From: Sandy Petersen (sandyp@idcube.idsoftware.com)
Date: Tue 12 Jul 1994 - 08:56:27 EEST
Mark Foster wonders:
>Do female Grey Sages have to wear the beard all the time?
I play that it's only Required during ceremonies and when presiding in official tasks, but it's considered devout to wear it more often, especially when in the library.
Alex wonders re: my Dayzatar cult
>> Folk who die in the worship of Dayzatar go to dwell forever in
>> heaven.
>Who ever said it was a sure thing, eh, Sandy?
Well, the Dayzatar monks SAY that if they keep their doctrines it's sure.
>> Some monasteries are complete little communities and support
>>themselves.
>How, exactly? It's not likely Monks do physical labor
Though I did not point this out in the text, I assumed in the writing that initiates & acolytes from other cults are oft assigned to the Dayzatar community. Also, nothing keeps the monks from gardening, etc. Remember that their needs aren't too great -- they're probably mostly vegetarian valetudinarians, so just sitting around until they wither away is probably considered quite The Thing.
>> I should think a line of flying Shades would be an excellent
>>technique to break up a cavalry charge, seeing as 98% of the horses
>>charging you get Demoralized as they come, and 10% either drop dead
>>or collapse in their tracks.
>Now work out how many close-order infantry could could have nobbled
>for the same cubic metrage of Shade.
10% drop dead or collapse, 40% are demoralized, assuming they have only average POW, and no defensive magic up. Of course, we're assuming the same thing for the horses, too. My understanding is that a breakup of a cavalry charge is utterly disastrous, whereas a slight breakup of a disciplined close-order infantry unit is merely a serious setback. Breaking up the shield wall is not a Good Thing, but it doesn't keep you from pushing through an assault. Still, shades are clearly a tremendous weapon on the battlefield, though relatively puny, compared to other elementals, in small adventurer-style melees.
Kevin Rose:
> Familiars are a crutch. I have never had a PC want to create a
>familiar
You must interpret sorcery very differently from my campaigns. Every single sorcerer PC in my campaigns has created a familiar.
Back to Alex:
>I'm not sure CoP _does_ imply any particular reliability to
>religions: it says what the particular cult believes, and would like
>for its initiates to be like, not necessarily exactly how things
>must be, precisely.
I have always assumed that the descriptions of the initiates are no more than goals. If all Storm Bulls were sternly brave in the face of chaos, then the cult probably wouldn't even bother to praise such bravery (nor would it have the irksome Face Chaos spell). While a typical Storm Bull, by both personality and training, is no doubt more courageous in the face of Chaos than an ordinary slob, I suspect for most it's a relative thing, not an absolute. Though the cult would like to project an image of being unflinchingly tough.
> In general, "artillery", or magic which affects a large area per
>go, or is nasty, but inaccurate, will be proportionately more
>effective against close-order infantry than cavalry.
Hmm. Real solid-shot artillery was, in fact, HIGHLY effective against cavalry. The addition of explosive shells and canister basically destroyed the cavalry charge as an assault technique and relegated it to scouting and small-scale actions. But infantry was still expected to make assaults against canister.
Take my close-order infantry vs. shades example -- when the shades hit the troops, they impose fearshock on half of 'em, but are almost instantly killed, as the bunched-up troops slam into the shades with their axes/spears/what have you (shades are weak in the ol' HP dept.) The soldiers who collapse on the ground or are killed are immediately replaced by the guy behind them in line. The soldiers who are demoralized either stand in place and are crappy fighters for the next few minutes, or get Dispel Magic cast on them.
When a shade hits a horse and rider, the horse is KOed 10% of the time, Since the loss of either destroys the unit, 19% of the cavalry hit are eliminated by the fearshock. After that, basically all the remaining horses are demoralized and presumably more difficult to control. This is going to make any sort of charge or countercharge nigh unto impossible. You can't "replace" the guy in front of you in a cavalry charge, as can infantry.
>If elementals are the mass-combat wonder-weapon Sandy suggests, any
>cavalry in possession of a clue will train against them
You bet. I imagine the standard techniques include one or more of the following: Not Charging vs. elementals, sending out a wave of one's own elementals ahead of you to cancel them out, or loosing missiles into the elementals as they approach to try to knock them out. I'm sure Gloranthans can deal with elementals. For that matter, cavalry have one highly useful technique they can use on elementals, not open to infantry -- Run Away. A mounted man can outrun any elemental but a sylph (and the sylph probably lacks the strength to pick up a horse). I wager that Gloranthan horsemen who think they'll be facing sylphs tie themselves to their horses, so they won't be lifted off.
