From leonbk at yahoo.com Tue Aug 2 17:02:39 2005 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Wizardry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20050803000239.98915.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> I have been looking for a long time for a way to integrate D&D type magic into RQ. This is what I have come up with so far: http://68.197.33.44:8245/Wizardry/rules.asp Some converted spells are at: http://68.197.33.44:8245/Wizardry/default.asp I would really like to hear your opinions on these rules and of course any suggestions are welcome. Leon ____________________________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From Nick.Middleton at invensys.com Wed Aug 3 05:40:51 2005 From: Nick.Middleton at invensys.com (Nick.Middleton@invensys.com) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Wizardry Message-ID: >I have been looking for a long time for a way to >integrate D&D type magic into RQ. This is what I have >come up with so far: > >http://68.197.33.44:8245/Wizardry/rules.asp Hmm, can't seem to access that from work. Will try again from home. >Some converted spells are at: > >http://68.197.33.44:8245/Wizardry/default.asp > >I would really like to hear your opinions on these >rules and of course any suggestions are welcome. Once I've had a look will be happy to, but I can't see it as yet! Cheers, Nick Middleton From michael at messiahbomb.com Thu Aug 4 05:55:15 2005 From: michael at messiahbomb.com (Michael Christian) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Wizardry References: <20050803000239.98915.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001b01c598f3$c30b74f0$0300a8c0@spacelord> Just a couple of comments. I like the idea and some of the spell treatments. So much so that I think I'll make use of them myself if opportunity presents itself. One thing that I didn't see is: what is the % chance to cast a spell? Is it a skill or is it power based. One of the things that always bugged me about D&D was the "fire and forget" nature of magic. It never made sense to me. So much so that even before playeing Runequest we had adopted a magic point system in our D&D games. Both a point system and the caster forgetting the spell once it's cast serve as limits on spell use, so is it necessary to have both for a wizard? Some the spells seem to have excessive MP costs for what you get. Compare 8 point wizardry Burning Sword ( The enchanted weapon deals +1d6 points of fire damage on a successful hit, which is increased to +2d6 on a special or a critical hit. 1 Minute Duration) to 4 point Spirit Magic Flame Blade (3d6 replaces weapon damage, 5 minute duration). ----- Original Message ----- From: "Leon Kirshtein" To: ; Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2005 5:02 PM Subject: [RQ-Rules] Wizardry >I have been looking for a long time for a way to > integrate D&D type magic into RQ. This is what I have > come up with so far: > > http://68.197.33.44:8245/Wizardry/rules.asp > > Some converted spells are at: > > http://68.197.33.44:8245/Wizardry/default.asp > > I would really like to hear your opinions on these > rules and of course any suggestions are welcome. > > Leon > > > > ____________________________________________________ > Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules@crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > From rymoore at channel-zero.net Thu Aug 4 08:45:06 2005 From: rymoore at channel-zero.net (rymoore@channel-zero.net) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Magic Item Costs Message-ID: <30133.136.182.2.222.1123170306.squirrel@www.channel-zero.net> Hello everyone, In my Runequest 2 book it has a page that shows that cost for buying various spirit/battle magic spells. I seem to remember something about costs for matrices and potions as well but I couldn't find it. Is there a formula or guidelines for the cost of spirit magic potions/matrices? Thanks Ryan Moore From andrew at crashbox.com Thu Aug 4 10:14:02 2005 From: andrew at crashbox.com (Andrew Mellinger) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Magic Item Costs In-Reply-To: <30133.136.182.2.222.1123170306.squirrel@www.channel-zero.net> References: <30133.136.182.2.222.1123170306.squirrel@www.channel-zero.net> Message-ID: I think I saw it in Runequest Cities but basically enchantments are (if my memory serves me right) 1000 per point of POW. So matricies arae based on POW cost. Now, for me I usually put potions in the 50 to 1000 range. Simpler effects start at 50 and double every level increase. More complex effects start higher and still double. For example, and 'oil of bladesharp' being fairly common might start at 40 for a level 1 doubling thereafter. In a large city it might be as low as 25/point. In a backwoods area with high demand as high as a starting price of 80. Of course this is where bargain comes in... -Amdrew On Thu, 4 Aug 2005 rymoore@channel-zero.net wrote: > Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2005 11:45:06 -0400 (EDT) > From: rymoore@channel-zero.net > Reply-To: RuneQuest rules discussion. > To: rq-rules@crashbox.com > Subject: [RQ-Rules] Magic Item Costs > > Hello everyone, > > In my Runequest 2 book it has a page that shows that cost for buying > various spirit/battle magic spells. I seem to remember something about > costs for matrices and potions as well but I couldn't find it. Is there a > formula or guidelines for the cost of spirit magic potions/matrices? > > Thanks > Ryan Moore > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules@crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Aug 4 12:55:08 2005 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Wizardry Message-ID: <20050804195508.15547.qmail@web41113.mail.yahoo.com> >Just a couple of comments. I like the idea and some of the spell treatments. So much so that I think Ill make use of them myself if opportunity presents itself. One thing that I didnt see is: what is the % chance to cast a spell? Is it a skill or is it power based. There are several possibilities. I am considering, either 100% - encumbrance (if encumbrance is greater than STR + SIZ), or Memorization skill (base INT x3). What do you think would be the best way? >One of the things that always bugged me about D&D was the fire and forget nature of magic. It never made sense to me. So much so that even before playeing Runequest we had adopted a magic point system in our D&D games. Both a point system and the caster forgetting the spell once its cast serve as limits on spell use, so is it necessary to have both for a wizard? The fire and forget system forces the caster to choose spells ahead of time and limits access to spells. A wizard may have dozens of spells in his spellbook, but must choose which to carry around with him. Magic points serve as a limit on what kind of spells the Wizard memorizes. I certainly do not want characters using only 9th level spells. >Some the spells seem to have excessive MP costs for what you get. Compare 8 point wizardry Burning Sword (The enchanted weapon deals +1d6 points of fire damage on a successful hit, which is increased to +2d6 on a special or a critical hit. 1 Minute Duration) to 4 point Spirit Magic Flame Blade (3d6 replaces weapon damage, 5 minute duration). The way I figured magic point cost was D&D spell level x2. This spell may seem to be a bit expensive, but it has advantages other FireBlade in that it generates light and it does not hurt the caster. For now I am not really concerned with viability of individual spells, but rather more the mechanics of it as a whole. Leon ____________________________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From andrew at crashbox.com Thu Aug 4 16:27:06 2005 From: andrew at crashbox.com (Andrew O.Mellinger) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Wizardry In-Reply-To: <20050803000239.98915.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20050803000239.98915.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: I've been looking at it and thinking about it for a while and here's my two cents. Overall it looks intriguing, however I'm not sure I'd want to be a player using it. And for me that is often the acid test of whether something is good or not. Here's my basic problem: It takes way too long to memorize a spell, and much of it isn't worth the time. As a starting 'Magic User' (regardless of what other skills someone has) they won't have a very high memorization. So that means that they are going to fail on most of the rolls to study a spell. Let's say I start off with a 35%. (Or were you thinking of much higher? If so, then why even bother to roll?) I was looking at most spells, and even the low end D&D style ones are about four points. (The cantrip-ones are one, but most are 4 or more.) So for a starting character that is 40 minutes and with an average number of failures, learning something like Acid Arrow would take 2 hours. Then to cast it I make another memorization (once again 35%) so we are looking at another 1 in 3. So basically I have to spend 120 minutes to learn the spell the first time, then cast it three times to even get the chance to make a DEX x 3 roll (even with a dex of 15 that's only a 45%) to do only 2d4 points of damage to a guy. Not really worth it. Even for the much more interesting and useful spells (like air walk) it takes much longer time to learn (it is an 8 point spell.) So the problem is that I can't see someone trying this without a meditation skill of 75% or higher. Which is going to be hard to get I'd imagine. Then a person has to acquire the spells, etc. And if we are always assuming meditation of 75% or higher, I'd recommend getting rid of the roll altogether. Taking ideas from old D&D campaigns: Maybe it takes a long time to *learn* a new spell, but it refreshing one isn't that hard. For example: To fill one of my slots with an Air Walk would be even 20 minutes per point, but if I'm just refreshing it would be only 2 minutes per point. Echoing what Michael said: If you've got MP why do you need forgetting the spells? It seems like a double penalty to me. Sure the caster gets some flexibility but that means the spells have to be in the spell book, and the caster has sufficient time learn the spell. In most campaigns I've been in, people would benefit from the time in other ways. -Andrew On Aug 2, 2005, at 8:02 PM, Leon Kirshtein wrote: > I have been looking for a long time for a way to > integrate D&D type magic into RQ. This is what I have > come up with so far: > > http://68.197.33.44:8245/Wizardry/rules.asp > > Some converted spells are at: > > http://68.197.33.44:8245/Wizardry/default.asp > > I would really like to hear your opinions on these > rules and of course any suggestions are welcome. > > Leon > > > > ____________________________________________________ > Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules@crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Aug 4 19:41:10 2005 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Wizardry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20050805024110.13258.qmail@web41111.mail.yahoo.com> --- "Andrew O.Mellinger" wrote: > I've been looking at it and thinking about it for a > while and here's my two cents. Some very good thoughts here. > Overall it looks intriguing, however I'm not sure > I'd want to be a > player using it. And for me that is often the acid > test of whether > something is good or not. That is why I brought it up here. I felt it need some work. Its not quite right yet. > As a starting 'Magic User' (regardless of what > other skills someone > has) they won't have a very high memorization. So > that means that they > are going to fail on most of the rolls to study a > spell. Let's say I > start off with a 35%. (Or were you thinking of much > higher? If so, > then why even bother to roll?) I was thinking a INT x3 as a starting percentage, so you at right on. > I was looking at > most spells, and even > the low end D&D style ones are about four points. > (The cantrip-ones are > one, but most are 4 or more.) So for a starting > character that is 40 > minutes and with an average number of failures, > learning something like > Acid Arrow would take 2 hours. Then to cast it I > make another > memorization (once again 35%) so we are looking at > another 1 in 3. > > So basically I have to spend 120 minutes to learn > the spell the first > time, then cast it three times to even get the > chance to make a DEX x 3 > roll (even with a dex of 15 that's only a 45%) to do > only 2d4 points of > damage to a guy. Not really worth it. Yes, I see the problem. I think a better idea would be to change the casting percentage to 100+STR-enc. This would be more in flavor with the original idea that Wizards should not be wearing armor in the first place. I am also thinking of lowering the time to memorize a spell from 20 minutes to 10 minutes. I still want to keep the Memorization roll to ready a spell, since will limit on the amount of stacking which can be done. > Echoing what Michael said: If you've got MP why do > you need forgetting > the spells? It seems like a double penalty to me. Ok, in that case I can get rid of the magic point cost and half the points of the spells. They will work like Divine spells to represent their effective mp cost, but point for point (half for stacked points). For example Acid Arrow would take 20 minutes to memoraze and count as a 2pt spell versus CounterMagic. If the caster stacks 2 of them then it would count as a 3pt spell, and so on. Thanks for the ideas so far guys. They really help. Leon > > http://68.197.33.44:8245/Wizardry/rules.asp > > > > http://68.197.33.44:8245/Wizardry/default.asp ____________________________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From grogthing at yahoo.com Fri Aug 5 07:45:08 2005 From: grogthing at yahoo.com (grogthing) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Wizardry In-Reply-To: <20050805024110.13258.qmail@web41111.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20050805144509.26894.qmail@web32809.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Have you considered using the sorcery system from "Elric!"? You can memorize a number of spells equal to your intelligence. You dont forget a spell after casting it. Spells cost a number a magic points to cast. I dont remeber how much study time is needed to memorize a spell but you can choose at any time to "forget" a memorized spell and replace it with a new one from your spell book. Very playable and already designed for BRP system. I think you could take all the D&D spells figure the mp cost for them and use the existing Elric! sorcery rules above to judge memorization/use/casting of them. Greg --- Leon Kirshtein wrote: > --- "Andrew O.Mellinger" > wrote: > > I've been looking at it and thinking about it for > a > > while and here's my two cents. > > Some very good thoughts here. > > > Overall it looks intriguing, however I'm not sure > > I'd want to be a > > player using it. And for me that is often the > acid > > test of whether > > something is good or not. > > That is why I brought it up here. I felt it need > some > work. Its not quite right yet. > > > As a starting 'Magic User' (regardless of what > > other skills someone > > has) they won't have a very high memorization. So > > that means that they > > are going to fail on most of the rolls to study a > > spell. Let's say I > > start off with a 35%. (Or were you thinking of > much > > higher? If so, > > then why even bother to roll?) > > I was thinking a INT x3 as a starting percentage, so > you at right on. > > > I was looking at > > most spells, and even > > the low end D&D style ones are about four points. > > (The cantrip-ones are > > one, but most are 4 or more.) So for a starting > > character that is 40 > > minutes and with an average number of failures, > > learning something like > > Acid Arrow would take 2 hours. Then to cast it I > > make another > > memorization (once again 35%) so we are looking at > > another 1 in 3. > > > > So basically I have to spend 120 minutes to learn > > the spell the first > > time, then cast it three times to even get the > > chance to make a DEX x 3 > > roll (even with a dex of 15 that's only a 45%) to > do > > only 2d4 points of > > damage to a guy. Not really worth it. > > Yes, I see the problem. I think a better idea would > be > to change the casting percentage to 100+STR-enc. > This > would be more in flavor with the original idea that > Wizards should not be wearing armor in the first > place. I am also thinking of lowering the time to > memorize a spell from 20 minutes to 10 minutes. I > still want to keep the Memorization roll to ready a > spell, since will limit on the amount of stacking > which can be done. > > > Echoing what Michael said: If you've got MP why > do > > you need forgetting > > the spells? It seems like a double penalty to me. > > > Ok, in that case I can get rid of the magic point > cost > and half the points of the spells. They will work > like > Divine spells to represent their effective mp cost, > but point for point (half for stacked points). > > For example Acid Arrow would take 20 minutes to > memoraze and count as a 2pt spell versus > CounterMagic. > If the caster stacks 2 of them then it would count > as > a 3pt spell, and so on. > > Thanks for the ideas so far guys. They really help. > > Leon > > > > http://68.197.33.44:8245/Wizardry/rules.asp > > > > > > http://68.197.33.44:8245/Wizardry/default.asp > > > > > ____________________________________________________ > Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules@crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 5 10:03:40 2005 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Wizardry Message-ID: <20050805170341.12367.qmail@web41106.mail.yahoo.com> >Have you considered using the sorcery system from Elric!? Yes, but it does not do what I want. Elric spells are just a gloried versions of Spirit Magic. They do not have progression/stacking I am looking for. Under Elric rules you can not realy simulate a Cone of Cold and similar spells. Under the system I am putting together you should be able to. Leon ____________________________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 5 10:03:03 2005 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Wizardry Message-ID: <20050805170337.65972.qmail@web41102.mail.yahoo.com> >Have you considered using the sorcery system from Elric!? Yes, but it does not do what I want. Elric spells are just a gloried versions of Spirit Magic. They do not have progression/stacking I am looking for. Under Elric rules you can not realy simulate a Cone of Cold and similar spells. Under the system I am putting together you should be able to. Leon ____________________________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From grogthing at yahoo.com Fri Aug 5 11:37:02 2005 From: grogthing at yahoo.com (grogthing) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Wizardry In-Reply-To: <20050805170341.12367.qmail@web41106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20050805183702.60857.qmail@web32810.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I guess I'm missing something. I don't understand what is missing. You don't have to use the "spells" that are listed in Elric!, just the rules governing how spells work. IE.. you can remeber up to Itelligence number of spells at one (showing how many specific spell formulas you can keep in accessable memory at one time) And that all it takes is some study time (of your choosing) to open up your spell book, decide to forget one of the spells youve been concentrating on remembering, and load into memory a new one from your book. Spells cost MP to cast. Price and Affect of spell, up to GM. You can take a "Cone of Cold" spell (straight out of D&D if there is one) assign a MP cost, decide on its affect. Make it available to learn in your game. If a player learns it through proper research time and a succesfull spell casting/million spheres (or whatere ever skill you decides controls this knowledge in your game) roll, then the spell is "understood" and can be transcribed into the players "spellbook" and memorized at will according to above rules. This still controls spell usage through MP expenditure. It still limits immediately available spells to whats in memory. It allows some logical flexability for tha magic character to change his spells allocated after a reasonable study time rather than just setting an arbitrary and unmeaning 24 time period. Spell flavor, MP cost, and spell affect are entirely up to you. What are you trying to achieve that the above does not allow? Greg --- Leon Kirshtein wrote: > >Have you considered using the sorcery system from > Elric!? > > Yes, but it does not do what I want. Elric spells > are > just a gloried versions of Spirit Magic. They do not > have progression/stacking I am looking for. > > Under Elric rules you can not realy simulate a Cone > of > Cold and similar spells. Under the system I am > putting > together you should be able to. > > Leon > > > > ____________________________________________________ > Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules@crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 5 17:14:03 2005 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Wizardry In-Reply-To: <20050805183702.60857.qmail@web32810.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20050806001403.44313.qmail@web41126.mail.yahoo.com> > You can take a "Cone of Cold" spell (straight out of > D&D if there is one) assign a MP cost, decide on its > affect. > > What are you trying to achieve that the above does > not allow? Like many other spells in D&D, "Cone of Cold" does 1d4 damage per level of the caster. With my rules it would be possible to to simulate this by stacking the spells. I want the progression that D&D achieves through levels. Leon ____________________________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From andrew at crashbox.com Fri Aug 5 17:19:33 2005 From: andrew at crashbox.com (Andrew O.Mellinger) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Wizardry In-Reply-To: <20050805024110.13258.qmail@web41111.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20050805024110.13258.qmail@web41111.