From: owner-runequest-rules@ (RuneQuest Rules Digest) To: runequest-rules-digest@lists.MPGN.COM Subject: RuneQuest Rules Digest V2 #42 Reply-To: runequest-rules@mpgn.com Sender: owner-runequest-rules@ Errors-To: owner-runequest-rules@ Precedence: bulk RuneQuest Rules Digest Tuesday, March 2 1999 Volume 02 : Number 042 RuneQuest is a trademark of Hasbro/Avalon Hill Games. All Rights Reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS [none] [RQ-RULES] spellbooks [RQ-RULES] Re: RE: [RQ-RULES] spellbooks RE: [RQ-RULES] Another sorcery question: Spellbooks? Re: [RQ-RULES] spellbooks Re: [RQ-RULES] spellbooks RE: [RQ-RULES] spellbooks [RQ-RULES] Learning Sorcery Spells Re: [RQ-RULES] spellbooks Re: [RQ-RULES] spellbooks Re: [RQ-RULES] spellbooks RE: [RQ-RULES] Paul Reilly's sorcery system meets the Ressurecti 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, 1 Mar 1999 17:29:26 GMT From: simonh@msi-uk.com (Simon Hibbs) Subject: [none] Tal Meta : >Well, I'll own up to having whacked at the system myself, awhile back. I >called them Vrachi, to differentiate them from sorcerers. All pretty >much the same as Mr. Reilley's work, though. In Glorantha, perhaps these people hang out in Fonrit? It would seem apropriate for Fonrit to have sorcerers as well as religious cults a la Genertela, but they would not necesserily be Malkioni. Perhaps they are the product of a fusion of traditional local magical practices and Malkionism, developed by God Learner experimenters and leavened by several centuries of relative isolation. Hence the unusual 'vessel' concept linked to Malkioni style sorcery. Simon Hibbs *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 13:59:56 -0600 From: Steve Lieb Subject: [RQ-RULES] spellbooks > The higher the skill% in the spell is, the more pages it takes to write it >down, and the time required increases as well. Roughly, %/5 equals pages 1) I have a lot of trouble with anyone writing down a spell in which the skill of the spell caster is conveyed in the text (i.e. basing the # of pages on the caster's skill). 2) I also don't think it should be impossible for new spellcasters to write spells in books. This came up in my campaign, so I already had rules as well: Spellbook (reference work): something from which someone can learn the basics of casting a spell. Method: to write a spell down, the character must first succeed at a read/write. Then the spell is in the book. DM's judgement how many pages/hours it takes, IMO minimum 2d4 hours up to 3d6 hours per spell, and anywhere from 1-20 pages, depending on the complexity of the spell. Once the spell is in the book, it's logged with the character's base skill in the spell, (i.e. "Power Blast (62)") OMITTING Magic Skill Modifier. [Obviously, this skill number would be unknown to players finding such a book.] To read the spell: If it's new to the studying mage: similar study time as writing time. THEN the player has a chance to "get it" equal to the scriber's skill %, plus the reader's magic or knowledge modifiers, whichever's better. (Personally I also give them a bonus of 2% times the number of other spells they have known unless it's a totally new/wierd spell. This is sometimes higher if they have familiarity - i.e. a sorceror learning a fire spell might get 2% per spell, but 5% per known fire spell.) Usually, if the setting is right, the caster can immediately test this. If they can cast it with a successful roll then they know they KNOW it. If they didn't "get" it, they would roll a successful roll, but nothing would happen (except on a critical failure for sadist DM's). So then they might study again. (Basically they can keep casting it until they either cast it successfully, or roll that they should and nothing happens.*) Initial skill is Magic Skill modifier + (d4% for hard stuff up to d30% for easy ones). *in the above example, it's not always easy to test. The aforementioned Fire Mage was trying to study in his inn room while the other characters were sleeping, and ended up burning nearly the entire block of buildings. This shows an unappreciated aspect of killer-spells...how do you test it in anything but circumstances where it's vital? That appeals to my personal "DM sense of the perverse". If the character is refreshing their memory, it takes half the time noted above, and the spell is restored at original skill levels (you can apply a minus if you want to discourage spell switching). - -Steve Lieb styopa@iname.com steve@necadon.com http://surf.to/styopa *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 17:26:25 -0500 From: Tal Meta Subject: [RQ-RULES] Re: Simon Hibbs wrote: > > Tal Meta : > > In Glorantha, perhaps these people hang out in Fonrit? It would seem > apropriate for Fonrit to have sorcerers as well as religious cults > a la Genertela, but they would not necesserily be Malkioni. Perhaps > they are the product of a fusion of traditional local magical > practices and Malkionism, developed by God Learner experimenters > and leavened by several centuries of relative isolation. Hence > the unusual 'vessel' concept linked to Malkioni style sorcery. Perhaps. My Glorantha Lore still hovers at 30%, despite all my time playing RQ. :) Hmmm. Now making "Maintain Vessel" into a vow is an