From: owner-runequest-rules@ (runequest-rules-digest) To: runequest-rules-digest@lists.MPGN.COM Subject: runequest-rules-digest V1 #3 Reply-To: runequest-rules@mpgn.com Sender: owner-runequest-rules@ Errors-To: owner-runequest-rules@ Precedence: bulk runequest-rules-digest Friday, January 23 1998 Volume 01 : Number 003 RuneQuest is a trademark of Avalon Hill Games. All Rights Reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS [RQ-RULES] Sandy's Sorcery - Long /2 [RQ-RULES] Sandy's Sorcery - Art Vows Re: [RQ-RULES] Sandy's Sorcery - Art Vows 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: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 21:51:18 -0500 From: Tal Meta Subject: [RQ-RULES] Sandy's Sorcery - Long /2 From: "Hibbs, Philip" To: "'RQ Rules Digest'" Subject: Sandy's Sorcery - Long (pt. 2) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 20:10:40 -0000 Sandy Petersen I'll post the new sorcery when I'm more happy with it than I am now -- mainly I want to fix the "too many die rolls" problem inherent in the Resist spells. I'm not sure whether to do this by ... A) making the Reist spells more costly (but even better, to make up for the cost!), so that not so many of them are being maintained at once, or B) making the Rsist spells work totally differently, so that no die roll is involved. Philip Hibbs The Animate Dead spell (6 SIZ or 1d6 STR per Intensity) seems outrageously cheap, compared to the rather crap Divine alternatives. Sandy Petersen To keep a skeleton animated costs only 6 Presence, but it can be dispelled. The Rune spell, as an enchantment, cannot be. Probably the Rune and shamanic versions of creating skeletons & zombies needs to be looked at. Philip Hibbs In my experience, dispelling magic is very unusual, especially vs sorcery, because spells generally have quite a high Intensity compared to spirit or divine magicians' capabilities. Philip Hibbs Is the result of a Sorcery Animate Dead spell detectable as undead? Sandy Petersen I'd say yes. Certainly Humakti & the ilk woudl consider it, at the best, to be an "undeadoid", to coin a word. And I agree that Turn Undead, etc. would match vs. the Intensity of the spell (NOT the total MPs, just Intensity, as with other Sorcery). Sandy Petersen Artificial figurines are reasonably popular familiars among certain groups of sorcerers ... No good in combat, but how many familiars are? Philip Hibbs Chonchons, Hags, shapechanged Sperm Whales, Dream Dragons ... Philip Hibbs Would you think a familiar is subject to the right Dominate [species] spell? I would say it is, but I've heard it argued against, as it is no longer a normal member of that species. Sandy Petersen I think that Dominate works on familiars. Philip Hibbs Can a Magic spirit animate materials? Sandy Petersen Not under normal conditions. [It has no DEX] Philip Hibbs This is a shame. I have used 'poltergeist' effects both as player and referee a few times. I suppose you could use Fly, but there are no rules for attacking with flying objects. Sandy Petersen Here is the current version of Josselyne's Blessing: Josselyne's Blessing (6 POW): Josselyne may be invoked for four purposes, depending on one's (current) caste. FARMER (temporal): the user's CON is doubled. KNIGHT (temporal): the user's damage bonus is doubled. WIZARD: Invoked only while casting a sorcery spell. The user's INT is added to Intensity at no additional MP cost. LORD (temporal): Invoked over a building, bridge, or other construction, the structure's strength and Armor Points (if appropriate) is doubled until nightfall. Kevin Rose I think that most conceptions of the West include that they make no use of int and magic spirits. Philip Hibbs I've been trying to think of a good justification for not using spirits. They seem purpose-built for use by spellcasters, what could persuade them that they are a bad idea? Surely that's what the Creator intended them for? Andrew Mellinger All the games I play in recently have been based on RQIV which is a lot more lenient with spirits than RQIII. It also deals with spellcasting and other things that changes the dynamics of magic subtlely but pervasively. Personally I like using lots of spirits. Of course, due to the skills and MP required they will only be found by those with money, time, and power, but not the general populance. Specifically I would see Wizards using spirits for MP. I wouldn't see them dealing with elementals (leave them to the pagans), other nature spirits, or chaos spirits. Most would consider Demons evil, but otherwise they would use spirits of the Power, Intellect, Healing, etc. varieties. Nick Effingham I think it absurd that sorcerors would not make use of the Spirits. Power spirits, intellect spirits and magic spirits would be staple diet for any Wizard worth his salt. Philip Hibbs Sandy's latest Spell Matrix directly imbues the caster with 10% skill per point of matrix, plus the ability to use Intensity if they don't already have it, and the caster then has to cast the spell with this skill plus his magic bonus, so most people can manage one more point of spell than the Matrix has. I can only presume it also imbues the caster with enough temporary Presence to use the spell. This presence probably stays until the user loses contact with the matrix. Andrew Mellinger Hmm. I remember Sandy once saying that