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <7477567dce6d8fa2df11610ba70c15c8@crashbox.com> > Yes, I see the problem. I think a better idea would be > to change the casting percentage to 100+STR-enc. This > would be more in flavor with the original idea that > Wizards should not be wearing armor in the first > place. I am also thinking of lowering the time to > memorize a spell from 20 minutes to 10 minutes. I > still want to keep the Memorization roll to ready a > spell, since will limit on the amount of stacking > which can be done. The 100+STR-enc makes sense. Spellcasters in D&D never had to roll to cast a spell, and in fact never had to roll to target either, at least on directed spells (lightning, fireball, etc.) That may be something you want to consider/playtest as well. Regarding Memorization: I don't see any problems with having a skill, I just recommend making sure that the numbers work out for lower level characters so people will try it. (I always hated the 1st level magic user with one spell.) >> Echoing what Michael said: If you've got MP why do >> you need forgetting >> the spells? It seems like a double penalty to me. > > Ok, in that case I can get rid of the magic point cost > and half the points of the spells. They will work like > Divine spells to represent their effective mp cost, > but point for point (half for stacked points). > > For example Acid Arrow would take 20 minutes to > memoraze and count as a 2pt spell versus CounterMagic. > If the caster stacks 2 of them then it would count as > a 3pt spell, and so on. That sounds fairly reasonable. Be aware that completely changes the dynamic. (I was leaning towards not forgetting the spell rather than dropping magic points.) By dropping MP you leave the system open to the abuse of combining with sorcery or spirit magic. Sure the initial rules say that shamans can't learn wizardry or sorcerers don't think much of it, but some player is going to want to use those MP. They wheedle and compain and find someway to use that resource. (Even if it is charging other player's items.) Also, if you don't have MP what powers the spell? So I'd recommend finding someway to work MP into it, even if it just to prevent a future rules abuse. It is a tough thing to balance out. The flexibility with the power levels. As I am sure you have found out. ;) -Andrew >>> http://68.197.33.44:8245/Wizardry/rules.asp >>> >>> http://68.197.33.44:8245/Wizardry/default.asp From leonbk at yahoo.com Fri Aug 5 19:00:38 2005 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Wizardry In-Reply-To: <7477567dce6d8fa2df11610ba70c15c8@crashbox.com> Message-ID: <20050806020038.42552.qmail@web41114.mail.yahoo.com> > The 100+STR-enc makes sense. Spellcasters in > D&D never had to roll > to cast a spell, and in fact never had to roll to > target either, In D&D3E they do if they wear armor or carry a shield as those give a chance of "Arcane spell failure". > at > least on directed spells (lightning, fireball, etc.) > That may be > something you want to consider/playtest as well. That is because these are area effect spells! I plan to leave them as such. > Regarding Memorization: I don't see any problems > with having a > skill, I just recommend making sure that the numbers > work out for lower > level characters so people will try it. (I always > hated the 1st level magic user with one spell.) Assuming a starting character with an INT 15. To memorize a 1 point spell he would need to spend 20 minutes and roll under 45. If he wants another point that is another 20 minutes and a roll under 35 and so on. > some player is going to want to use those MP. They > wheedle and compain and find someway to use that > resource. (Even if it is charging other player's > items.) Not really a problem. > Also, if you don't have MP what powers the spell? Same thing that power Divine spells. > So I'd recommend finding someway to work MP into > it, even if it just to prevent a future rules abuse. There is a natural built in limitation. You need Free INT to memorize Wizardy, therefore you will know less Spirit Magic or will be lowering Presence in the case of Sorcery. Leon >>> http://68.197.33.44:8245/Wizardry/rules.asp >>> >>> http://68.197.33.44:8245/Wizardry/default.asp __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From soltakss at yahoo.com Sun Aug 7 08:56:19 2005 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (Simon Phipp) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Magic Item Costs In-Reply-To: <20050805144525.F40B9222708@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <20050807155619.5041.qmail@web51005.mail.yahoo.com> Ryan Moore: > In my Runequest 2 book it has a page that shows that cost for buying > various spirit/battle magic spells. I seem to remember something about > costs for matrices and potions as well but I couldn't find it. Is there a > formula or guidelines for the cost of spirit magic potions/matrices? Andrew Mellinger: > I think I saw it in Runequest Cities but basically enchantments are (if my > memory serves me right) 1000 per point of POW. So matricies arae based on > POW cost. In RQ2 you had the Matrix Creation spell which was 1 point one-use and you could use it to create a spell matrix. Cost was 1000L per point of spell, i.e. per POW spent. In RQ3 the same principles should apply - 1000L per point of spell for any enchantment. I think the costs were in Plunder, but I don't have it any more so can't check. > Now, for me I usually put potions in the 50 to 1000 range. Simpler > effects start at 50 and double every level increase. More complex effects > start higher and still double. That sounds fairly reasonable. Isn't there a price list in RQ2? There is a price list for everything else. The cost to make the potion is the same regardless of the spell. I think we used to play that the cost of a potion was a percentage of the cost of the spell, but I can't remember the percentage we used, maybe 1 percent. > For example, and 'oil of bladesharp' being fairly common might start at 40 > for a level 1 doubling thereafter. In a large city it might be as low as > 25/point. In a backwoods area with high demand as high as a starting > price of 80. Yep, that is where the RQ3 idea of different costs for different cultural levels comes in. > Of course this is where bargain comes in... Simon ___________________________________________________________ To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com From gianni at basicrps.com Mon Aug 8 06:59:51 2005 From: gianni at basicrps.com (Gianni) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Wizardry Message-ID: <20050808140008.440652225B0@boomstick.screwheads.net> Hey Greg > >Have you considered using the sorcery system from > Elric!? Which supplement is it described in? Cheers Gianni From grogthing at yahoo.com Mon Aug 8 08:01:39 2005 From: grogthing at yahoo.com (grogthing) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Wizardry In-Reply-To: <20050808140008.440652225B0@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <20050808150139.79198.qmail@web32811.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I believe that is in the core "Elric!" book. It is also in the newer Stormbringer 5th Ed. with some minor differences. Greg --- Gianni wrote: > Hey Greg > > > >Have you considered using the sorcery system from > > Elric!? > > Which supplement is it described in? > > Cheers > > Gianni_______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules@crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle From grogthing at yahoo.com Mon Aug 8 08:09:43 2005 From: grogthing at yahoo.com (grogthing) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Wizardry In-Reply-To: <20050808150139.79198.qmail@web32811.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20050808150943.35727.qmail@web32807.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Leon, I think the "level" scaling of spells could easily be handled by either of 2 methods. 1) have different levels of spell available with the previous version being a prereq for the more advanced version. Cone of Cold 1 = 1d4 cold damage, 5 MP Cone of Cold 2 = 2d4 cold damage, 5 MP (requires Cone of Cold 1 as prereq) Cone of Cold 3 = 3d4 cold damage, 5 MP (require Cone of Cold 2 as prereq) 2) Have one variable power version of the spell but have the damage affect vary by the amount of MP spent on it Cone of Cold 1d4, 5 MP Cone of Cold 2d4, 8 MP Cone of Cold 3d4, 10 MP Greg "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle From degordon3000 at btconnect.com Mon Aug 8 08:23:54 2005 From: degordon3000 at btconnect.com (David Gordon) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Wizardry References: <20050808151012.2B43F222719@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <009f01c59c2d$30584600$d0169109@2373993GCH7> In Unknown East Elrc! supplement there is a very good Sorcery system which involves the use of spheres and runes. It has a stackable system and the spells in Elric! are translated into this system in that supplement. I highly recommend it. The system is not as prone to failure than RQ3 sorcery is at low levels. Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2005 10:03:40 -0700 (PDT) From: Leon Kirshtein Have you considered using the sorcery system from Elric!? Yes, but it does not do what I want. Elric spells are just a gloried versions of Spirit Magic. They do not have progression/stacking I am looking for. Under Elric rules you can not realy simulate a Cone of Cold and similar spells. Under the system I am putting together you should be able to. Leon From leonbk at yahoo.com Mon Aug 8 08:36:55 2005 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Wizardry Message-ID: <20050808153655.90366.qmail@web41124.mail.yahoo.com> Yes, it could be done in such a fashion, but I like my method better in that it makes these spells into something different than powerful Spirit Magic. Leon --- rq-rules-bounces@crashbox.com wrote: > Leon, > > I think the "level" scaling of spells could easily be > handled by either of 2 methods. > > 1) have different levels of spell available with the > previous version being a prereq for the more advanced > version. > > Cone of Cold 1 = 1d4 cold damage, 5 MP > Cone of Cold 2 = 2d4 cold damage, 5 MP > (requires Cone of Cold 1 as prereq) > Cone of Cold 3 = 3d4 cold damage, 5 MP > (require Cone of Cold 2 as prereq) > > 2) Have one variable power version of the spell but > have the damage affect vary by the amount of MP spent > on it > > Cone of Cold 1d4, 5 MP > Cone of Cold 2d4, 8 MP > Cone of Cold 3d4, 10 MP > > Greg > > > "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every > form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson > > "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson > > "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry > > "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules@crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From leonbk at yahoo.com Mon Aug 8 08:39:27 2005 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Wizardry Message-ID: <20050808153927.35102.qmail@web41102.mail.yahoo.com> The problem with those rules, is that they are very general and my players like things defined for them. Besides, my goal was to bring D&D spells to my game and not just to develop a different sorcery system. Leon --- rq-rules-bounces@crashbox.com wrote: > In Unknown East Elrc! supplement there is a very good Sorcery system which > involves the use of spheres and runes. It has a stackable system and the > spells in Elric! are translated into this system in that supplement. I > highly recommend it. The system is not as prone to failure than RQ3 sorcery > is at low levels. > > > Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2005 10:03:40 -0700 (PDT) > From: Leon Kirshtein To: rq-rules@crashbox.com > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > >Have