idea, too.... - -- talmeta@bellatlantic.net - Heretic & Dilettante ICQ - 12594453 AIM - talmeta1 Homepage - *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 16:49:24 -0600 From: "Rich Allen" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] spellbooks > > The higher the skill% in the spell is, the more pages it > takes to write it > >down, and the time required increases as well. Roughly, %/5 equals pages > > 1) I have a lot of trouble with anyone writing down a spell in which the > skill of the spell caster is conveyed in the text (i.e. basing the # of > pages on the caster's skill). Why not? The way I see it, the more experience you have with a spell, the more notes, hints, "this works a little better if you hold your foot like so [diagram]", you would write down along with the basic spell. This is basically the only way to differentiate a spell known at 30% with the same one known at 90%. The book would most likely have the spell initially written down at some low percentage, but then later on the spell information would be added to, jotting down lessons learned, etc, making the spell as a whole a higher percentage than when it was first written down. Rich Allen *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 16:54:53 -0600 From: "Rich Allen" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] Another sorcery question: Spellbooks? > from David Dunham's page: > HREF="http://hamachi.pensee.com/dunham/glorantha/sorcery.html">Sorcery > > > "Spell Inscription anyone who knows a spell at 90+ can > inscribe it via a > successful Write. If a matrix of the spell is enchanted into the scroll or > book, the matrix's skill bonus is added to the student's chance > of learning > the spell. " I don't like this. Why should someone with a lower percentage in a spell be precluded from writing it down? Really, the ability to accurately write down your knowledge of the skill is the important thing here; that's where the required Write Language roll comes in. By noting the skill level of the spell when it's written down, you avoid any problems with spell percentages later on when it's time to (re)learn the spell. Rich Allen *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 08:32:03 +0100 From: Tollisen Terje Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] spellbooks I don't think I like the idea for writing down spells at all in this way. Is there not a rule already for this? I seem to remember that if someone writes down a spell, someone else can use it to learn the spell up the same % as the writer, but this has to be done by research. It might be my mind playing me a trick, but even if there is no such rule I still don't like the idea of reading a few hours and getting maybe 70% in a spell. Also, can't a magician choose to forget a spell, wait a while, relearn it and still have the same % in the skill (maybe with a penalty)? After all, it is not the skill one has to memorize, it is the knowledge of the spell. This is why sorcerers can forget a spell they know and use the memorized spell of a bound spirit or matrix with their own skill%. - -Terje Tollisen *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 04:08:27 EST From: IssariesGT@aol.com Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] spellbooks In a message dated 3/2/99 2:43:04 AM Eastern Standard Time, terje.Tollisen@posten.no writes: << Also, can't a magician choose to forget a spell, wait a while, relearn it and still have the same % in the skill (maybe with a penalty)? After all, it is not the skill one has to memorize, it is the knowledge of the spell. This is why sorcerers can forget a spell they know and use the memorized spell of a bound spirit or matrix with their own skill%. >> This is my interpretation of all the sorcery rules published thus far. keith *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 09:34:08 -0000 From: Ashley Munday Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] spellbooks Terje said: "Also, can't a magician choose to forget a spell, wait a while, relearn it and still have the same % in the skill (maybe with a penalty)? After all, it is not the skill one has to memorize, it is the knowledge of the spell. This is why sorcerers can forget a spell they know and use the memorized spell of a bound spirit or matrix with their own skill%." Keith replied: "This is my interpretation of all the sorcery rules published thus far." For what it's worth, that's what the rules say, before they were Sandied into their current form. Sorcerers can also develop a skill with a spell they don't know even if they can get hold of a matrix for it. Ash *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 09:49:42 -0000 From: Ashley Munday Subject: [RQ-RULES] Learning Sorcery Spells As I can't leave anything alone, here's the rules I've been using for the last 3 months for Sorcerer's learning new spells. Erm, it doesn't have anything about actually writing spells down in spell books though. Bugger. If they appear a bit convoluted, I have a shelf full of old FGU games at home and I never grew out of the style! If anyone's interested in the rest, they're on my home page (gratuitous self plug) http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/1853/ Ash PS: Cutting and pasting this lot has