From: owner-runequest-rules@lists.ient.com (RuneQuest Rules Digest) To: runequest-rules-digest@lists.ient.com Subject: RuneQuest Rules Digest V3 #100 Reply-To: runequest-rules@lists.ient.com Sender: owner-runequest-rules@lists.ient.com Errors-To: owner-runequest-rules@lists.ient.com Precedence: bulk RuneQuest Rules Digest Monday, October 16 2000 Volume 03 : Number 100 RuneQuest is a trademark of Hasbro/Avalon Hill Games. All Rights Reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS Re: [RQ-RULES] To change a mount or not [RQ-RULES] Masswarp and perpetual motion [RQ-RULES] Visibility RE: [RQ-RULES] Masswarp and perpetual motion Re: [RQ-RULES] Visibility Re: [RQ-RULES] Visibility [RQ-RULES] Re: Masswarp RE: [RQ-RULES] Re: Masswarp 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: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 10:20:52 EDT From: MurfNMurf@aol.com Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] To change a mount or not In a message dated 10/13/00 6:23:56 PM Central Daylight Time, Jim wonders about riding different types of creatures: << I am hoping to find out what other people are doing in regards to this and some suggestions. >> Hmmm. Well, here's a lil something I saved a while back, and which you might find of some use. The original poster shouldn't mind. And if he does... :) Anyways, here ya go. -Ken- From: ROBERTSON@sc.intel.com (Roderick Robertson) Subject: A few ideas on riding A few notes about Andrew's riding article: > From: bell@cs.unc.edu (Andrew Bell) > Subject: Riding unfamiliar animals >In RuneQuest, riding is treated as a separate skill for each type of >animal. However, there is certainly similarity between riding a horse >and riding a zebra, or sable, or even a rhinoceros, bolo lizard, or >griffin. In "Elder Secrets", Chaosium gives their first hint of what >this similarity should be when it says that hippogriff riding skill is >half of one's ride horse skill. The following uses that as a guideline >in establishing similarity factors for various riding skills. If I ran the Zoo (Well, I do in My games... :-)): Figure that 1/2 of the Ride skill is balance, keeping your seat, etc. The other is how horses (or camels, or whatever) behave, and appropriate things to do to get the beast moving/turning/stopping/etc. This part includes use of goads, spurs, sugar cubes, etc. This is the part that you lose when you go to another species. On top of this, Andrew's Movement type modifiers would apply (after halving the skill), to show the difference in balance needed when changing animals drastically. (I would add Quadruped-Biped to the list). The character would get their Ride/2 + the Movement Type modifiers below for the first time they get on the other species, and until they develop the Ride (other) skill (When they gain at least 1 point from experience or training.) Ride (other) starts as Ride/2. Note that if the entire culture rides some weird species (Say, Camel), then that would be their 'normal' animal instead of Horse. >Temperament: A temperamental mount is more likely to throw its rider, >although it can be trained to be a better combatant. Note that there >really is a continuum between passive and combative, but I break it >down like this for simplicity. The temperament of an animal should modify riding a different animal of the same species (Mare/Gelding vs. Stallion). A different species will have different methods of showing their displeasure with their rider, For instance, a Horse may buck, a Camel Spit or bite, & an Elephant try to trample or reach back with it's trunk (& don't p**s off the griffon...). I would determine the temperament of the animal when offering it to the PC's. You could give it a TEMP stat, from -4 to +4, (or -20:+20) to characterize how docile the animal is. The TEMP is added to the RIDE (animal) Skill to simulate the normal riding problems. Dealing with the temperament of a different species should require multiplying the penalty by two, or halving the bonus. Also note that a aggressive animal will more often be willful, while a docile animal might be hard to keep moving. There is a good article on horses and their advantages/disadvantages in the August 1990 ROLEPLAYER magazine (Steve Jackson Games, written to the GURPS system, but easily modified). >Body Shape: > ... >Normal vs. Wide: The normal/wide breakdown is whether a normal saddle >can be placed on the animal. It's easier to hold on when your legs can >clamp around the sides of the creature. Note that giants might find >elephants to be "normal", while pixies might find ponies to be "wide." >Difficulty modifier for "wide" creature: -10 Note that some "wide" animals are not ridden by the traditional method, but would have a Howdah on the back (look at the asian use of elephants, but animals of a similar configuration (Triceratops ?) would probably work as well). The Ride skill would then be a Drive skill (to make the beast go where you want), and a modifier to combat due to movement for those in the howdah. (a couple of movies to see: "Octopussy" & "The Charge of the Light Brigade" (Errol Flynn, no basis in historical reality, but fun) for looks at shooting from a moving elephant) Also, if the beast is wide enough, you would ride it by sitting or kneeling on its back, rather than trying to ride astride. >Movement Type: The technique by which the creature moves. > "walking" (horse, elephant, rhino) > slithering (snake) > swimming (dolphin) > flying (griffin) > special (earth elemental, kangaroo, tree sloth)* > Skill in >R Wa Sl Sw Fl >i Wa 0 -10 -20 -30 >d Sl 0 -20 -30 >i Sw 0 >n Fl 0 >g >* Handle special creatures and skills on a case by case basis. (What happened to Swim-Fly?) Add Quadriped/Biped (-10) to this list. This only applies to walking animals, though similiar penalties might