Subject: Re: >Subject: Re: Re: armor values

From: Thom Baguley <t.s.baguley_at_Wv1nO7sw6XQqI2vTue7RLDWRvbmpYzjcvRLdX0_-QJ5n1uPPW_TnWnf5sHRVWJfCOnz>
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 17:11:28 +0100

> From: bryan neff <nagilfar_at_kXyWAPtKugkUsi3W5EJ6rY9j1zjo70cgOtmpoIrw8jpqhiQ3MDkHBw0zntqnVh_x63er-I3l_0bM-kL1.yahoo.invalid>
>
>What about a well made iron greatsword? ^7?

Not mundane, but would presumably be ^8. (5+2 for iron and maybe +1 for well made).

Thom Received on Wed 04 Oct 2000 - 09:12:35 EEST

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Thom Baguley: "Subject: Extended Contest for debate"
Previous message: Alexandre Lanciani: "Demo Report"
In reply to bryan neff: "Re: [hw-rules] >Subject: Re: Re: armor values"
Next in thread: philip.hibbs_at_UtDbGGb2thoRO3PU4odma0-qPPmNKSGW9HQb9C_pOp8WQ7SPc8F_YQGmZEffT2AZIm: "Re: armor values in non-combat"
Reply: philip.hibbs_at_UtDbGGb2thoRO3PU4odma0-qPPmNKSGW9HQb9C_pOp8WQ7SPc8F_YQGmZEffT2AZIm: "Re: armor values in non-combat"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Fri 04 Jan 2008 - 22:52:10 EET