made me cringe at my grammar in places. Sorry! It shall be fixed and even made readable English one day. Learning New Spells - ------------------- Spells must be memorised before they can be cast. Spells can be memorised by (a) being taught by another Sorcerer that knows the spell, (b) Researching it from a written scroll, (c) Remembering a forgotten spell (one you still have skill in but have forgotten) or (d) working it out for yourself. For every 20 hours spent memorising the spell, the Sorcerer rolls to see if he works out how to use the spell. This is given by: Sorcerer's chance of memorising new spell = T + R where: T = Sorcerer's INT if he or she's being taught by another Sorcerer or is researching the spell from a written source and succeeds in a R/W appropriate language roll, zero otherwise; R = The Sorcerer's spell skill if he or she has a skill in the spell being memorised or the Sorcerer's Research Factor if that's higher. Once memorised a Sorcerer's spell skill starts at 0 and has to be increased to actually use the spell. Research Factor - --------------- A Sorcerer's Research Factor is a measure of the Sorcerer's general experience with magic. When memorising the basic knowledge of a spell or Art, a Sorcerer may use his or her Research Factor in place of their skill in the spell or the Art. A Sorcerer's Research Factor starts at 0. It increases by one for each spell mastered (known at a skill of 90+) and for each full 25 points of skill in each Art over 50 (i.e. +1 at 75, +2 at 100, +3 at 125 etc). ========================================== Home: ashleym@telinco.co.uk ashley@geocities.com Work: ashley.munday@liffe.com http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/1853/ ========================================== *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 07:00:04 -0500 From: Tal Meta Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] spellbooks IssariesGT@aol.com wrote: > > In a message dated 3/2/99 2:43:04 AM Eastern Standard Time, > terje.Tollisen@posten.no writes: > > << Also, can't a magician choose to forget a spell, wait a while, relearn it > and still have the same % in the skill (maybe with a penalty)? After all, it > is not the skill one has to memorize, it is the knowledge of the spell. This > is why sorcerers can forget a spell they know and use the memorized spell of > a bound spirit or matrix with their own skill%. > >> > This is my interpretation of all the sorcery rules published thus far. Mine as well, though I'd be temped to rule that the sorcerer in question must rememorize the spell from the same source he originally learned it, unless he has sufficient skill to record the spell description himself (as per Sandy's rules). Thus, the PC sorcerer -could- have a spellbook of sorts, a grimoire given to him by his prior master. - -- talmeta@bellatlantic.net - Heretic & Dilettante ICQ - 12594453 AIM - talmeta1 Homepage - *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 13:38:17 +0100 From: "Terje Tollisen" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] spellbooks Tal: > Mine as well, though I'd be temped to rule that the sorcerer in > question must rememorize the spell from the same source he originally learned it, I`d say he can relearn it from any source as by the normal rules for learning a spell. Or maybe he will relearn it faster from his own notes. - -Terje Tollisen "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway." -Tanenbaum ********************* Terje Tollisen Kjelsaasveien 99 0491 OSLO Norway ********************* *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 09:54:31 -0500 From: "Bob Stancliff" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] spellbooks > -Terje Tollisen wrote > I don't think I like the idea for writing down spells at all in this way. Is > there not a rule already for this? I seem to remember that if someone writes > down a spell, someone else can use it to learn the spell up the same % as > the writer, but this has to be done by research. There is no rule in the books regarding writing a spell... sorcerers just do it. It should probably be restricted to people with at least 50 - 75% in the spell and Writing, but that isn't official. The skill training restriction you are thinking of is in regard to people researching a normal skill up to the level of the person helping them research it. This is a restriction on teaching. > It might be my mind playing > me a trick, but even if there is no such rule I still don't like the idea of > reading a few hours and getting maybe 70% in a spell. Agreed, the quality of the writing should not add many (or any?) skill %'s to the reader, it should lessen the time needed to learn it, or change the base starting percentage (ie: +1% per 10% of writer). > Also, can't a magician choose to forget a spell, wait a while, relearn it > and still have the same % in the skill Yes, the skill doesn't change just because you don't have the spell in mind. It is the same skill used to cast that spell from a matrix. Bob Stancliff *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 18:29:58 GMT From: "Nikk Effingham" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] Paul Reilly's sorcery system meets the Ressurecti Rich: > > I assume most