you considered using the sorcery system from > Elric!? > > Yes, but it does not do what I want. Elric spells are > just a gloried versions of Spirit Magic. They do not > have progression/stacking I am looking for. > > Under Elric rules you can not realy simulate a Cone of > Cold and similar spells. Under the system I am putting > together you should be able to. > > Leon > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules@crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules ____________________________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Mon Aug 15 02:12:14 2005 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Are RuneQuest fans older? Message-ID: I have been on leave. Am 33 Tony -----Original Message----- Peter Maranci I recently asserted that RuneQuest fans were probably older, on average, than fans of most other systems; particularly D&D. Now I'm wondering if I was right. So...how old is everyone? Feel free not to answer, of course. I'll start off: I'm 41. __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Standard Bank Disclaimer and Confidentiality Note This e-mail, its attachments and any rights attaching hereto are, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, the property of Standard Bank Group Limited and/or its subsidiaries ("the Group"). It is confidential, private and intended for the addressee only. Should you not be the addressee and receive this e-mail by mistake, kindly notify the sender, and delete this e-mail, immediately and do not disclose or use same in any manner whatsoever. Views and opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender unless clearly stated as those of the Group. The Group accepts no liability whatsoever for any loss or damages whatsoever and howsoever incurred, or suffered, resulting, or arising, from the use of this email or its attachments. The Group does not warrant the integrity of this e-mail nor that it is free of errors, viruses, interception or interference. Licensed divisions of the Standard Bank Group are authorised financial services providers in terms of the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act, No 37 of 2002 (FAIS). For information about the Standard Bank Group Limited visit our website http://www.standardbank.co.za ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Mon Aug 15 07:57:14 2005 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Widows Tale Message-ID: Well, I eventually got round to reading Widows tale. I am pretty neutral = re Glorantha. It has its place and some ideas but I tend to prefer doing my = own thing. Having said that, who what a read! After chapter 1 I was grinding my teeth wishing I had brought my gods of Glorantha box with me on holiday. But once I got into it I couldn't put i= t down. The literary device I found most intriguing, I loved the way the author used subtle repetition to underline events and how she displayed h= ow each group of protagonists viewed an event and blamed the other for what happened. Must say the book definitely showed me a side of Glorantha I had never perceived before. T=A8=92ny=20 _________________________________________________________________________= _________________________________________________________ Standard Bank Disclaimer and Confidentiality Note This e-mail, its attachments and any rights attaching hereto are, unless = the context clearly indicates otherwise, the property of Standard Bank Gr= oup Limited and/or its subsidiaries ("the Group"). It is confidential, private and in= tended for the addressee only. Should you not be the addressee and receiv= e this e-mail by mistake, kindly notify the sender, and delete this e-mail, immediately an= d do not disclose or use same in any manner whatsoever. Views and opinion= s expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender unless clearly stated as= =20those of the Group. The Group accepts no liability whatsoever for any = loss or damages whatsoever and howsoever incurred, or suffered, resulting, or ari= sing, from the use of this email or its attachments. The Group does not w= arrant the integrity of this e-mail nor that it is free of errors, viruses, interception or in= terference. Licensed divisions of the Standard Bank Group are authorised = financial services providers in terms of the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act, No 37 o= f 2002 (FAIS). For information about the Standard Bank Group Limited visit our website h= ttp://www.standardbank.co.za _________________________________________________________________________= __________________________________________________________ From anthony.emmel at gmail.com Mon Aug 15 18:25:55 2005 From: anthony.emmel at gmail.com (Anthony Emmel) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Are RuneQuest fans older? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Chello! 35 here. Tony -- Anthony N. Emmel Scholar & Catholic Gentleman 6? The high praises of God shall be in their mouth: and two-edged swords in their hands: 7 To execute vengeance upon the nations, chastisements among the people: 8 To bind their kings with fetters, and their nobles with manacles of iron. 9 To execute upon them the judgment that is written: this glory is to all his saints. Alleluia. Psalm 149, DRV From pmj at comhem.se Tue Aug 16 14:03:23 2005 From: pmj at comhem.se (Peter Johansson) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Widows Tale In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4302549B.7000301@comhem.se> Hmm, you really made me move 'Widows tale' up my reading list. Has had in my bookshelf for a year or more but never gotten around to it. Does anyone have any views on the book and/or other Gloranthan ficition in print. /Peter J Den, Tony T wrote: >Well, I eventually got round to reading Widows tale. I am pretty neutral re >Glorantha. It has its place and some ideas but I tend to prefer doing my own >thing. Having said that, who what a read! > >After chapter 1 I was grinding my teeth wishing I had brought my gods of >Glorantha box with me on holiday. But once I got into it I couldn't put it >down. The literary device I found most intriguing, I loved the way the >author used subtle repetition to underline events and how she displayed how >each group of protagonists viewed an event and blamed the other for what >happened. > >Must say the book definitely showed me a side of Glorantha I had never >perceived before. > > >T¨’ny > >__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > >Standard Bank Disclaimer and Confidentiality Note > >This e-mail, its attachments and any rights attaching hereto are, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, the property of Standard Bank Group Limited >and/or its subsidiaries ("the Group"). It is confidential, private and intended for the addressee only. Should you not be the addressee and receive this e-mail by >mistake, kindly notify the sender, and delete this e-mail, immediately and do not disclose or use same in any manner whatsoever. Views and opinions >expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender unless clearly stated as those of the Group. The Group accepts no liability whatsoever for any loss or >damages whatsoever and howsoever incurred, or suffered, resulting, or arising, from the use of this email or its attachments. The Group does not warrant the integrity >of this e-mail nor that it is free of errors, viruses, interception or interference. Licensed divisions of the Standard Bank Group are authorised financial services providers >in terms of the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act, No 37 of 2002 (FAIS). >For information about the Standard Bank Group Limited visit our website http://www.standardbank.co.za >___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ >_______________________________________________ >RQ-Rules mailing list >RQ-Rules@crashbox.com >http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules >http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > From Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za Tue Aug 16 22:46:48 2005 From: Tony.Den at standardbank.co.za (Den, Tony T) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:09 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Widows Tale Message-ID: Thanks Peter. Oddly enough it also lurked on my shelf for about a year. Then again most books do, I am a classicx read one buy two person, so never really catch up.I too would lie to know if any of the other RQ/Gloranhan fiction is worthwhile - Complete Griselda? Peter Johansson wrote: Hmm, you really made me move 'Widows tale' up my reading list. Has had in my bookshelf for a year or more but never gotten around to it. Does anyone have any views on the book and/or other Gloranthan ficition in print. /Peter J __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Standard Bank Disclaimer and Confidentiality Note This e-mail, its attachments and any rights attaching hereto are, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, the property of Standard Bank Group Limited and/or its subsidiaries ("the Group"). It is confidential, private and intended for the addressee only. Should you not be the addressee and receive this e-mail by mistake, kindly notify the sender, and delete this e-mail, immediately and do not disclose or use same in any manner whatsoever. Views and opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the sender unless clearly stated as those of the Group. The Group accepts no liability whatsoever for any loss or damages whatsoever and howsoever incurred, or suffered, resulting, or arising, from the use of this email or its attachments. The Group does not warrant the integrity of this e-mail nor that it is free of errors, viruses, interception or interference. Licensed divisions of the Standard Bank Group are authorised financial services providers in terms of the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act, No 37 of 2002 (FAIS). For information about the Standard Bank Group Limited visit our website http://www.standardbank.co.za ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ From phil.hibbs at capgemini.com Thu Aug 18 01:42:42 2005 From: phil.hibbs at capgemini.