From: owner-runequest-rules@lists.ient.com (RuneQuest Rules Digest) To: runequest-rules-digest@lists.ient.com Subject: RuneQuest Rules Digest V4 #88 Reply-To: runequest-rules@lists.ient.com Sender: owner-runequest-rules@lists.ient.com Errors-To: owner-runequest-rules@lists.ient.com Precedence: bulk RuneQuest Rules Digest Monday, July 9 2001 Volume 04 : Number 088 RuneQuest is a trademark of Hasbro/Avalon Hill Games. All Rights Reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS Re: [RQ-RULES] More spells for criticism : Spiritwrap Re: [RQ-RULES] More spells for criticism : Cloud of Magic Re: [RQ-RULES] More spells for criticism : Reflection Of The Death Rune Re: [RQ-RULES] More spells for criticism : Rune of the Tiger Re: [RQ-RULES] More spells for criticism : Tenebrous (Weapon) Re: [RQ-RULES] Roman setting [RQ-RULES] Multiple actions [RQ-RULES] No more than 100% [RQ-RULES] Tenebrous (Weapon) [RQ-RULES] SR and multiple attacks RE: [RQ-RULES] No more than 100% [RQ-RULES] THe Sorcerer's Apprentice 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: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 10:05:24 -0400 From: "Leon B Kirshtein" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] More spells for criticism : Spiritwrap - ---- "Adam Benedict Canning" wrote: > > > Spiritwrap > > > Variable spirit magic spell, temporal, passive > > > For each point in this spell the subject > > suffers the effects > > > of uncomfortable temperatures as if the > > temperature was 5°C > > > less extreme. Thus under 3 points of this spell > > –5°C would > > > affect the character as if it was 10°C and 65°C > > as if it was > > > 50°C. > > > > I just do not see this spell as being used too > > much. As spirit magic > > its duration is fairly short plus to be of any > > benifit you would have > > to cast it at a very high level. Make it sorcery > > and 10°C per intensity > > and it would be worth while. > > 10°C per intensity means that > Intensity 4 will be sufficent for comfort from around -30 to > 60°C. > Intensity 8 and one can swim in boiling water without > discomfort. > Intensity 36 and one could try to swim in liquid helium > without discomfort. > > I'm almost tempted to make it a longer than usual duration > but 5°C per point, the question would come what duration is > too long an hour? a day? > > Adam > Well if it sorcery you duration problem is solved. As to the 5°C vs 10°C how often do you see someone casting an intensity 36 spell? And if someone is puting up such spell (I36), well I have no problem about them swimming in liquid helium. Their clothes and equipment on the other hand ... :) Leon Kirshtein (No good deed shall go unpunished.) ___________________________________________________________________ To get your own FREE ZDNet Onebox - FREE voicemail, email, and fax, all in one place - sign up today at http://www.zdnetonebox.com *************************************************************************** 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: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 10:10:07 -0400 From: "Leon B Kirshtein" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] More spells for criticism : Cloud of Magic - ---- "Adam Benedict Canning" wrote: > > > > Cloud of Magic > > > Variable spirit magic spell, ranged, 5m radius per point > > > area effect, temporal, passive > > > Within the area of effect of this spell, the > > visibility of > > > magical phenomena is reduced by formless swirls > > of mana. The > > > visibility of gross effects, such as the > > presence of spirits > > > or spells running is reduced by 50% and detail > > examination > > > of magical fields is prevented. > > > > I assume you are trying to prevent people > > examining your spirits and > > magic in combat. > > > I would go for a set area, > > something like a Darkwall > > or Lightwall and make it a 2pt or 3pt spell or > > make it variable effect > > one person/spirit and each point would reduce > > search/scan skill by 10% > > per point. I do like the idea of this spell. > > The original idea came from Brust's Pheonix Guard. And I > want a volume effect thus the variability effecting radius > rather than the one-way screen the walls give. The point > being that it blinds both sides. The wall effect has > potential as an alternative spirit spell. > > The variable effect and target version feels more like a > Sorcery version using multispell for the number of targets > and the skill reduction being 10% per intensity. > > Adam > Spirit spells in RQ are more personel centered in general. If you want an area effect it may be worth while to make it a ritual enchantment. You won't be able to cast it in combat, but it will give you what you want in its effect. Leon Kirshtein (No good deed shall go unpunished.) ___________________________________________________________________ To get your own FREE ZDNet Onebox - FREE voicemail, email, and fax, all in one place - sign up today at http://www.zdnetonebox.com *************************************************************************** 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: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 10:25:48 -0400 From: "Leon B Kirshtein" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] More spells for criticism : Reflection Of The Death Rune - ---- "Adam Benedict Canning" wrote: > > > Reflection Of The Death Rune > > > 2 point divine magic spell, temporal, passive, > > nonstackable > > > reusable > > > Humakt (Sword), Yanfal Tarnils (Scimitar), > > Babesta Gor(Axe), > > > Zorak Zoran(Maul) > > > This spell temporarily provides a normal weapon > > of the type > > > appropriate to the casters god. The weapon > > disappears at the > > > end of the duration or if it leaves the casters > > possession > > > > Unless the weapon is going to count as magical > > for purposes of killing > > such things as Gorps and Werewolves, it should > > only be a 1pt spell. > > I think the best way round is the weapon should count as > rune metal for the purpose of damaging creatures so subject. > So it would hurt werewolves