For some reason GD #159 seemed full of obvious errors which I feel impelled to correct.
>From: sstair_at_cs.utep.edu
>Date: Wed, 18 Oct 95 23:13:15 MDT
>Subject: Loskalmi Knights, Harrek & Tricksters
>
>David Cake:
>> To the Loskalmi way of life, soldier is only a step on the way to
>> knight. So why would you want training in fighting light, missile arms, and
>> skirmishing tactics, as all that will become irrelevent once you become a
>> knight?
>
>So that when you become a commander of the aforementioned soldiers,
>you will know their stengths, weaknesses and how to use them to best advantage.
>
First - there is no need to actually train as such a soldier to know their strenghs and weaknesses. Witness the great Chinese military tradition, which frequently included great commanders with no real skill at arms at all.
But more importantly - if you have no such troops in your army, why would you train to lead them? And I can't think of any real reason why the Loaskalmi would have any. I guess it is possible that they have been training them up since the Greenlead rebellion, but before that certainly not. After all, light inf is not very glorious, glamorous, compared to the cavalry or heavy infantry, and as the main point of Loskalmi miltary tradition for the last few centuries was showing off I can see light inf falling into disfavour.
>RE: Robert McArthur's beef about illusion magic:
>
>While it may seem expensive to use Divine Illusion spells,
>if you realize that most Tricksters are priests of some
>Trickster cult, and therefore can use their spells reusably,
>the cost does seem more reasonable.
>
You seem to have missed the point completely. The problem is that it is simply underpowered rune magic, not accessibility (IMHO access to the spells is about right - its just that the spells such). Compare a Trickster (all tricksters have reusable magic anyway, rather than having to be priests) with anyone else who gets reusable Rune Magic - for 5 or 6 points a trickster can create a fairly average illusion (a human sized being, for example). Now, compared to 5 or 6 points of Shield, or two Thunderbolts, or even 5 or 6 points of Trickster Rune magic (Lie, for example), which is more useful.
Nick disses Harrek
>As for Harrek, I prefer him to be a grunting savage (traditional Conan type),
>whose "magic" is accidental/ incidental/ personal and not revealed through
>massive Runespells. In my view he doesn't consciously manipulate the awesome
>powers he has come to possess: in some ways, they manipulate him. I know Greg
>draws on the Harald Hardrada parallel, but a clever (as opposed to "cunning")
>Harrek goes against my grain.
The guys a super-hero, Nick. He is one of the most powerful magicians of his age, the magical equal of Jar-Eel or perhaps even Arkat. He is also a great leader - not a good figurehead, a general. Somehow, grunting savage with some low cunning and a big magic item just doesn't cut it.
But then again, maybe having people underestimate him all the time is one of his secret weapons.
Personally, I think if he depended so much on his cloak, one of those really smart and treacherous Lunar magicians would get him eventually.
> If
>anyone seriously thinks it would take three points of Runepower to create a
fart
>(which should IMHO be a one or two point spirit spell, comparable to Sneeze or
>Hotfoot), they're off base.
So, Nick, are you agreeing or disagreeing with Rob - it sounds like he is saying the rules are dumb, lets get better ones, and you are saying the rules are dumb, so just ignore them and make up your own whenever you want a particular effect.
I will leave out Nicks great description of the Puppeteer Troupe, but point out that as the rules stand the amount of magical effort required to create it is fairly outrageous.
and then I try to be nice to Rob and he snubs me terribly <sniff>
>> In fact, I might even propose a better solution right now, as it
>> comes to me in a flash of inspiration - perhaps the really effective
>> illusionists have access to illusion spells that are made more powerful by
>> more magic point. I.e. perhaps the area of effect of an Illusionary Sight,
>> for example, can be increased by stacking mps with it.
>
>That sounds sourcerish to me - ve hav vays of dealing vis such peoples...
>
Actually, Rob, I was thinking of Shake Earth, in the Maran Gor cult, and I think there are a few other examples. Now, I hope for your sake you don't intend calling them sorcerous...
>I must admist I like the idea of the generic illusion magic - ie. 5-6 spells
>which can go together to make any illusion - wouldn't this make illusion
>rune magic different to every other rune magic (thinks furiously for any
>example of rune magic which works this way and gives up)?
>
So, umm, what don't you like about illusion spells then?
You like the several generic spells (the mechanic that means you
need to use four or five points of rune magic to get an average illusion),
and you don't like my ideas that it should be easier to increase the effect.
(the illusion discussion is in severe danger of having to move to the rules list).
Another point against current illusion magic - the presumed
justification of illusion magic is that it is 'temporary reality' rather
than an actual illusion. But if you are trying to fool somebody, very often
illusions are still easily distinguishable from reality to a half competent
magicians. The difference between 'temporary reality' and an illusion from
other game systems is usually only really relelvent in the case of touch
illusions.
Cheers
Dave
Computing Officer |" Life is easily understood as bit strings of logical
Arts Faculty UWA |depth greater than their length" - Rebis, Doom Patrol
davidc_at_cs.uwa.edu.au |" Do not think, HIT, it is our way" - Milk & Cheese
Powered by hypermail