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:10 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Wizardry Message-ID: <28FEE77FA0D069428DBB715915864EE6025C01CF@MISSBHXVS02.uki.capgemini.com> I think to do D&D style wizardry in RQ, you have to get away from Magic Points. D&D wizards are more like channeling wizards whereas magic points are essence, to steal a term from Rolemaster (although that system bottles out on the concept completely, as essence and channeling have access to identical power levels). D&D wizards get more spells as they advance in skill, not as they acquire more magic batteries. Maybe this progression could be simulated by having a relatively high MP cost (comparable to spirit magic), but have the spell cost only 1MP if a special success is rolled, and zero for a critical. The justification here is that the power for the spell is supposed to come from the material components. Phil Hibbs. This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message. From aluban at yahoo.fr Thu Aug 18 03:38:42 2005 From: aluban at yahoo.fr (Alban de ROSTOLAN) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:10 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Wizardry In-Reply-To: <28FEE77FA0D069428DBB715915864EE6025C01CF@MISSBHXVS02.uki.capgemini.com> Message-ID: <20050818103842.28224.qmail@web26209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> "Hibbs, Phil" a ?crit : I think to do D&D style wizardry in RQ, you have to get away from Magic Points. D&D wizards are more like channeling wizards whereas magic points are essence, to steal a term from Rolemaster (although that system bottles out on the concept completely, as essence and channeling have access to identical power levels). D&D wizards get more spells as they advance in skill, not as they acquire more magic batteries. Sandy Petersen's sorcery rules offered an excellent way to simulate D&D-like magic with the Art of "Hold". With this art you could prepare your spells and hold them within your Presence until needed. To me, those rules are a good basis to recreate D&D-like wizardry. Maybe this progression could be simulated by having a relatively high MP cost (comparable to spirit magic), but have the spell cost only 1MP if a special success is rolled, and zero for a critical. The justification here is that the power for the spell is supposed to come from the material components. Wow. Sounds a little drastic for me. I'd rather half MP cost on a special and divide it by 4 on a critical. --------------------------------- Appel audio GRATUIT partout dans le monde avec le nouveau Yahoo! Messenger T?l?chargez le ici ! From soltakss at yahoo.com Thu Aug 18 04:14:42 2005 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (Simon Phipp) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:10 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: Widow's Tale/Complete Griselda In-Reply-To: <20050818084316.D3288222705@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <20050818111442.4116.qmail@web51005.mail.yahoo.com> Tony Den: > >Well, I eventually got round to reading Widows tale. I am pretty neutral > re > >Glorantha. It has its place and some ideas but I tend to prefer doing my > own > >thing. Having said that, who what a read! And > Thanks Peter. Oddly enough it also lurked on my shelf for about a year. > Then again most books do, I am a classicx read one buy two person, so never > really catch up.I too would lie to know if any of the other RQ/Gloranhan > fiction is worthwhile - Complete Griselda? Well, Widow's Tale is a pretty good read, but is set in a Glorantha far, far removed from the one I am used to. Would I recommend reading it? Yes. Would I recommend buying it? Not really, unless you are a die-hard Gloranthan fan. As for the Complete Griselda, all the Griselda stories are well-written and interesting, although they do read as though they are campaign write-ups, which they aparently aren't, funnily enough. They can be used as ideas for campaigns, for scenarios and for getting some flavour of Pavis and Big Rubble. Speaking personally, I've never had much time for Griselda as she wouldn't have lasted long in any campaign of mine, so I've not been that interested in her. Would I recommend reading Complete Griselda? Yes. Would I recommend buying it? Yes. See Ya Simon ___________________________________________________________ To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com From peter.brink at brinkdata.se Thu Aug 18 06:10:45 2005 From: peter.brink at brinkdata.se (Peter Brink) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:10 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Wizardry In-Reply-To: <28FEE77FA0D069428DBB715915864EE6025C01CF@MISSBHXVS02.uki.capgemini.com> References: <28FEE77FA0D069428DBB715915864EE6025C01CF@MISSBHXVS02.uki.capgemini.com> Message-ID: <430488D5.4090301@brinkdata.se> Hibbs, Phil skrev: > I think to do D&D style wizardry in RQ, you have to get away from > magic Points. D&D wizards are more like channeling wizards whereas > magic points are essence, to steal a term from Rolemaster (although > that system bottles out on the concept completely, as essence and > channeling have access to identical power levels). D&D wizards get > more spells as they advance in skill, not as they acquire more magic > batteries. Maybe this progression could be simulated by having a > relatively high MP cost (comparable to spirit magic), but have the > spell cost only 1MP if a special success is rolled, and zero for a > critical. The justification here is that the power for the spell > is supposed to come from the material components. > Another way of doing it would be to adapt the concept of formulaic spells from Ars Magica. A formulaic spell is a spell that the mage has a description of (e.g. in the form of a recipe) and has studied (that is the mage has learned how to cast the spell without any mnemonics or props, although such things may increase his chance of successfully casting the spell). As long as the mage successfully casts spells which he can control, i.e. he has sufficient mastery of the skill(s) required to cast the spell, there is no magic point loss. If he fails he must "pay" the cost in magic points of the spell, if he fumbles he must "pay" double the cost. If he is casting a spell which he really can't fully control then he must pay the usual cost to cast the spell, double the cost if he fails and triple the cost if he fumbles. Fumbling a powerful spell that he does not fully control may kill the mage. The method to find out *if* a mage can control a spell is made up of two steps, first you calculate the effective spell casting chance, then you calculate the energy used. Each school of magic (conjuration, enchantment, etc) is a separate skill and each level of difficulty subtracts 5 percentiles from the chance of casting the spell. The base energy cost is equal to the difficulty level plus any additional range, volume, duration or damage the mage wants the spell to have. Use the tables in RQ Sorcery for calculating costs of range, volume and duration. Use the fire damage intensity table for the cost of increasing the damage. If the total cost is less or equal to a fifth (20%) of the effective spell casting chance the mage can fully control the spell, if the total is more than a fifth of the of the effective spell casting chance then the mage is casting a spell he has trouble controlling. An example: A Fireball spell is a level 3 evocation spell. The mage must subtract 15 percentiles from his evocation school skill. The base cost for a fireball that does 1 point of damage at 10 m range is 3 mp. The mage's evocation skill is rated at 60%. His effective skill is 45%, so he can control a fireball spell worth 9 magic points. He could increase the damage to 3d6 by spending another 3 points, and he could increase the range to 40 meters by spending two more points and increase the radius of the explosion another meter by spending one point. The total would then be 9 points, which the mage would be able to control. If the mage was in a tight spot he could add another point on the damage intensity and two more points to increase the radius to four meters, but then he would have to pay up 12 mp to cast the spell (at 45%) or 24 if he failed (which very well might kill him). /Peter Brink From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Aug 18 07:10:38 2005 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:10 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Wizardry Message-ID: <20050818141038.12703.qmail@web41122.mail.yahoo.com> I am convinced that the spells should not depend on magic points, but having the spells cost less on a special does not really help. I am still looking for a nice progression system, which would allow a wizard to learn and cast more spells as time goes on. What I am using now is a combination of the characters INT, which also serves to limit the characters access to spirit magic and sorcery, and decrease chance of memorizing an additional spell of the same type. But, these do not prevent a character to memorizing only the most powerful spells. I am still open to suggestions on that. Leon --- rq-rules-bounces@crashbox.com wrote: > > I think to do D&D style wizardry in RQ, you have to get away from Magic > Points. D&D wizards are more like channeling wizards whereas magic points > are essence, to steal a term from Rolemaster (although that system bottles > out on the concept completely, as essence and channeling have access to > identical power levels). D&D wizards get more spells as they advance in > skill, not as they acquire more magic batteries. Maybe this progression > could be simulated by having a relatively high MP cost (comparable to > spirit > magic), but have the spell cost only 1MP if a special success is rolled, > and > zero for a critical. The justification here is that the power for the > spell > is supposed to come from the material components. > > Phil Hibbs. > > This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential > and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the > person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, > you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, > distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this > message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all > copies of this message. > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules@crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules ____________________________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From styopa1 at gmail.com Thu Aug 18 07:12:47 2005 From: styopa1 at gmail.com (Steve Lieb) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:10 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 20, Issue 3 In-Reply-To: <20050818084316.D3288222705@boomstick.screwheads.net> References: <20050818084316.D3288222705@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <56e64e7a05081807125440ae6d@mail.gmail.com> I like both of these, and think some specific spells would lend themselves to either system. Use both at the same time. Nothing wrong with saying "Jorge's Spell of Fire Casting" can be juiced with more MP to make it more powerful (but it's not freely modifiable like default RQ3 sorcery, you have to learn HOW to do it)*, while "Phandaal's Bolt of Flame" which gives a certain damage, MUST be learned to 50% to have the insight to learn "Phandaal's Searing Curtain" or "Phandaal's Volcanic Lance" - heck, you could have whole TREES of spells and their relationships/developments, making being a sorcerer intrinsically INTERESTING as this is discovered. At least this would give you an almost-infinite number of additional adventure hooks. Also makes it even more different than other magic systems. * Personally, I let sorcerous players handle their magical skills differently too - if a character casting a spell gets a special success in casting, they get a chance at an experience roll (d6-1) to increase the skill in casting just like other skills. If they get a critical success and then later 'win' the experience roll, they get a chance to improve their insight into that spell somehow, maybe reduce the casting time by 1SR, add +1 damage, etc. On a tangential note, I also give my spellcasters a magic skill called "focus" = (INT+CON)/2 (trainable and gainable) - if they get hit by damage other serious disturbance this is their chance to continue casting. (With damage applied causing a negative modifier, etc.). Also, casters maximum dodge during