anyone who didn't have presence (i.e. not a wizard caste) could maintain one (1) spell at whatever he could cast it at. Thus a knight could not have presence but use the intensity art and his Bless 50% to maintain a 5 point bless. I would probably do the same thing with the magic item. It wouldn't give him any presence, but he couldn't maintain or cast any other spells while the one from the item is in effect. Thus a group of warriors could pass around a holy sword with a 100 Bless matrix on it. They could each cast an 11 point bless and maintain it forever. Sure, imbalancing, but Sandy has often claimed to intentionaly ignore balance. Kevin Rose Why carry around a wand with evoke 10 if it takes the same 15 SR's to cast as if they cast it themselves, particularly if it only works 40% of the time. Philip Hibbs In sandy's new rules, the 10 points adds 100% to your skill, so you end up with 200%+. Thus you can blow some of the extra 10 points on Speed. Andrew Mellinger I prefer the %ile arts to the 'digital' effects of Sandy's. Philip Hibbs By this I presume you mean Arts as a skill, with the Arts being used limiting the chance of success, as per RQ3. I'm not sure I prefer it, but it seems the only way of doing it for my Pagans. I think it is one of the ways in which Sandy has tried to 'simplify' the rules, so you don't have to keep working out your chance to cast a spell or the number of points you can do with it depending on *what* you are doing with it, you just have to know your spell %age and it all falls from that. If I could think of a compatible way that 'my' Pagans could gain an Art without taking a Vow, I would probably use it. Andrew Mellinger In general for game system I like gradual or widely variable skills. I prefer having a skill rating of 1-20 or greater. Some game systems have skill rating of 1-6 or even 1-4. I don't feel that leads to enough variation in characters and doesn't provide for nice gradual, realistic advancement. One of my favorite things about RQ is that the players get better ~3% every few adventures providing for constants feelings of success and power gain. Thus I prefer a gradual % system for increase of a skill and a variable effects produced by such a skill rather than a 'You have it or you don't.' Nick Effingham I play that the arts are skills, so that all sorcerors learn magic just like the Brithini. First of all, this removes the need for expenditure of POW etc... to gain the arts, but more importantly, takes the sorceror back to sprawling over tomes and researching knowledge. The maximum amount that you may manipulate an Art is limited by your skill in that art divided by 10. Farmers have no intensity, therefore will never have the opportunity to cast a spell above 1 intensity. Warriors would learn the Intensity skill, requiring no sacrifice of POW, and in doing so would gain a Presence of somewhere between 1-10, as they gain the High Vow. In this case, a spell matrix does not give you access to Intensity. Jean Durupt This amendment came after some exchange with Sandy Petersen. A character can cast a sorcery spell without presence. He is limited by his percentage in the spell and in the manipulations he uses. He can maintain this spell until one of these cases: a) he sleeps b) he casts another spell c) he falls unconscious d) he loses control of his thoughts (for example he is affected by befuddle, demoralize would not cancel the spell because the character is still in charge of his actions) This allows the trap in Maugre's tower to work under the new rules. This allows the Malkioni that will not or cannot sacrifice POW to St Malkion in order to learn the arts to still use non instant spells with an intensity greater than 1. Jean Durupt As the rules stands, with one vow you may have a produce light 1 (ie glow 1) that lasts forever. Each week a spell stored in the sorcerer's presence grows of 1 point (like regenerate). The dwarves (and maybe the Brithini and the Vadeli) have the Art of maintain. Maintain: With this art the sorceror can cancel the growth of the spell he is casting, if he is not using permanency. He has to put as many points in maintain as he put in the highest other art used in the spell. The dwarves' special enchantment have now to use maintain instead of duration. Jean Durupt Break condition (Enchanter Specialist) touch This spell allows an enchanter to break the conditions in an echantment in order to use it. The sorceror has to use as many level of multispell as there are conditions in the enchantment. The spell must have at least half the POW points of the enchantment in intensity to work. The caster pits his MP against the POW points in the enchantment. If he is successful he can now use the enchantment. Jean Durupt I don't like the idea that a sorcery spell matrix increases the percentage in the spell. I play that they give a number of points that a sorceror can add to his manipulations. Example: Cybex the sorceror has 65% in Call Light, and owns a matrix of Call Light with 4 points in it. Without ceremony he can put 7 (his skill) + 4 (the matrix) = 11 points in Call Light with a 65% chance of success. With ceremony (assuming he has at least 61% in ceremony and 18 points of free presence), he can put 7 (his skill) + 7 (the ceremony) + 4 (the matrix) = 18 points in Call Light with a 130% chance of