apply within the other categories (Griffon vs. Draconid vs. Giant Eagle, Porpoise vs. Eel vs. Ray, Python vs. Sidewinder) Let's also not forget the Insect kingdom (I only have RQ II Trollpak, figuring that the new Troll realms/Gods/etc were the same, rehashed. Any comments on them?) how about the difference between Spider (nice & gentle, but watch out for climbing walls & ceilings) and Preying Mantis (The flight is a rush, but the landing is hell) and Bee/wasp (Fast fast fast -- see "Honey I shrunk the kids")? > ... Of course, how detailed you want to be depends on how the players view animals. In my current campaigns (English Civil war), horse are like taxis, just a part of the transportation system. If they want to have a favorite horse (Trigger?), then I'll hit them with HERO SYSTEM/GURPS style horses, with their own *unique* personalities. As far as uniques personalities for mounts goes; when my wife was a little kid, her family had a pony that, for some unknown reason, just wouldn't turn right. Goofball, or what? :) *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 14:47:08 -0400 From: Andrew Barton Subject: [RQ-RULES] Masswarp and perpetual motion > In the case of the pipe & chain, the spell's energy is the power source so it isn't a perpetual motion machine. The machine is continuously producing energy. If that comes from the caster, by making one of these items you're making something that can allow anyone who gets hold of it to drain away an unlimited amount of your magic. If it comes from your surroundings, you're creating a potential eco-catastrophe. > Sounds like there needs to be something in the spell that makes it only work when the space is entirely confined. Put the container on one end of a seesaw, with a counterweight on the other. Have a person or a mechanism alternately open and close the container. Seesaw goes up and down each cycle. Attach the seesaw to a bucket in a well, and you have an equivalent of a common irrigation device in low-tech societies, but needing much less effort to drive it. > Oh, and another way around this problem is to rule that the entire object must be inside the container before its mass can be affected. Put in a heavy weight, with a string attached, and a ring on the end. Have a hook on the end of a rod. Use the rod to pull the string out, then drop it back in. Same seesaw arrangement as before. Over the centuries a lot of people have come up with ingenious attempts at perpetual motion. In our world, none of them can work. As soon as you allow the connection between mass and weight to be switched on and off they can work, because doing so creates and destroys potential energy, and potential energy can be transformed into other forms. The seesaw effect makes the amounts created and destroyed unequal, so that you can tap the difference from each cycle. Changing the conditions for the spell to activate doesn't help, unless you have to meet the energy debt at de-activation. For an item that's been brought from deep underground or up a mountain, this could be very great. You're having to do all the work to carry the contents upwards, or releasing the energy that would be gained by dropping it. Hmmm ... a bag that needs a lot of magic points to open it unless you're high in the air or on a mountain top. Or one that will cause a devastating explosion unless you're a long way underground. That could be interesting ... Maybe I'll let this spell into my world after all. Andrew *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 12:08:53 -0700 From: Brad Furst Subject: [RQ-RULES] Visibility The spell named Visibility has been interpreted differently depending on with whom I am gaming. The point of difference comes at (I am quoting from RQ3): "Normal weapons will not effect such creatures whether or not they have magic cast upon them. Some otherworld creatures possess this as a natural ability which does not cost magic points." How do you interpret the antecedents of the pronouns? Does "whether or not _they_ have magic cast upon _them_" refer to the normal weapons or to the creatures? Does "creatures possess _this_" refer to the invulnerability or to the visible manifestation? Although "normal weapons will not effect such creatures", then which weapons _will_? A simply enchanted iron sword? Although "normal weapons will not effect such creatures", will the "_magic_ cast upon them" score damage? For comparison, a Wraith "may only be hit by magic. If a sword with a Bladesharp 4 spell were to strike a wraith, the wraith would take exactly 4 points of damage. If a 3D6 Fireblade hit a wraith, it would take 3D6 damage. A Truesworded weapon will do full damage." (I think this last means full normal damage rather than full double damage). Why would a spell caster cast Visibility and under what circumstances? Would NPC's use this against the character party? Brad Furst esoteric@teleport.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 14:11:17 -0600 From: "Rich Allen" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] Masswarp and perpetual motion > If it comes from your surroundings, > you're creating a potential eco-catastrophe. This assumes that magical energy is a finite commodity, I tend to think of it like light; it's everywhere, ready to be used if you know how, and in practice it's inexhaustible. > > Oh, and another way around this problem is to rule that the entire > object > must be inside the container before its mass can be affected. > > Put in a heavy weight, with a string attached, > and a ring on the end. Have a hook on the end of a rod. > Use the rod to pull the string out, then drop it back in. > Same seesaw arrangement as before. If you tie a string to the heavy object, the two become one object as far as this rule is concerned. It's a little bit like how a gold chain and a gemstone setting, when attached together, become a single piece of jewelry. As far as the spell is concerned, an object is defined as any thing or series of connected things, and the whole must be within the enchanted container before its mass is affected. Rich Allen *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 17:14:24 -0400 From: Tal Meta Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Visibility Brad Furst wrote: > > to the visible manifestation? Although "normal weapons will not effect > such creatures", then which weapons _will_? A simply enchanted iron > sword? Although "normal weapons will not effect such creatures", will the I believe Elder Secrets says that enchanted silver can be used to hit spirits, but I'm too lazy to go check. :) - -- talmeta@cybercomm.