From: paul@phyast.pitt.edu
Date: Thu 10 Jun 1993 - 21:27:50 EEST
In response to Loren: Thanks for the feedback! Individual points:
>PAUL'S SORCERY SYSTEM
Change to PAUL & MIKE'S system (& now incorporating feedback from other
people as well, like Oliver)
[Favorable comments]
Thanks.
>The ordeal portion is missing though.
I'll try to write this up. May vary by culture, I need more info on
what goes on behind closed doors at the Malkioni Rectory! Could base
somewhat on Catholic Ordination... but would have to add strange twists.
(Oh, Malkioni may _call_ the Ordeal "Ordination"!)
Guardian angel is good for Malkioni. Familiar for animal users (it's
'familiar' because it's part of you!). Somehow I see the Dormali sorcerors
who accompany ships using animals like monkeys, cats, etc., perhaps because
on Earth sailors often picked up strange pets in foreign ports. Ship's
cat is an old tradition as well.
Darkness sorcerors (Subere initiates, Arkat Kingtroll) may just use
Shadow. We think that they may even use their _physical_ shadow as
a Vessel.
Oh, Vessel = Object in which Presence is invested. Staff, mandala, familiar,
etc.
[Spooky effects for sorcerors]
I like these very much. But I think that a Malkioni priest-sorceror
may have project an ambiance that his flock sees as ethereal and holy,
and pagans would see as weird, cold, and spooky! Cats and rats run from the
holy man because their essential low and evil nature can't abide his
holy aura - or is it that they're scared of the unnatural smell of magic
around this man? Depnds on your point of view.
>On to the astral plane, it is the plane on which the stars vibrate and
>live. It permeates the world. You didn't think the western wizards
>believed in all that sky captains malarky, did you? The stars are living
>beings in a plane that is contiguous with our own, and their reflections
>are what we see in the sky. That aside, it could easily be called
>phlogiston or ether, or alternate reality which is the culturalist's
>generic word for it.
This is very good, someone will have to tun it byu Greg though. Natural
influences of the stars, like "orlanth's ring" are interpreted by
superstitious pagans as messages from their gods! When the New Star
flared, a great but misguided Natural Magician (Sheng Seleris) learned to
tap its energies for spectacular effects! (Or he was born under it.) When
the star failed, Sheng was left powerless and easily captured by his enemies!
Now the question is, was that nova cyclic or not?
Spirit Magic
>Note that the RQ3 rule change, to cast chance=POWx5, was one of the
>rules that changed POW into the most important characteristic.
I don't mind POW being most important if it should be in the context of the
world. If I was running an Iroquois campaign, _orenda_ would be the basic
stat! But if POW is the basic currency of Gloranthan power, it should
be less fluky in how it grows. (Unless there is no overall scheme to things
and Luck is actually the Ruling Rune)
>RQ4 SORCERY DRAFT
Loren thinks they've overcorrected. I think so too but much less strongly.
I think the idea of quick casting for short duration vs. ritual casting for
long duration is OK, just needs tweaking. (Of course I like our system
better, like your own vs. neighbor's children)
>THE CASE FOR CHARISMA
I agree with Loren that Charisma is a good stat. I liked Charisma.
Saying it should be a function
of player decisions combined with skills doesn't quite make it for me. We
all know examples of someone with inexplicable charisma, perceptible but
not easily broken down into (Orate 65/5 + App 8 + Smile 75/5)/3 = CHA 12
or some such. Ugly and inarticulate people can be Charismatic and smooth
talking good-looking people can be repulsive. I think Charisma is
more basic than Appearance in many ways. I also like stats that are
close to what you want to use in a game. For example, I want to be able
to run a freckled, jug-eared Trickster with an idiotic grin who is
nevertheless so likable that people keep him around in spite of his
practical jokes. How do we represent this character with APP and Skills?
It seems fine to me to say, "His Charisma comes from his appearance. Hers
is because she's always so nice. That beautiful woman is considered a
bitch." What we want in all these cases is to extract the basic reaction
modifier and relegate its source to the realm of unquantified description,
like hair color or finger length.
On the other hand, skill proliferation never bothered me much. I think
there should be some blank spaces where you can put in what skills are
important to you (like GURPS). Merchants, even ugly crass merchants,
live by Bargaining and a merchant character should quantify this. On the
other hand the merchant may not want to bother with separate skills like
Attack, Parry, Fast-draw as she tries to avoid this sort of thing altogether.
>Make all the communication skills (except
>languages, which will split into their own group anyway) special
>instances of CHA rolls.
Uhh... great for a fighter but how about a diplomat? What you want
represented in detail depends on the type of campaign you want to run.
I could see a Traders game where weapons skills are just DEX x 5% for
guards and DEXx3 for Merchants, and Bargain, Evaluate, Fast-Talk,
Bribe, etc. are the real basis for the game.
[ I actually like the way VAMPIRE: the Masquerade does skills, but that's
too big a jump from the base system. Besides, while their basic idea is
good they have a lot of bugs in their system, more than RQ.]
> APP is a useless and sexist stat.
Appalling but true.
>When my players meet a female character, they ask how good looking
>she is because they know there's an APP stat. Do they ask the same about
>male characters?
True in my experience also - with some exceptions. Magicians and fighters
get rated on prowess regardless of sex. My PCs first reaction has grown
to be threat assessment.
Also, in our expedition to Esrolia, male APP suddenly took on real
meaning. I modelled male Esrolian behavior on birds who try to display
themselves to best advantage. This hinged on money for clothing as well
as Appearance - the women (who controlled the real property) wanted to
be able to see how much dowry a prospective mate would bring by looking
at him.
>2. Useless? There are no official uses for APP in the rules. The only
I think this is true. I bet that there would be for Charisma.
>The point system even counts APP at half value and ... players are reluctant
True in most cases - but sometimes a player has a strong character
concept that overcomes this reluctance. We had a campaign where each
player got to pick an "18" for one stat and roll the rest on 3d6 (or 2d6+6).
One of the male players picked APP for a male character, the handsome
Sir Michael of Ashford. The handsomeness fitted in with his idea of a
well-bred Malkioni Knight.
But that's very much the exception. Designed characters will stint
on APP, because it isn't used.
I think that mental skills should be at least split into Intellectual and
Social, and that Charisma can serve as Social Intelligence (including any
modifiers for physical appearance, etc.) This gives you the derived stat
you want, Reaction Modifier.
0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:27:39 EEST