casting is the lower of dodge and focus. On 8/18/05, rq-rules-request@crashbox.com wrote: > > I think the "level" scaling of spells could easily > be > > handled by either of 2 methods. > > From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Aug 18 07:13:30 2005 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:10 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Wizardry Message-ID: <20050818141330.19745.qmail@web41121.mail.yahoo.com> Sorcery is sorcery and no matter how good Sandys rules are (I think they are excellent, with some modifications) they do not mimic D&D magic at all. Leon --- rq-rules-bounces@crashbox.com wrote: > "Hibbs, Phil" a ?crit : > > > I think to do D&D style wizardry in RQ, you have to get away from Magic > Points. D&D wizards are more like channeling wizards whereas magic points > are essence, to steal a term from Rolemaster (although that system bottles > out on the concept completely, as essence and channeling have access to > identical power levels). D&D wizards get more spells as they advance in > skill, not as they acquire more magic batteries. > > Sandy Petersen's sorcery rules offered an excellent way to simulate D&D-like magic with the Art of "Hold". With this art you could prepare your spells and hold them within your Presence until needed. > > To me, those rules are a good basis to recreate D&D-like wizardry. > > Maybe this progression > could be simulated by having a relatively high MP cost (comparable to spirit > magic), but have the spell cost only 1MP if a special success is rolled, and > zero for a critical. The justification here is that the power for the spell > is supposed to come from the material components. > > Wow. Sounds a little drastic for me. I'd rather half MP cost on a special and divide it by 4 on a critical. > > > --------------------------------- > Appel audio GRATUIT partout dans le monde avec le nouveau Yahoo! Messenger > T?l?chargez le ici ! > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules@crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules ____________________________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Aug 18 07:16:57 2005 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:10 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Wizardry Message-ID: <20050818141657.40537.qmail@web41106.mail.yahoo.com> >each level of difficulty subtracts 5 percentiles from the chance of casting the spell. Hmm, I may be able to use that. Leon --- rq-rules-bounces@crashbox.com wrote: > Hibbs, Phil skrev: > > I think to do D&D style wizardry in RQ, you have to get away from > > magic Points. D&D wizards are more like channeling wizards whereas > > magic points are essence, to steal a term from Rolemaster (although > > that system bottles out on the concept completely, as essence and > > channeling have access to identical power levels). D&D wizards get > > more spells as they advance in skill, not as they acquire more magic > > batteries. Maybe this progression could be simulated by having a > > relatively high MP cost (comparable to spirit magic), but have the > > spell cost only 1MP if a special success is rolled, and zero for a > > critical. The justification here is that the power for the spell > > is supposed to come from the material components. > > > > Another way of doing it would be to adapt the concept of formulaic > spells from Ars Magica. A formulaic spell is a spell that the mage has a > description of (e.g. in the form of a recipe) and has studied (that is > the mage has learned how to cast the spell without any mnemonics or > props, although such things may increase his chance of successfully > casting the spell). As long as the mage successfully casts spells which > he can control, i.e. he has sufficient mastery of the skill(s) required > to cast the spell, there is no magic point loss. If he fails he must > "pay" the cost in magic points of the spell, if he fumbles he must "pay" > double the cost. If he is casting a spell which he really can't fully > control then he must pay the usual cost to cast the spell, double the > cost if he fails and triple the cost if he fumbles. Fumbling a powerful > spell that he does not fully control may kill the mage. > > The method to find out *if* a mage can control a spell is made up of two > steps, first you calculate the effective spell casting chance, then you > calculate the energy used. Each school of magic (conjuration, > enchantment, etc) is a separate skill and each level of difficulty > subtracts 5 percentiles from the chance of casting the spell. The base > energy cost is equal to the difficulty level plus any additional range, > volume, duration or damage the mage wants the spell to have. Use the > tables in RQ Sorcery for calculating costs of range, volume and > duration. Use the fire damage intensity table for the cost of increasing > the damage. If the total cost is less or equal to a fifth (20%) of the > effective spell casting chance the mage can fully control the spell, if > the total is more than a fifth of the of the effective spell casting > chance then the mage is casting a spell he has trouble controlling. > > An example: A Fireball spell is a level 3 evocation spell. The mage must > subtract 15 percentiles from his evocation school skill. The base cost > for a fireball that does 1 point of damage at 10 m range is 3 mp. The > mage's evocation skill is rated at 60%. His effective skill is 45%, so > he can control a fireball spell worth 9 magic points. He could increase > the damage to 3d6 by spending another 3 points, and he could increase > the range to 40 meters by spending two more points and increase the > radius of the explosion another meter by spending one point. The total > would then be 9 points, which the mage would be able to control. If the > mage was in a tight spot he could add another point on the damage > intensity and two more points to increase the radius to four meters, but > then he would have to pay up 12 mp to cast the spell (at 45%) or 24 if > he failed (which very well might kill him). > > > /Peter Brink > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules@crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules ____________________________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Aug 18 07:19:13 2005 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:10 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 20, Issue 3 Message-ID: <20050818141914.5231.qmail@web41110.mail.yahoo.com> Concentration as a skill is another thing I stole from D&D rules :) Leon --- rq-rules-bounces@crashbox.com wrote: > I like both of these, and think some specific spells would lend > themselves to either system. Use both at the same time. > > Nothing wrong with saying "Jorge's Spell of Fire Casting" can be > juiced with more MP to make it more powerful (but it's not freely > modifiable like default RQ3 sorcery, you have to learn HOW to do it)*, > while "Phandaal's Bolt of Flame" which gives a certain damage, MUST be > learned to 50% to have the insight to learn "Phandaal's Searing > Curtain" or "Phandaal's Volcanic Lance" - heck, you could have whole > TREES of spells and their relationships/developments, making being a > sorcerer intrinsically INTERESTING as this is discovered. At least > this would give you an almost-infinite number of additional adventure > hooks. Also makes it even more different than other magic systems. > > * Personally, I let sorcerous players handle their magical skills > differently too - if a character casting a spell gets a special > success in casting, they get a chance at an experience roll (d6-1) to > increase the skill in casting just like other skills. If they get a > critical success and then later 'win' the experience roll, they get a > chance to improve their insight into that spell somehow, maybe reduce > the casting time by 1SR, add +1 damage, etc. > > On a tangential note, I also give my spellcasters a magic skill called > "focus" = (INT+CON)/2 (trainable and gainable) - if they get hit by > damage other serious disturbance this is their chance to continue > casting. (With damage applied causing a negative modifier, etc.). > Also, casters maximum dodge during casting is the lower of dodge and > focus. > > On 8/18/05, rq-rules-request@crashbox.com w > rote: > > > I think the "level" scaling of spells could easily > > be > > > handled by either of 2 methods. > > > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules@crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From grogthing at yahoo.com Thu Aug 18 07:38:14 2005 From: grogthing at yahoo.com (grogthing) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:10 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Wizardry In-Reply-To: <20050818141038.12703.qmail@web41122.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20050818143814.76694.qmail@web32810.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Well if a person really wants the D&D magick system in RQ, the only thing that that D&D has that Rq doesn't is levels. So you just have to have a wizardry skill % / level conversion. Here is the wizard spells per day progression chart from the SRD. Instead of this being a per level chart covering 20 levels of progression, you divide 100% by the 20 levels provided to give you the % value of each progression = 5%. So you change the level chart to a skill percentage chart. Each full 5% of skill in Wiazardry takes you up a level on the chart and you can use the D&D spells right out of the book. | Spells Per Day | |0/1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8/9| |3/1/?/?/?/?/?/?/?/?|01-05% |4/2/?/?/?/?/?/?/?/?|06-10% |4/2/1/?/?/?/?/?/?/?|11-15% |4/3/2/?/?/?/?/?/?/?|16-20% |4/3/2/1/?/?/?/?/?/?|21-25% |4/3/3/2/?/?/?/?/?/?|26-30% |4/4/3/2/1/?/?/?/?/?|31-35% |4/4/3/3/2/?/?/?/?/?|36-40% |4/4/4/3/2/1/?/?/?/?|41-45% |4/4/4/3/3/2/?/?/?/?|46-50% |4/4/4/4/3/2/1/?/?/?|51-55% |4/4/4/4/3/3/2/?/?/?|56-60% |4/4/4/4/4/3/2/1/?/?|61-65% |4/4/4/4/4/3/3/2/?/?|66-70% |4/4/4/4/4/4/3/2/1/?|71-75% |4/4/4/4/4/4/3/3/2/?|76-80% |4/4/4/4/4/4/4/3/2/1|81-85% |4/4/4/4/4/4/4/3/3/2|86-90% |4/4/4/4/4/4/4/4/3/3|91-95% |4/4/4/4/4/4/4/4/4/4|96-00% Greg --- Leon Kirshtein wrote: > I am convinced that the spells should not depend on > magic points, but having the spells cost less on a > special does not really help. I am still looking for > a > nice progression system, which would allow a wizard > to > learn and cast more spells as time goes on. What I > am > using now is a combination of the characters INT, > which also serves to limit the characters access to > spirit magic and sorcery, and decrease chance of > memorizing an additional spell of the same type. > But, > these do not prevent a character to memorizing only > the most powerful spells. I am still open to > suggestions on that. > > Leon > --- rq-rules-bounces@crashbox.com > wrote: > > > > I think to do D&D style wizardry in RQ, you have > to > get away from Magic > > Points. D&D wizards are more like channeling > wizards > whereas magic points > > are essence, to steal a term from Rolemaster > (although that system bottles > > out on the concept completely, as essence and > channeling have access to > > identical power levels). D&D wizards get more > spells > as they advance in > > skill, not as they acquire more magic batteries. > Maybe this progression > > could be simulated by having a relatively high MP > cost (comparable to > > spirit > > magic), but have the spell cost only 1MP if a > special success is rolled, > > and > > zero for a critical. The justification here is > that > the power for the > > spell > > is supposed to come from the material components. > > > > Phil Hibbs. > > > > This message contains information that may be > privileged or confidential > > and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is > intended only for the > > person to whom it is addressed. If you are not > the > intended recipient, > > you are not authorized to read, print, retain, > copy, disseminate, > > distribute, or use this message or any part > thereof. If you receive this > > message in error, please notify the sender > immediately and delete all > > copies of this message. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > RQ-Rules mailing list > > RQ-Rules@crashbox.com > > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > > > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > > > > > ____________________________________________________ > Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs > > _______________________________________________ > RQ-Rules mailing list > RQ-Rules@crashbox.com > http://www.crashbox.com/rq-rules > http://www.crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rq-rules > "I have sworn, upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." - Thomas Jefferson "It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg." - Thomas Jefferson "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!" - Patrick Henry "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion. Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they consider god-fearing and pious." - Aristotle From leonbk at yahoo.com Thu Aug 18 08:26:35 2005 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:10 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Wizardry Message-ID: <20050818152635.52671.qmail@web41125.mail.yahoo.com> Hmm, how about a progression by school? School skill/10 as the number of spells of a particular level(pionts) which can be memorized. I could still keep the INT restriction, but make memorizing same spells take up only 1 point of INT. For example: Evocation 30% would allow one to memorize 3 x 1 point Evocation spells, 1 x 2 point Evocation spell, and 1 x 3 point Evocation spell. If the character chooses to memorize 3 uses of Magic Missle it would still onlt take a 1 point of INT. This method would allow for specialization and make some wizards much better at some things than other. Leon --- rq-rules-bounces@crashbox.com wrote: > Well if a person really wants the D&D magick system in > RQ, the only thing that that D&D has that Rq doesn't > is levels. > > So you just have to have a wizardry skill % / level > conversion. > > Here is the wizard spells per day progression chart > from the SRD. > > Instead of this being a per level chart covering 20 > levels of progression, you divide 100% by the 20 > levels provided to give you the % value of each > progression = 5%. > > So you change the level chart to a skill percentage > chart. Each full 5% of skill in Wiazardry takes you up > a level on the chart and you can use the D&D spells > right out of the book. > > | Spells Per Day | > |0/1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8/9| > |3/1/?/?/?/?/?/?/?/?|01-05% > |4/2/?/?/?/?/?/?/?/?|06-10% > |4/2/1/?/?/?/?/?/?/?|11-15% > |4/3/2/?/?/?/?/?/?/?|16-20% > |4/3/2/1/?/?/?/?/?/?|21-25% > |4/3/3/2/?/?/?/?/?/?|26-30% > |4/4/3/2/1/?/?/?/?/?|31-35% > |4/4/3/3/2/?/?/?/?/?|36-40% > |4/4/4/3/2/1/?/?/?/?|41-45% > |4/4/4/3/3/2/?/?/?/?|46-50% > |4/4/4/4/3/2/1/?/?/?|51-55% > |4/4/4/4/3/3/2/?/?/?|56-60% > |4/4/4/4/4/3/2/1/?/?|61-65% > |4/4/4/4/4/3/3/2/?/?|66-70% > |4/4/4/4/4/4/3/2/1/?|71-75% > |4/4/4/4/4/4/3/3/2/?|76-80% > |4/4/4/4/4/4/4/3/2/1|81-85% > |4/4/4/4/4/4/4/3/3/2|86-90% > |4/4/4/4/4/4/4/4/3/3|91-95% > |4/4/4/4/4/4/4/4/4/4|96-00% > > Greg > > --- Leon Kirshtein wrote: > > > I am convinced that the spells should not depend on > > magic points, but having the spells cost less on a > > special does not really help. I am still looking for > > a > > nice progression system, which would allow a wizard > > to > > learn and cast more spells as time goes on. What I > > am > > using now is a combination of the characters INT, > > which also serves to limit the characters access to > > spirit magic and sorcery, and decrease chance of > > memorizing an additional spell of the same type. > > But, > > these do not prevent a character to memorizing only > > the most powerful spells. I am still open to > > suggestions on that. > > > > Leon > > --- rq-rules-bounces@crashbox.com > > wrote: > > > > > > I think to do D&D style wizardry in RQ, you have > > to > > get away from Magic > > > Points. D&D wizards are more like channeling > > wizards > > whereas magic points > > > are essence, to steal a term from Rolemaster > > (although that system bottles > > > out on the concept completely, as essence and > > channeling have access to > > > identical power levels). D&D wizards get more > > spells === Message Truncated === ____________________________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From peter.brink at brinkdata.se Thu Aug 18 09:07:15 2005 From: peter.brink at brinkdata.se (Peter Brink) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:10 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: Wizardry In-Reply-To: <20050818141038.12703.qmail@web41122.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20050818141038.12703.qmail@web41122.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4304B233.3040404@brinkdata.se> Leon Kirshtein skrev: > I am convinced that the spells should not depend on > magic points, but having the spells cost less on a > special does not really help. I am still looking for > a nice progression system, which would allow a wizard > to learn and cast more spells as time goes on. What I > am using now is a combination of the characters INT, > which also serves to limit the characters access to > spirit magic and sorcery, and decrease chance of > memorizing an additional spell of the same type. > But, these do not prevent a character to memorizing > only the most powerful spells. I am still open to > suggestions on that. Well, one way of thinking is to assume that wizards use the magical energies around them instead of their own, when they cast spells. As they grow more and more proficient they learn to use the energy more efficiently. From this POW a Fireball spell does not really consume more energy than a Gate spell but it takes more skill to be able to manifest such a high level spell, and also to be able to fine tune ones control over the magic energies needed. As long as the wizard is able to control a spell he can make use of the energies around him, if he fails then part of the energies used is taken from his power reservoir. Whenever a wizard tries casts a spell which he has more than 50% chance of failing to cast, he is gambling with his own life force. That alone ought to stop players from trying on too powerful spells. As for limiting access to other types of magic, I would in my game, rule that Spell spirits would refuse to teach "tainted" persons their spells. As for Sorcery, I'd guess that a practical player would realise that the effort needed for learning sorcery would be far more than the potential gains, so I don't see that as a problem. But if you feel a need for it, why not impose a limit on how powerful spells a PC may memorize, based on his skill level in the school. For example you could use Skill/10 as the maximum spell difficulty level the PC may memorize. /Peter Brink From styopa1 at gmail.com Fri Aug 19 07:23:53 2005 From: styopa1 at gmail.com (Steve Lieb) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:10 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] what's wanted? Message-ID: <56e64e7a050819072330f98daf@mail.gmail.com> Hi all, I've got a fairly basic random NPC/monster generator set up in MS excel I'd be happy to share with whomever wants it, my main problem at this point is "feature creep". So far, I have it generating random creature stats and all the basic data (hp, hp per location, etc.). I use reach/speed* as an alternative system to the "classic" RQ strike ranks, so I show those data for weapons/attacks but I'll probably also show the "classic" SR data for general utility...that retrofit isn't implemented yet but it's easy enough. * happy to explain it if someone wishes Features: note: the intent of the sheet is NOT to save characters as data files - it's just generate/print, generate/print very quick for random encounters or adventure population. implemented: output sheet is independent of calculations, so you can randomly generate a character, and then say, manually enter a value for STR and see that immediately reflected in his skill mods, damage bonus, etc. (just don't save it or you'll lose the formula in that cell!) + implemented: a inferior/standard/superior choice so you can generate inferior (young/old/sickly) or superior (heroic, trained, leaders) versions of anything. The actual effect is that it buffs/debuffs each stat by a random 8-23% (i wanted a bell curve, so it's 3d6+5) + implemented: a full-body armor adder, which will add a full suit of whichever armor is desired, along with SIZ-appropriate ENC calculated. (If you want to give them other partial armor, you'll need to just print the character and edit it manually....that would have been WAY too complex!!) - considering: I'm trying to figure out how to do skills. I figure I'd only present the half-dozen or so essential skills for each NPC plus the individualized ones. Basically only jump/dodge/hide/sneak/listen/scan plus the ones that are shown in the RQ3 creatures book or Gloranthan bestiary - i.e. skills with different base skill values. But do I just show the different base skills (simplest, let people just manually add needed skills) or figure out a way to implement a skill-up process that will give them additional skill in these things based on the inferior/standard/superior selector? - considering: how to present locations/hp. I *want* to show it fairly graphically for the 15 or so "body types" possible like the old RQ3 character sheet, with the HP/AP for each location laid out kind of in a 'body' shape. Or do I just make it a lot simpler and have a column of melee/missile loc rolls, hp/ap list for each location? - considering: in conjuction with the skills, I'm toying with adding a Human-Equivalent-Age field. Basically, you'd enter a HEA for each NPC (default entry would be adult in their physical prime, maybe 25-30), and it would use this number to give the character/creature equivalent skills. Ie if you enter 15 for an elf, the elf isn't necessarily 15 but would be given skills appropriate to a mid-age teen human and a slight stat reduction for being juvenile. Enter 70 for a trollkin, and he's obviously not 70 but will have a lot of skills but MAJOR physical stat reduction for decrepitude, and possible INT reduction for senility...not sure this would be worth the effort Opinions? Comments? Suggestions for a feature that people particularly want/need? From phil.hibbs at capgemini.com Fri Aug 19 08:00:35 2005 From: phil.hibbs at capgemini.