Note that the Impala Rider technique of running away at top speed while firing arrows is the Tactic Of Choice in fighting elementals.
>>The boar's tusks simply do not grow right, but instead grow back
>>along the jaw, through the jowls
>Would this make it impossible for him to open his jaw, as it'd
>effective bolt the lower mandible onto the skull?
Not if it was one of the upper tusks. Remember that boars have 2 sets of tusks, one pair in the upper jaw, one in the lower. How else could they can gnash them together?
Devin
>the wording in RQ3 needs to be changed to state that many diseases
>use Con rolls less than x5%
I quote: "This recovery die roll is typically CONx5, but may be CONx4, CONx3, CONx2, or even CONx1, if the gamemaster judges that the disease is particularly tenacious." The rules clearly infer that only the "Conx1" roll is considered "tenacious." Probably the rules example should have boasted a disease with a CONx3 roll or something.
I view RuneQuest disease as a terror comparable to the dread that D&D Undead used to inspire in us -- remember your D&D days (if you had any). Undead were the worst monster, because they destroyed the whole point of your character -- experience points. In RuneQuest, undead are not the same type of beastie, though fearsome enough. The Ultimate Horrors are, rather, disease and Tap spells.
Paul, with interesting facts about medieval fighting women.
Hmm. fascinating. I wonder how many of these cases of fighting women were unknown to the crusaders themselves. We all know of women disguising themselves as men and fighting in wars. There's lots of such cases in the Civil War (some of 'em were prostitutes using this as a technique to get at the men, but by no means all), which is the war I've read most on. But society at large and the army was completely unaware of their unauthorized participation. I wonder if the same was true for many of these crusader women.
I wonder if the fact that it was a religious war incited more women to participate than in a normal war. Probably not. I know that during the 30-years war the hordes of female camp followers occasionally took up arms and fought. Not often, though.
Note that I never claimed women can't be war leaders, excellent generals, etc. only that they are rare on the fighting line. The "wealthy noblewoman from page 206" sounds like it's possible she was a Joan of Arc type i.e., not actually fighting, but wearing armor and going out near the battle front to inspire her men. As near as I can make out, Joan never struck a blow in anger, and this may have been the case for the wealthy noblewoman, either. Still, she's clearly in the battle and is personally at risk.
>Sandy, sorry about my wounding comment. I am oversensitive ...
Apology accepted.
> I am sure you're not one of those people, but I have run into them
>in the SCA often enough that I expect to find them ... everywhere.
Say no more. If you've been trained in the arduous school of SCA debate, you've led a hard life indeed. Nothing's worse than a band of Experts Whose Word Cannot Be Contested. *sigh*
Mr. S. W. Jones:
>How are the armies of the Lunar Empire organized?
The organizations differs regionally, but in general my belief is that 'tis as follows:
The basic unit of the Lunar Army is the Regiment, and in general a regiment acts as a unit, though it can be split into troops to occupy several different cities or to patrol a large region. Each regiment has two captains, who are generally Rune Lords or the equivalent. One of the captains is responsible for training, morale, and supply, while the other is the "real" commander in battle. The local governor-general is in charge of all the troops there, and if forced to go to battle, delegates authority over the various wings of the army to his staff.
All governors answer to the Lunar Emperor, who is the ultimate commander of the army. In addition, each branch of the army has its own staff who is responsible for bureaucratic matters concerning it. For instance, the Imperial Bodyguard, Cavalry Corps, and Heartland Corps each have their own commanding staff who approve promotions, send replacements, provide supply in peacetime, etc. The Provincial Armies also each have their own commanding staff.
>So what I'd like to know is just general dispositions of the Lunar
> Occupational forces in both Prax and Sartar
Hmm. This is a very different question than the foregoing. I always play that the Lunar Occupying Army of Prax is based entirely in and around Pavis, with a troop or two stationed permanently in Corflu. Troops from Pavis also are used to escort troops to and from Sartar along the King's Road.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 10 Oct 2003 - 01:35:51 EEST