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine ICQ - 12594453 AIM - talmeta Homepage - *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 16:05:06 +0200 From: St=?ISO-8859-1?B?6Q==?=phane FRANCOIS Subject: Re: [RQ-RULES] Visibility > "Normal weapons will not effect such creatures whether or not they have > magic cast upon them. Some otherworld creatures possess this as a natural > ability which does not cost magic points." > > How do you interpret the antecedents of the pronouns? Does "whether or not > _they_ have magic cast upon _them_" refer to the normal weapons or to the > creatures? Does "creatures possess _this_" refer to the invulnerability or > to the visible manifestation? Although "normal weapons will not effect > such creatures", then which weapons _will_? A simply enchanted iron > sword? Although "normal weapons will not effect such creatures", will the > "_magic_ cast upon them" score damage? I think the "magic cast upon them" applies to the weapons. Casting "Visibility" is a bit like casting an illusion spell, you create an image of an entity of the Spirit Plane on the Mundane Plane, since the creature itself remains on the Spirit Plane, you can't affect them, but they can't affect you. "Posses this as a natural ability" applies to "Visibility". >> to the visible manifestation? Although "normal weapons will not effect >> such creatures", then which weapons _will_? A simply enchanted iron >> sword? Although "normal weapons will not effect such creatures", will the > > I believe Elder Secrets says that enchanted silver can be used to hit > spirits, but I'm too lazy to go check. :) I think Iron (in native form or enchanted steel form) can affect creatures that have invulnerability to nrmal weapons, like werewolfs. Silver also has this property, but unless it's enchanted you're restricted to bludgeoning weapons because it's much softer. Any *enchanted* metal also affect such cretures, because of the permanent magic imbued in the metal. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 04:19:45 -0700 From: "Simon Hibbs" Subject: [RQ-RULES] Re: Masswarp Rich Allen : > Dang, I was going to say that! In the case of the pipe & chain, the >spell's energy is the power source so it isn't a perpetual motion machine. >At least not in the way I understand that term. I think you could produce >the same effect with a magnetic relay inside the pipe, with the powersource >being electricity instead of magic. Except that the spell is a one-time cost, capable of producing a permanent effect (depending on your magic rules). > Of course, this all depends on your definition of magic!! My prefered definition is that Magic in an RPG should conform to the same definitions and behaviour which would be recognisable to someone studying magical metaphysics in the real world. I'm afarid I've not got much time for the 'wish-physics' approach. Simon - ------------------------------------------------------------ - --== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==-- Before you buy. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 09:00:06 -0600 From: "Rich Allen" Subject: RE: [RQ-RULES] Re: Masswarp > Except that the spell is a one-time cost, capable of producing a permanent > effect (depending on your magic rules). But you _can_ cast one-time cost spells with a duration that makes them nearly permanent. The cost of making a spell last a year or more can't be correlated with the amount of POW spent on the spell, there's no "one POW is equal to X amount of spell energy" formula. Also, enchanted items have a cost for the enchantment itself, which is a permanent effect. The spells that are added in as part of the enchantment must be powered each time they're used, but the enchantment itself must be drawing energy from somewhere, doesn't it? So, why can't this imbue effect take advantage of this somehow, making the duration of a spell last thousands of years but costing less POW to produce. That's basically what imbue is doing, IMO. > My prefered definition is that Magic in an RPG should conform to the > same definitions and behaviour which would be recognisable to someone > studying magical metaphysics in the real world. I'm afarid I've not > got much time for the 'wish-physics' approach. I'm not sure I understand that one. I have read about many different types of real-world metaphysical beliefs, and several of them include the idea of permanent enchantments in the form of love tokens, voodoo dolls, medicine bags, etc. Some believe magic is powered by the body, some believe magic is powered by the cosmos. And what does that have to do with RuneQuest and it's magic rules?? Rich Allen *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.com with the line 'unsubscribe runequest-rules' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ End of RuneQuest Rules Digest V3 #100 ************************************* *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.ient.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.