is the ring the familiar, >or the spirit? You have to be careful with the "familiars" described in Griffin Island. Only two of the three are sorcerous familiars. The third one, the wyrm, is a familiar *only* in the old RQ2 definition of the term (that is, a friendly spirit bound into a living creature); it is, so far as I can tell, not possible to create a sorcerous familiar from a non-sentient living being by binding an intelligent spirit into it. [Why not? Because the familiar rules state very clearly that only an incomplete creature can be made into a familiar. A living creature has SIZ, STR etc.; an intelligent spirit has INT and POW. Once you bind the spirit into the animal, the creature is complete and cannot be familiar-ised!] I wrote up some house rules on making familiars from inanimate objects; I can post them if anyone's interested. - ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au ICQ 6563830 Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 "I sure hope he said 'peanuts'." ASL FAQ http://users.senet.com.au/~mantis/ASLFAQ *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 01:27:52 +0100 (BST) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Ian=20Gordon?= Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Skalds, warriors and social standing... Greetings one and all... I am playing a skald in a RQ game, though a Drogarsi rather than a Donandar. As he is an Orlanthi he also worships Orlanth. This is presenting me with some interesting problems of visualisation. Firstly, what position do normal bards hold in society? Is it as a non-combatant (in many cultures the bard's person was sancrosanct)? As far as I remember warriors can't touch them in many places, even Kyger Litor exercises restraint here. Secondly, as Drogarsi is the wardancer what relative position would he hold? He appears to be both bard and warrior, given that his place is on the battlefield. I am having difficulty deciding whether he could be challenged or not. Thirdly, he worships Orlanth, in the same way that an initiate of Matakos usually also worships Orlanth. If a skald of Drogarsi becomes a windlord, then what happens? At present I envisage this kind of dilemma... "You can't challenge me I'm a skald. Oh wait a minute you can challenge me as I'm a windlord. However if you touch me you break the 'ban' on assaulting a skald. Why not give up now as you can't win." I may be completely off base as far as this is concerned but I hope someone out there can put my mind to rest. Ian ____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ End of RuneQuest Rules Digest V4 #13 ************************************ *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.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.