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:10 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] RE: RQ-Rules Digest, Vol 20, Issue 4 Message-ID: <28FEE77FA0D069428DBB715915864EE60261CF2D@MISSBHXVS02.uki.capgemini.com> >Wow. Sounds a little drastic for me. Yes, I agree, it was just a thought off the top of my head. Perhaps more reasonable would be Spell Level in MP for a special, and 1 MP for a Critical. __________________________________________________ Phil Hibbs | Capgemini | Rotherham Technical Consultant __________________________________________________ This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message. From clive.wickens at btopenworld.com Sun Aug 21 03:50:23 2005 From: clive.wickens at btopenworld.com (Clive Wickens) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:10 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Maintaining sorcery spells and other stories Message-ID: <000801c5a63e$224d1f70$076a8456@sickboy> Dear all, Despite having read Sandy's Sorcery rules a few times I still find myself confused by the notion of 'maintaining' spells, how exactly does this process work, ie: how do you do it and what effect does it have ? On a more generic note, spirit magic spells are generally weaker than divine magic,what would you say is the ratio in terms of power eg how many points of spirit magic would equal one point of divine magic for a similiar effect ? From peter.brink at brinkdata.se Sun Aug 21 03:50:32 2005 From: peter.brink at brinkdata.se (Peter Brink) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:10 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Maintaining sorcery spells and other stories In-Reply-To: <000801c5a63e$224d1f70$076a8456@sickboy> References: <000801c5a63e$224d1f70$076a8456@sickboy> Message-ID: <43085C78.9090700@brinkdata.se> Clive Wickens skrev: > On a more generic note, spirit magic spells are generally > weaker than divine magic,what would you say is the ratio in > terms of power eg how many points of spirit magic would equal > one point of divine magic for a similiar effect ? Each point of divine magic is worth two points of spirit magic or sorcery. /Peter Brink From leonbk at yahoo.com Sun Aug 21 07:09:24 2005 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:10 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Maintaining sorcery spells and other stories In-Reply-To: <43085C78.9090700@brinkdata.se> Message-ID: <20050821140924.19600.qmail@web34308.mail.mud.yahoo.com> --- Peter Brink wrote: > Each point of divine magic is worth two points of > spirit magic or sorcery. I would say it depends on the situation. Divine magic is like a concentrated magic. It is more powerful because it is a burst of energy as opposed to a steady supply that spirit magic afford. Restricting the flow favors Rune spells. If there is a lot magic points available than the 2 for 1 ration is good. However, if there are little if any extrenious magic points available to the party, than a 4 for 1 ratio is more appropriate. Leon __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From talmeta at talmeta.net Sun Aug 21 07:23:58 2005 From: talmeta at talmeta.net (Tal Meta) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:10 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Maintaining sorcery spells and other stories In-Reply-To: <000801c5a63e$224d1f70$076a8456@sickboy> References: <000801c5a63e$224d1f70$076a8456@sickboy> Message-ID: <43088E7E.7020309@talmeta.net> Clive Wickens wrote: > Dear all, > > Despite having read Sandy's Sorcery rules a few times I still find myself confused by the notion of 'maintaining' spells, how exactly does this process work, ie: how do you do it and what effect does it have ? Well, under Sandy's rules, every sorc has a Presence score. In a highly simplified analogy, think of the Presence as a bucket, with a capacity of say, 10 gallons. A sorc can maintain 10 1 gallon spells, or 3 3 gallon spells and a 1 gallon spell, or any combination of spells that equal the number of gallons in the bucket. Replace gallons with MP, and you've got the idea. A 'maintained' spell doesn't have a duration; it goes on and on, so long as there is room for it in the bucket. -- talmeta@talmeta.net - Heretic, Dilettante, & God-Machine AIM - talmeta ICQ - 12594453 Homepage - devils speak of the ways in which she'll manifest -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.10.13/78 - Release Date: 8/19/2005 From peter.brink at brinkdata.se Sun Aug 21 08:07:13 2005 From: peter.brink at brinkdata.se (Peter Brink) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:10 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Maintaining sorcery spells and other stories In-Reply-To: <20050821140924.19600.qmail@web34308.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20050821140924.19600.qmail@web34308.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <430898A1.3080200@brinkdata.se> Leon Kirshtein skrev: > --- Peter Brink wrote: > >>Each point of divine magic is worth two points of >>spirit magic or sorcery. > > > I would say it depends on the situation. Well, yes of course, a given setting might change any default rule. The default rule is that each point of divine magic is worth two points of spirit magic or sorcery. See for example the Absobation spell's description. /Peter Brink From leonbk at yahoo.com Sun Aug 21 08:41:23 2005 From: leonbk at yahoo.com (Leon Kirshtein) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:10 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Maintaining sorcery spells and other stories In-Reply-To: <430898A1.3080200@brinkdata.se> Message-ID: <20050821154123.56760.qmail@web34305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> > >>Each point of divine magic is worth two points of > >>spirit magic or sorcery. > > > > > > I would say it depends on the situation. > > Well, yes of course, a given setting might change > any default rule. The > default rule is that each point of divine magic is > worth two points of > spirit magic or sorcery. See for example the > Absobation spell's description. > > /Peter Brink There are also examples of 4 for 1 trade off. For example Fireblade (4) has similar effect as a Truesword 1 pointer and Diamond Edge, 2 divine spell is essentially a Bladesharp 8. Leon ____________________________________________________ Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From soltakss at yahoo.com Mon Aug 22 01:39:58 2005 From: soltakss at yahoo.com (Simon Phipp) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:10 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Re: what's wanted?, Maintaining sorcery spells and other stories In-Reply-To: <20050821140944.E6DC922273A@boomstick.screwheads.net> Message-ID: <20050822083958.27443.qmail@web51006.mail.yahoo.com> Steve Lieb: > I've got a fairly basic random NPC/monster generator set up in MS > excel I'd be happy to share with whomever wants it, my main problem at > this point is "feature creep". I started to do one in Progress 4GL, but nobody else uses Progress. I'd like to have a look at it. Have you posted it anywhere on the Web? > note: the intent of the sheet is NOT to save characters as data files > - it's just generate/print, generate/print very quick for random > encounters or adventure population. Oh, surely that should be fairly straightforward? > implemented: output sheet is independent of calculations, so you can > randomly generate a character, and then say, manually enter a value > for STR and see that immediately reflected in his skill mods, damage > bonus, etc. (just don't save it or you'll lose the formula in that > cell!) There must be a way around this in Excel. > - considering: how to present locations/hp. I *want* to show it > fairly graphically for the 15 or so "body types" possible like the old > RQ3 character sheet, with the HP/AP for each location laid out kind of > in a 'body' shape. Or do I just make it a lot simpler and have a > column of melee/missile loc rolls, hp/ap list for each location? Better to have locations in columns, it is a lot easier to read than the little picture of a man and can be applied to any body type. It should also be easier to set up in Excel, rather than having to position the cells depending on body type. > - considering: in conjuction with the skills, I'm toying with adding a > Human-Equivalent-Age field. Basically, you'd enter a HEA for each NPC > (default entry would be adult in their physical prime, maybe 25-30), > and it would use this number to give the character/creature equivalent > skills. Ie if you enter 15 for an elf, the elf isn't necessarily 15 > but would be given skills appropriate to a mid-age teen human and a > slight stat reduction for being juvenile. Enter 70 for a trollkin, > and he's obviously not 70 but will have a lot of skills but MAJOR > physical stat reduction for decrepitude, and possible INT reduction > for senility...not sure this would be worth the effort Maybe, but I wouldn't be interested in that particularly. I don't use stat reduction for age and I'm not that interested in generating very old characters. > Opinions? Comments? Suggestions for a feature that people > particularly want/need? If you could send me a copy or let me know where to download it, I'll send you any comments I have on it. Peter Brink: > Clive Wickens skrev: > > > On a more generic note, spirit magic spells are generally > > weaker than divine magic,what would you say is the ratio in > > terms of power eg how many points of spirit magic would equal > > one point of divine magic for a similiar effect ? > > Each point of divine magic is worth two points of spirit magic or sorcery. For the purposes of dispelling spells or seeing how strong the spell is, then yes a 2 for 1 applies. However, for the purposes of spell effects it is usually a 4:1. For instance, Shield provides Protection 2/Countermagic 2. Shield of Darkess provides Darkwall/Protection2, but is a 2 point spell so is 2:1, Crush provides + 10%/+1D4 which is 2-4:1, Spirit Block gives +10 POW, Spirit Shield gives +2, so 5:1. There must be many more examples, but these are the ones I could think of. So, it depends, which is the worst answer that you could have .... See Ya Simon ___________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From phil.hibbs at capgemini.com Mon Aug 22 06:52:42 2005 From: phil.hibbs at capgemini.com (Hibbs, Phil) Date: Sun May 21 09:36:10 2006 Subject: [RQ-Rules] Maintaining sorcery spells and other stories Message-ID: <28FEE77FA0D069428DBB715915864EE60264F0E8@MISSBHXVS02.uki.capgemini.com> Maintaining a spell just happens. A sorceror can maintain a number of points of spell up to his current Presence rating. So if I have a Presence of 20, I can have Damage Boosting 10 and Damage Resistance 10 up and running. If I want to have Spirit Resistance, I have to drop one of the existing spells, I might consider re-casting them at 7, 7 and 6. This is in contrast to RQ3, where the number of spells is not limited, but you have to put points into Duration. The 2:1 Spirit to Divine ratio is a rule of thumb, it is particularly used for dispel and dismiss type effects. Divine magic can be anywhere between 2 and 10 times a powerful point per point, but it's a subjective comparison. __________________________________________________ Phil Hibbs | Capgemini | Rotherham Technical Consultant __________________________________________________ This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message.