From: Colin Watson (watson@computing-science.aberdeen.ac.uk)
Date: Mon 11 Oct 1993 - 12:49:15 EET
Steven E Barnes said:
>>[BTW I think bunny spirits would be as non-aggressive as corporeal bunnies:-)]
>
>Unless you are a grass spirit...
This made me wonder: do animal spirits (fixed INT creatures) have instincts about how to deal with the spirit plane? Mundane bunnies instinctively eat grass; mundane foxes instinctively eat bunnies etc. But would their spirits know how to deal with the process of survival on the spirit plane? Obviously the mechanics of hunting/foraging are very different on the SP (although we're not quite sure how they work yet:). Do you think animals would have appropriate instincts for indulging in spirit combat?
For that matter, do Gloranthan animals *have* instincts? Or are they just divinely inspired to do their thang by the appropriate deity?
Joerg Baumgartner:
>CW>I'm not sure of the mechanics
>CW>for multiple spirit combats. Anyone got any ideas?
>
>Spirit combat as it is now (in RQ3) consists of two opponents casting
>automatic MP-Disruptions at each other for no MP-cost. A bit dull, but
>there are people who don't think that skill is involved in anything
>magical. If you take this example, there are several people in each
>party casting disruptions at members of the opponent's party. Resolve
>the spirit combat like you would this magical conflict.
Yeah, I thought about massed spirit combat some more. I see three main
ways it could work:
(This is basically how you describe it above, simulating spell combat.
It's certainly the obvious way of resolving multiple spirits combats).
Using this method a big spirit is *always* going to win against an army
1) You can attack one opponent but defend against many (all).
2) You can attack one opponent and only defend against one.
Extra opponents get free attacks. (More like physical combat). This gives multiple attackers a huge advantage. 3) You can somehow split your defence (and possibly your attack) between
several opponents. (Like highly skilled physical combat).
Multiple attackers have an advantage, but a powerful entity can stand alone
against several less powerful entities. I think I like this best.
Using the current (boring) spirit combat rules I would simulate this
by saying a person can split their POW in defence (and in attack, why not?)
between several opponents.
eg.
Shaman (POW 19) and Assistant (POW 14) tag-team against a big ghost (POW 35).
The ghost must decide how to split its POW between opponents. Say it decides
to defend with 20 vs the shaman, and 15 vs the assistant and elects to go
all-out in attack (30) vs the puny assistant in the hope of taking him out
quickly.
Obviously this makes the number of creatures more significant than the
power of individuals. Unfortunately it means that multiple ghosts would
tend to massacre most PC parties (assuming they gang up on one target).
But I think it would make the political structure of the SP more interesting
because there would be great motivation for banding together. Maybe
that's not a good enough reason...
(I suppose you could make an arbitrary rule which states that combat
between corporeal creatures and disembodied spirits must be one-on-one.
I'm sure it wouldn't be difficult to come up with a spiritualogical excuse
for this, and it would be fairer on the PCs:-).
4) (For the sake of completeness).
You can attack all opponents and defend against all opponents.
This would mean gross spirits reign supreme.
___
CW.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 10 Oct 2003 - 01:31:52 EEST