[Rq-rules] Question about multicast

[David Smart]

Welcome to the list, Fred!

Fred is one of the players in my non-Gloranthan campaign and has done wonders with his sorcerer. Questions like his have really helped me improve my GMing. When he brought up this question, I suggested it would be a great question for this list.

I also have my own views but would prefer to hear those of the list, if you all wouldn't mind sharing your thoughts.

David

-----Original Message-----
>From: Fred Vogel <darthvogel at hotmail.com>
>Sent: Jan 11, 2006 5:57 PM
>To: rq-rules at crashbox.com
>Subject: [Rq-rules] Question about multicast
>
>Hello All,
>
>I am new to the list but ready to be active.  I am participating in a RQIII 
>campaign that has been going on for 3 years now.  I have experience with 
>several RPGs, but I fell in love with RQ when we started it.  OK...intro 
>over...on to the subject.
>
>I came across a scenario that got me thinking about stuff and I came up with 
>a question in an RQIII sorcery magic context. Without elaborating on the 
>scenario or the reason one would want to do this I would like to concentrate 
>on the game mechanics and modeling philosophy involved in this.  I'm going 
>to multi-spell 5 Sight Projections, each to go to a different destination to 
>act as a sentry.
>
>Normally, I say easy enough if you have the juice and the Free INT to pull 
>it off.  The trick is that this is an active spell.  Can a character 
>accomplish multi-spelling active spells?  Is this multi-spell one thing he 
>is concentrating to keep up allowing him to monitor each simultaneously?  
>Alternately, is he concentrating on keeping the single multicast spell up 
>and able to only monitor one of the active sight projection spells at a 
>time; basically having to strobe through them?  Or is he somehow trying to 
>juggle 5 active spells that he has to make concentration rolls to maintain 
>and use?
>
>I am curious to know what thoughts you guys have concerning this scenario. I 
>have an opinion but don't want to taint any answers so I will withhold it 
>for now.  Also, I am open to answers that suggest that all 3 of my possible 
>outcomes may be off base.
>
>Fred
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>RQ-Rules mailing list
>RQ-Rules at crashbox.com
>http://crashbox.com/mailman/listinfo/rq-rules