Re: Immortal power

From: Frank Rafaelsen <rafael_at_nvg.unit.no>
Date: Sun, 12 May 1996 23:30:37 +0200 (MET DST)


David Dunham

> That said, I agree that the Horals would be extremely unlikely to be
> flexible. On the other hand, the tactics they do use are probably pretty
> refined, and you'd have to be pretty innovative to catch them off guard.

This is my view exactly, if only a little more eloquently said :)=20

Peter Metcalfe:=20
> Gun powder...hmmm...They invented this before the Dawn and the=20
> Mostali are using flintlock muskets 2000+ years later. IMHO the=20
> only *innovative* dwarves are either heretics, diamonds (on the=20
> off-chance they can break out of their mould) or True Mostali. =20
> All others are anal-retentive stick-in-the-muds.

Well if my memory isn=ABt failing me, I seem to rememberthat gun powder is= =20
an old invention, but using it for guns is pretty new. I seem to remeber th= at
they only started to use it in this way after humans stole the crossbow idea. And the invention of the cannon is something else that shows dwarves can think new.=20
Now I think that the reason dwarves might seem stagnant is because they=20 haven=ABt been involved in all out wars for quite som time. Imagine all the= =20
technical horrors they have kept hidden from mans=AB eye because they=20 haven=ABt been needed. (Mk. T1000 Jolanti, Enchanted steel machine guns tha= t=20
fire 12.7mm MP rounds (MagicPiercing) etc.) Dwarves being extremely=20 secretive when it comes to their inventions.=20 As the dwarves have a linear view of time, there is every reason to belive= =20
they are developing new tactics and weapons. The world machine is being=20 repaired at this very moment.=20

> Eh? We are talking about an army operating above ground and lousy=20
> vision is a minor problem? Operating above ground is the dwarven=20
> equivalent of human nightfighting. And I don't see how using sorcery
> solves their problem. =20

(snip)

Ok, you have conviced me that they are short sighted, but I don=ABt think= =20
it=ABs this bad. This makes the dwarves even lousier than the Uz at surface= =20
combat. In one area, mesuring distance, I even think dwarves are quite=20 good. If not by sight, then by sound. Perhaps this isn=ABt very effective= =20
above ground, but it=ABs good enough to target an army. And handy if you=20 are going to call artillery fire, and I don=ABt, for a second, doubt that= =20
they have it. :) =20

The other points you made was quite convincing.

Nils Weinander commented on:=20

>=20

> >>KIngdom of War 6
>=20

> But they _are_ magical in themselves. The army of KoW is the magical
> manifestation of the concept of the total war. Think mythical, not
> practical.

>=20

Now this is a good point! I felt it was to high, but this quite=20 nicely explains why it must be like this. All my reservations are laid to= =20
rest.=20
I still belive Loskalm is a bit underrated though. Not that it will=20 matter in the face of such a foe.:)

> From: Martin Crim=20

>=20
> Huh? Are you implying he has a 50% Attack skill bonus?! I think not, even=
 if
> (as the rules do not state) magical stat enhancements count. If your STR=
,
> INT, and DEX are all 18, then even Enhance STR and DEX 18 (which you'd ha=
ve
> to keep up for a week to enhance the experience check, if that works at a=
ll)
> would give you an Attack bonus of only +47. =20
(snip)

I use Sandy=ABs sorcery roolz so keeping something up doesn=ABt have to be that difficult once you have cast the spells. (*only* +47 :-)=20
But should we let spells increase skill modifiers? Perhaps not, since =20 players are likely to figur it out right away. I haven=ABt made up my mind= =20
about it yet.

>... any army has attrition, and needs replacements.  The Brithini

> are pathologically averse to death, and replace losses very slowly. This
> implies that their individual soldiers are not Onslaughtian.

Your second point makes a lot of sense, but I belive the brithini have been= =20
having babies for quite some time now. Not that this makes them any less=20 afraid of death, but it could make the leaders more likely to sacrifice=20 soldiers. And disobeying orders would be something *no* sane horali would= =20
do. That=ABs why I belive these soldiers, in a way have high morals.=20 Running means dying of old age, staying could mean making a difference.

This causes the horalis=AB battle prowess to be completely dependent on=20 their leaders=AB skills. This could explain why they have lost some battles= =20
in the past.

Frank Rafaelsen
rafael_at_nvg.unit.no
"Si fallor, sum"


End of Glorantha Digest V2 #561


WWW material at http://hops.wharton.upenn.edu/~loren/rolegame.html

Powered by hypermail