Re: Truestone

From: Paolo Guccione (
Date: Tue 28 Jan 1997 - 15:26:32 EET

Robert MacArthur replies to MOB:
================ ===

> MOB mobilises:
> >Once divine spells are cast from the Truestone,it can be 'refilled' with others
> >up to the amount of points it can store. The new spells do not have to be the
> >same as those that were in it before, nor even from the same cult! Thus a 7
> >point stone can be filled with any 7 points of divine magic, and used (and then
> >refilled) by anyone who knows divine magic.
> Hmm, I think I'd prefer that it could be refilled with other spells *from the
> same deity or deities*. Thus a truestone storing sheild 3 (from Orlanth),
> Turn Face to Ice Cream 2 (Eurmal) and True Breast (Uleria) could actually
> store any 3 points of Orlanth magic, any two points of Eurmal magic (though
> Eurmal may well be an exception to every rule!) and any 1 point of Uleria
> magic. It just depends on who cast the spells into it when the truestone
> was set. It also allows for runepoints.

No offense to the above suggestions, but I tend to be thoroughly against
any form of truestones storing other than the _original_ runespells cast
in it (the spells that "set" the truestone), including the suggested "X
points of magic from Y deity". Even the original Runepower writeup from
DC stated that it would not be wise to handle truestone in such a way.
Should we adopt such a solution it would allow PCs who get hold of a
medium-powered Orlanth or "all-deities" truestone specimen to carry
almost any runespell in tremendous stacking by simply paying RLs to cast
it into it (Shield 10 costs 300L this way, and I would add a couple Dark
Walk and a Wind Words if I were you...). And please do not suggest
enforcing limitations like "must be cast by the same person or cannot be
stacked" or "cannot hold subcult magic", I think it is just a bad,
unbalancing idea and it should not be modified this way. Elder Secrets
suggests that Truestone could be used by GMs to give their PCs access to
magic they could not normally have, which I interpretaate as "Truestone
gives them that couple of spells for free, but nothing else".

All this IMO, of course. I do not want to start any more flame wars.

V.S. Greene

> Or does Truestone have to be smaller than a certain mass before
> it has the spell storing quality? Could one find a fifty kilo block of
> Truestone and chip little bits off that would be unset?

Nothing is known about mass limitation in Truestone holding powers. ES
suggests the bigger ones can be more powerful because many people can
touch them at a time, but they can still hold 1-pt magic if they were
set this way. As for chopping it, the knowledge needed to craft
Truestone is lost, so I suspect that you _cannot_ chop it. The small
pieces found around the block were formed when Urox gently smashed the
whole thing on top of the Devil, and I think it was enough to create
some small crack in it. They were eventually buried by the sands of
Prax, and sometimes a piece or two resurfaces. Or at least the SBs say

The Block

Several theories were suggested about whether and why the Block sucks
your Divine Magic away: it was set by contact with the Devil
(chaostone?), by contact with Urox, it is not set, etc..

Nice theories. But I am afraid that none of them is quite correct. The
point is that we do not know the truth about the Block, and the Uroxi
guard it to prevent anybody from discovering more, too. So anything we
can say is doomed to remain an hypothesis forever. Unless of course we
notice that one of the contributors who suggested something about the

Block suddenly stops e-mailing without unsubscribing the Digest...

Paolo Guccione


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 13 Jun 2003 - 16:56:42 EEST