people have a coopy, or can lay their hands on one. If > > not, should I repost my version to the rq rules digest if, indeed, > > anyone sees fit to discuss it. > > Can you throw your version up on your web site? Heck, why not, geocities has enough space and I'm sure no1 will complain (especially as it is available freely elsewhere on the net). > > THE VESSEL > > > > I always wondered about this - the major device of Pauls system. It > > seemed very "fetch like" to have the power of a sorceror to reside > > mainly in another item. Especially in the way that POW was devoted to > > it. > > And why is this a bad thing? Because there is no rules difference between shamans and sorcerors, or at least there is a large amount of comparisons. Now, you may say that there is no problem with this, after all it is only a rules issue, but I think that to preserve the "flavour" of the three major distinctive magic systems within RQ you should try and stop the rules methods being the same. After all, sorcerors don't get DI or Sever Spirit. The idea of devoting POW to another spirit-esque thing should be a primarily shamanic activity. Anyhow, surely another way to increase your sorcery pool sounds more interesting than merely devoting your POW - more MGF for sure. > The way I see it, Shamans, Priests and > Sorcerers all tap into the same source of magic, they just use it in very > different ways. Shamans use spirits to change their environment, Priests > use divine blessings, and Sorcerers use their willpower. All of them use > MP's though, so why should a Sorcerer be able to have something similar to a > Shaman? Or a Priest and his holy symbol, for that matter? The difference > comes into the way these items are used, and to what affect. Because a Priest doesn't devote POW to his holy item. I'm only challenging the idea on a purely mechanical level that a player with a shaman and a sorceror will find the two run in a very similar fashion. > Items of power have been very much a part of sorcerery in myth and popular > fiction; look at the Athame, the wizards staff, etc. It is not so much the Vessel that i have a problem with, it is the deovting of POW to it rather than some other method. > I intend to only allow Vessels in the form of items or familiars, but I'm > changing the role of familiars a bit too, in that any sorcerer can Create a > familiar, but it doesn't HAVE to be a Vessel. Familiars that aren't Vessels > can communicate and share senses with the sorcerer, but can't provide extra > POW, INT or Spell storage to the sorcerer. Yep, this sounds great. Any chance of a "guardian angel vessel?" I thought the idea did sound kinda fun. > I intend to require one Vessel POW per point of spell to maintain the > spell. This includes ALL manipulation points in the spell. Duration can > only be used for spells held by the vessel, all other spells have a duration > of ten minutes unless they are instants. This means that a Damage Resist 9 > with a Duration of 5 will require 15 free Vessel POW to maintain it. I've > also revised the Duration Table as given by Reilly: Duration one is 1 hour, > 2 is 12 hours, it doubles from there. This still provides quite a bit of > duration (duration 6 provide 8 days) and so is open to changes. This looks far more workable. As a small aside, another simpler sorcery system I have seen is to remove Duration completely, limit spells and manipulation by skill/10 and allow you to Maintain a number of spells equal to your POW. Do you still require a ritual to set up a Maintained spell? Tal: >Well, I'll own up to having whacked at the system myself, awhile >back. I called them Vrachi, to differentiate them from sorcerers. >All pretty much the same as Mr. Reilley's work, though. This sounds interesting. IMG I would just add the Vessel system onto the existing sorcery system I use, as oppossed to using Paul's system wholesale, which would mean I'd have two completely different sorcery systems in one game world... The idea of having it be a Fonritan thing sounds good as well. >> This was, of course, the heart of the sytem and the idea of a >>vessel >> as a whole. This bit I liked. Somewhat. Firstly, it is VERY >>costly. >> To permanently maintain a simple Damage Boost 5 costs 5 POW, >> permanently gone, the equivalent of 5 strengthening enchantments... > >It never says you have to sacrifice the POW, only that you need to >'devote' POW. I read that to mean that POW maintaining a spell was >unavailable for other uses, but if the maintained spell were ended, >could be reused elsewhere. Ah, this misreading may mean that my problem with them being too much like shamans is all a big mistake. In this case i would definitely say that all the extra special abilities (to do with another form of POW regerneation, aiding you in spirit combat etc...) should be abolished so you are left only with the ability to Maintain sorcery. All IMO, Nikk *************************************************************************** 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 V2 #42 ************************************ *************************************************************************** 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 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.