but not gorp. I believe gorp are damaged by rune metals, so if you go with one you may as well go with the other. True sword is 1pt spell it can effect both and it gives additional damege. IMO 1pt and magical damage is the way to go. > > > Although ZZs have a 'soft spot' for blunt weapons > > they are not really > > associated with Mauls, Kigor Litor is, she does > > give out True Maul to > > her worshipers. > > I thought Maul was ZZ's form of the Death Rune, having > checked the requirements for Death Lord, it should be mace. > Based on the cult write up, yes ZZ = mace. However ZZ carried a number of different weapons and lost most of them ( exp: Axe to Babesta Gor). If fact I know of at least one quest where ZZ is trying to find a weapon for himself. > > You may wish to add > > Yelm/Lodril(Spear) and Orlanth(Sword), > > and Aldria(Bow and Arrows???) > > Aldrya would be Axe IIR the myth on early uses of death. But > I'd be disinclined to give it to these cults or Kygor Litor > directly because they have no death rune. Orlanthi getting > it from association with Humakt at some temples or KL from > some ZZ temples would be appropriate. Wasn't it the High King Elf who killed Stone? What subcult should have the death rune. And I believe the dwarves first made axes to use them on trees, if what is the case then giving axe to Aldrya is like rubing salt in the wound. I see you point about not giving this spell to Orlanth or KL. I would not give it to ZZ just because of the mythical stories about him loosing weapons and having to go search for new ones all the time. Leon Kitshtein ___________________________________________________________________ To get your own FREE ZDNet Onebox - FREE voicemail, email, and fax, all in one place - sign up today at http://www.zdnetonebox.com *************************************************************************** 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: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 10:29:07 -0400 From: "Leon B Kirshtein" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] More spells for criticism : Rune of the Tiger - ---- "Adam Benedict Canning" wrote: > > Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 13:35:07 -0400 > > From: "Leon B Kirshtein" > > > > > > > > Rune of the Tiger > > > Spirit magic enchantment > > > Each point of permanent POW sacrificed with > > this enchantment > > > increases the size of dice used for unarmed > > combat damage > > > caused by the subject by one step on this list > > 1d3 - 1d4 - > > > 1d6 – 1d8 – 1d10 – 1d12[maximum]. Martial arts > > double the > > > improved dice type, when relevant. > > > > Make this a stackable divine magic and have it > > add the base damage per > > point 1d3 - 2d3 - 3d3 - 4d3. Or leave it as > > spirit spell but make it > > variable. > > > > I just can't see someone walking around all the > > time with hands which > > do 1d12 and be able to use them for anything else > > execept combat. Don't > > trip ... > > It souldn't be any worse than tripping with Ironhand 6 > running. > > Just try to avoid pounding shop counters to get service > until you've got used to tapping them more gently. > > Adam But Ironhand is not permanent your spell is! Don't pat your dog or your kids ... :) Leon Kirshtein (No good deed shall go unpunished.) ___________________________________________________________________ To get your own FREE ZDNet Onebox - FREE voicemail, email, and fax, all in one place - sign up today at http://www.zdnetonebox.com *************************************************************************** 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: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 10:35:34 -0400 From: "Leon B Kirshtein" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] More spells for criticism : Tenebrous (Weapon) - ---- "Adam Benedict Canning" wrote: > > Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2001 13:35:07 -0400 > > From: "Leon B Kirshtein" > > > > Tenebrous (Weapon) > > > 2 point divine magic spell, temporal, passive, reusable > > > Humakt (Sword), Black Fang(Dagger) Zorak Zoran(Maul) > > > This spell obscures the target weapon such that > > it cannot be > > > parried unless the defender makes a greater > > level of success > > > on a scan roll than the success of the casting. > > A separate > > > scan check is made for each attack with this weapon. > > > > Humakt would never give out such a spell. > > What about the Humakt cults/Aspects that have an emphasis on > the unstopability of death rather than honour? I am not aware of any Humakti subcults what do so. He does have the thruth rune after all. > > > I seem > > to remeber a Humakti > > quest were you are supposed to turn down an > > Invisiable Sword. Does any > > one remeber this? > > > > It also seems a bit too sutle for ZZs. > > Possibly. If I could work out the appropriate weapons, > Annilla, Subere and Xemella would all feel sort of > appropriate. > > Adam Yes, no, I do not know. Annilla and Jakelel (?spelling) would be perfect. Subere is more associated with spirits/demons/magic as opposed to mundane/weapons. I do not remeber who Xemella is. Leon Kirshtein (No good deed shall go unpunished.) ___________________________________________________________________ To get your own FREE ZDNet Onebox - FREE voicemail, email, and fax, all in one place - sign up today at http://www.zdnetonebox.com *************************************************************************** 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: Mon, 09 Jul 2001 11:41:33 -0400 From: Tal Meta Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Roman setting RAMEAU Alain wrote: > > This setting reminds me a RPG issued about the same time as RQ (I can't be > more precise), called, as far as I remember, Myth and Magic. Man, Myth, & Magic, actually. I even have a copy. :) - -- 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: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 08:43:57 -0700 From: Simon Hibbs Subject: [RQ-RULES] Multiple actions Mikko Korhonen : >just wondering: How do you guys