From: owner-runequest-rules@lists.imagiconline.com (RuneQuest Rules Digest) To: runequest-rules-digest@lists.imagiconline.com Subject: RuneQuest Rules Digest V3 #54 Reply-To: runequest-rules@lists.imagiconline.com Sender: owner-runequest-rules@lists.imagiconline.com Errors-To: owner-runequest-rules@lists.imagiconline.com Precedence: bulk RuneQuest Rules Digest Sunday, May 28 2000 Volume 03 : Number 054 RuneQuest is a trademark of Hasbro/Avalon Hill Games. All Rights Reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS Re: [RQ-RULES] Demons in Lead [RQ-RULES] Steve Perrin's 'Attack of the Spirits' Re: [RQ-RULES] Steve Perrin's 'Attack of the Spirits' [RQ-RULES] HW Conversion 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: Sun, 21 May 2000 20:23:34 +0100 From: "Meirion Hopkins" Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Demons in Lead Hi William I know this is a REALLY late reply, but I put your email into the 'must respond' category then, um, forgot! Did anyone reply to you about this? Do you still require a copy of the articles or scenario? Drop me a line if you do, and I'll see what I can sort out. Meirion - ----- Original Message ----- From: William Wenz To: Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2000 12:10 AM Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Demons in Lead > > I have the original WD > >artivles if you'd like background info. > > Hello, I was wondering if you would be willing to email me a copy of the > articles. I have been interested in getting them, just haven't had the > time to go figure exactly which issues they were in and track them down. > I would really appreciate it. Thanks > - W. Kurt Wenz > > > > *************************************************************************** > To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com > with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 13:59:20 -0700 (PDT) From: dabick@excite.com Subject: [RQ-RULES] Steve Perrin's 'Attack of the Spirits' I would like to know if I am interpreting Steve Perrin's spirit combat rules correctly. 1. As I understand Perry's rules, those in spirit combat (spirits and characters) use their POW x 5 as their attack and defense chance. Mana is lost and POW remains it's original value. Thus, the chances to attack and defend do not change during the combat. 2. Several spirits or discorporate beings can the same target. The target defends against all attackers as normal, but can only make one attack per round. 3. For each success more than the defense successes the defender loses 1D4 mana. If I understand Steve's rules, I like them. But the attack/defense percent at POW x 5 I am not too sure of. Has this been explored at a lower value with some sort of skill increase to go along with it? I also like the idea of several spirits or discorporates being able to attack the same defender. I can see a hook of a large disease spreading spirit too powerful for one shaman to defeat. The shaman then has to befriend and make treaty with other shamans to hit this spirit together. Steve, if you are still out there, do I understand your rules right up? Jim Bickmeyer _______________________________________________________ Get 100% FREE Internet Access powered by Excite Visit http://freelane.excite.com/freeisp *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 18:43:07 EDT From: SPerrin@aol.com Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Steve Perrin's 'Attack of the Spirits' In a message dated 5/22/00 3:29:01 PM Pacific Daylight Time, dabick@excite.com writes: > I would like to know if I am interpreting Steve Perrin's spirit combat rules > correctly. > > 1. As I understand Perry's rules, those in spirit combat (spirits and > characters) use their POW x 5 as their attack and defense chance. Mana is > lost and POW remains it's original value. Thus, the chances to attack and > defend do not change during the combat. Correct > 2. Several spirits or discorporate beings can the same target. The target > defends against all attackers as normal, but can only make one attack per > round. Correct > 3. For each success more than the defense successes the defender loses 1D4 > mana. No, it's a sliding scale. One extra success on the attacker's part means 1d4 mana taken, two extra successes is 1d6, three is 1d8, and four is 1d10. This is a sequence I use a lot in my current incarnation of the rules. Also, if both attacking combatant and defending combatant roll the same number of successes, they each take 1D3-1 damage. Also, if the defending spirit has extra successes (in any number), it takes no damage and the attacking spirit loses 1d3-1. These may be additions to the current rules that were not distributed, or at least not part of the version you saw. Since I am running a campaign with two shamans in the PC group, we've had a lot of time to mess with spirits. I'm still not entirely satisfied with the rules, though. > > If I understand Steve's rules, I like them. But the attack/defense percent > at POW x 5 I am not too sure of. Has this been explored at a lower value > with some sort of skill increase to go along with it? > It's supposed to be an equivalent to a fighter's attack and parry chance, which doesn't get disrupted appreciably even when the fighter takes damage. > I also like the idea of several spirits or discorporates being able to > attack the same defender. I can see a hook of a large disease spreading > spirit too powerful for one shaman to defeat. The shaman then has to > befriend and make treaty with other shamans to hit this spirit together. Certainly one benefit > > Steve, if you are still out there, do I understand your rules right up? > Pretty close. Steve Perrin *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 28 May 2000 17:11:59 +0300 (EET DST) From: Olli-Pekka Kantola Subject: [RQ-RULES] HW Conversion I am interrested in converting the flexible HW magic into the more realistic RQ-rulz enviroment. Has anyone had any experience in this field? This seems like a big job. I don't think that sorcery needs much work, but runemagic, mysticism and shamanism should be reforged... If someone (anyone) has any ideas, feel free to send them to me. Flexibility is the best thing about HW magic and I would like to keep it. Things that I would like to "forget" to convert are "skill spirits" (why not let common sense rule what a willow spirit can be used for) and the similarity of the different magic systems(ie. you can do the same things with every magic system and no system is better than other in any aspect). Oh yeah, I almost forgot. The way that no magical boost is different (Swordhelp from Orlant & Truesword Strike from Humakt), except in description. IMO the effect that of the humakti feat should be greater. Augmentation-style of feats should be easy convert, but a system should be created that would transfer the feat description into a "rulesy" format. Somekind of powergraph should also be made. Maybe it is impossible to get the best of the both worlds, but I would like to try. Olli Kantola *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ End of RuneQuest Rules Digest V3 #54 ************************************ *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.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.