success. Nick Effingham I haven't found that Mutlispelling large amounts of magic was a problem. For example, last week my party embarked on an adventure. They had three sorcerors, two of whom had cast between them Resist Damage, Boost Armour, Boost Damage etc... on the other party members, using Multispell to reduce the presence cost. However, when one of the sorcerors was ambushed alone, and slaughtered, the spells all dissappeared. When the second sorceror died (unfortunately the party had a high fatality rate that session) the warriors were charging into combat with a hideous Undead monster. And then suddenly found themselves bereft of all their extra magic. So, if you play in a sorcerous area then the most common battle tactic would be to target the sorcerors first. Nick Effingham I don't like the idea of having to refuel a Permanent enchantment. It seems pointless, and surely the POW point gives the magic it's "fuel" forever?? Nick Effingham Adepthood is exceedingly expensive, three parton saints at an average of 3 POW per saint is 9 POW sacrificed. Most players will try at least to gain a worthwhile patron saint, so might have to spend 12 POW on Saints alone. philip.hibbs@tnt.co.uk or phibbs@compuserve.com http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/phibbs +--------------+ | Philip Hibbs +---------------------------------------------+ | What immortal hand or eye dare frame thy perfect symmetry? | +------------------------------------------------------------+ *************************************************************************** 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, 23 Jan 1998 02:03:43 -0800 (PST) From: Erik Nolander Subject: [RQ-RULES] Sandy's Sorcery - Art Vows Hi all, Since Philip Hibbs started the long-awaited sorcery discussion, I thought I would continue with something that bothers me. In Sandy's rules, he mentions that a sorceror can gain Arts by taking Art Vows. Now, if I remember the wording correctly, it's something along the lines of "take a Vow, gain an Art, lose Presence equal to Vow Presence minus 3". After that, it is stated that if a sorceror breaks the Art Vow, he doesn't lose the Art, but instead gains Presence equal to the amount he lost when he took the Vow in the first place (phew!). Is this correct??? Because if it is, I see multiple powergaming opportunities by greedy PCs and NPCs. Any comments? Cheers, Erik Nolander _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com *************************************************************************** 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, 23 Jan 1998 10:40:10 -0500 From: Tal Meta Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Sandy's Sorcery - Art Vows Erik Nolander wrote: > In Sandy's rules, he mentions that a sorceror can > gain Arts by taking Art Vows. Now, if I remember the > wording correctly, it's something along the lines of > "take a Vow, gain an Art, lose Presence equal to Vow > Presence minus 3". After that, it is stated that if a > sorceror breaks the Art Vow, he doesn't lose the Art, > but instead gains Presence equal to the amount he > lost when he took the Vow in the first place (phew!). > Is this correct??? Because if it is, I see multiple > powergaming opportunities by greedy PCs and NPCs. Any > comments? Originally, I was going to say that this must be a typo, but then I double-checked the three versions of SS I've got on hand and discovered that it's probably an idea not yet set in stone. Observe: Version 1 Unaligned:Vows -- Vows can be taken to learn Arts, instead of raising the sorcerer's Presence. If the sorcerer later on violates a Vow, he does not lose access to the associated Art but instead loses Presence equal to what he would have gained if the Vow had been taken normally. Vows still may only be taken during Sacred Time, once a year. (In this version, he'd keep the Art but loses extra Presence.) Version 2 If the sorcerer violates an Art Vow, he loses use of the Art, and his Presence is restored to what it would have been without said Vow (note that it may increase!). He also loses 10 percentiles from all his sorcery spell skills. He may take another Art Vow to restore use of the lost Art. This will not restore his skill loss, however. (In this one, he loses the Art, gets back SOME Presence, and loses alot of skill percentages.) Version 3 If a sorcerer violates an Art Vow, he does not lose use of that Art, and his Presence is restored to what it would have been without said Vow (it may increase!). However, he also loses 10 percentiles from all his spells. (Virtually the same as 2, above, except that he keeps the Art.) Based on the way my group's Sorcerer played his character (Brithini-style), he's have chopped off his nose (the PLAYER's nose!) rather than lose Presence, let alone an Art. I'd probably use a union of the three, costing him tha Art, Presence equal to what he would have gained if he'd taken the Vow normally, AND 10% from all his spell skills. *************************************************************************** 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 V1 #3 *********************************** *************************************************************************** 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 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.