handle multiple attacks in combat? Let's say >character has 100% in both right hand scimitar and left hand dagger. Rules >give two actions per melee round(attack once/parry once, attack twice, parry >twice), no matter how fast the character is. If character divides his >attack%, he gets two attacks with 1/2 chance. How about if he attacks with >both weapons with divided attack%? Basically he then gets four attacks? Any >house rules? He'd get 4 attacks, but no parry or dodge. He'd probably run out of strike ranks in which to make the attacks, so I doubt it's viable under the current rules. One rule I realy like in Elric is the Riposte option. If a character makes a special success parry against an opponent's failed attack, then the defender can knock aside the attacking weapon, opening the attacker for a free attack by the defender. The Riposte attack has to be with a different weapon to that used to parry the orriginal attack. In practice, it often gets used for those very cinematic kicks, punches and knockbacks you see in Errol Flyn movies. Great stuff! Simon Hibbs *************************************************************************** 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: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 17:03:25 +0100 From: "Tom Zunder" Subject: [RQ-RULES] No more than 100% No more than 100%, that's when it gets fun! I think that in RQ noone would have enough strike ranks to perform 4 attacks a round. If they did I'd let em. - --- T H Zunder tom@zunder.freeserve.co.uk ICQ:1521799 *************************************************************************** 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: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 11:28:56 -0400 From: Robert Stancliff Subject: [RQ-RULES] Tenebrous (Weapon) > > > Tenebrous (Weapon) > > > This spell obscures the target weapon such that > > > > Humakt would never give out such a spell. > > What about the Humakt cults/Aspects that have an emphasis on > the unstopability of death rather than honor? > Remember that Humakt has a tie to the Truth rune. He would never give deceit magic, that would need a tie to Illusion. If you want unstoppable Death, then make Truesword stackable like Bab.Gor's Slash or give Humakt a Sword Trance like Axe Trance. It has bothered me for a while that Bab.Gor has better Death magic that the god of Death. Bab.Gor should be weakened or Humakt should be toughened... maybe swap some spell effects between them. 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: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 17:06:15 +0100 From: RAMEAU Alain Subject: [RQ-RULES] SR and multiple attacks In my house rules, when using two weapons, you can attack with the primary one at the normal Melee SR, and with the secondary one 1 SR later. If you have more than 100% in both, the second strikes occur 3SR after the primary one and 3SR after the secondary one, provided it does not go beyond the 10 SR you are entitled to. Concerning the SR system, I think the Feng Shui combat system could be a source of inspiration. Alain. *************************************************************************** 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: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 13:05:42 -0400 From: Robert Stancliff Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] No more than 100% > No more than 100%, that's when it gets fun! Definitely, high percent battles are fun. > I think that in RQ no one would have enough strike ranks to perform > 4 attacks a round. If they did I'd let em. Strictly, by the rules, the attacks would need to be in SR1, 4, 7, and 10. To get a SR1 attack requires a Lance or Pike, 20 SIZ and 20 DEX. I can barely imagine a mounted Troll or Agimori with a Lance and a second weapon riding through an enemy force, splitting the Lance attack and then splitting the other weapon after it. This is obviously a difficult scenario to arrange, but possible. Another possibility is a very dexterous giant with a couple of big branches. 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: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:03:19 EDT From: MurfNMurf@aol.com Subject: [RQ-RULES] THe Sorcerer's Apprentice - --part1_30.175e04e6.287b6807_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hiya gang, Having watched _Fantasia_ a while back, I got to wondering if the RQ (or Sandy's) Sorcery Rules could be used to recreate the whole animated broom shtick. Anyone have a clearer idea than me about just which spells would be involved? For those of you not familiar with the sequence, _welcome to Earth!_ Anyhow, the broom is not only Animated, but given a pair of arms as well. Then the thing is also self-aware enough to move around under its own power, understand some pretty simple directions, and then perform the task without any supervision (I'm not even gonna get into the whole thing where the splintered bits of broom grow into identical animated brooms, though). -Ken- - --part1_30.175e04e6.287b6807_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit  Hiya gang,
  Having watched _Fantasia_ a while back, I got to wondering if the RQ (or
Sandy's) Sorcery Rules could be used to recreate the whole animated broom
shtick. Anyone have a clearer idea than me about just which spells would be
involved?
  For those of you not familiar with the sequence, _welcome to Earth!_
  Anyhow, the broom is not only Animated, but given a pair of arms as well.
Then the thing is also self-aware enough to move around under its own power,
understand some pretty simple directions, and then perform the task without
any supervision (I'm not even gonna get into the whole thing where the
splintered bits of broom grow into identical animated brooms, though).
 -Ken- - --part1_30.175e04e6.287b6807_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. ------------------------------ End of RuneQuest Rules Digest V4 #88 ************************************ *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.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.