From: Burton Choinski (burt@ptltd.com)
Date: Mon 19 Jul 1993 - 23:47:55 EEST
Lots of stuff to reply to...
===============================================================================
Wayne Shaw notes...
%% curtiss@netcom.netcom.com (Curtis Shenton) writes:
%% > Um, which current version are you talking about? I agree that RQIII was
%% > far to over powered. But I think any sort of system that allows for long
%% > term enchantments without spending POW is going to lead to the problem
%% I'm not sure I agree that non-POW expending long-term enchantments are
%% automatically overpowered. The question is, how much time is being tied
%% up compared to how much yield, and how much time does the sorcerer have
%% to fool around with this all the time? A one per one time to duration
%% seems ridiculous; nobody's going to bother with that. On the other hand
%% the old system where the skill was all that limited duration was out of
%% hand too.
The way we have done duration and range is using a squared table rather than
a doubling one. The break point for this is about Range 4 or Duration 4.
In the doubling table, a duration 10 lasts for 10x(2^10) or ~10,000 minutes.
In a squared one it lasts for 10x(10^2) or ~1,000 minutes.
I have been mulling over how a ritual would affect this. The way I see it,
the dice you roll for the Ceremony add to the duration or range value before
calculation.
As an example, Joe mage decides to put a curse on some merchant who gyped him.
He managed to get a snatch of hair of the little weasel, so he does not have
to have LOS. He spends 89 rounds checking, doublechecking, consulting books,
triple checking, etc (whatever a Socerer does for a Ceremony :) for each of
range and duration, and adds 9 points of duration, 0 points of range (but the
range skill is still needed since he wishes to improve it) and enough power
in his "Drain APP" spell to chop the turkey down about 4 points.
His Duration roll of 10d6 is 30, his range roll is 24.
The range base is 1 (the basic range) plus the 24 he rolled. So the actual
range is 25^2 (625) x10m, or 6.25km. Hopefully this is enough range to tag
the bugger. The base duration of this spell is 30+10 (40), which translates
to 1600 x10 minutes, or 16,000 minutes. This is just a tad over 11 days.
He needed to spend 89+89+2 melee rounds (180) @10 secs (total 1800 seconds)
to prep and cast this sucker, about half an hour's work. In any case, success
or failure, I would deem the targeting material to be spent and useless.
I would also deem the points actually invested in the spell are tied up,
for simple play-balace.
This use of ceremony seems to work okay...I have not tried to use it in play
yet. Granted, the square table means no decade long curses (you want somthing
that long, use Enchant with POW :), but if you can substitute time for
capability, that means that Sorcerers won't have to bleed off so much magic to
do everything and end up being ghost-bait or something. If a sorcerer is
willing to spend an extra 2 melee rounds in addition to the casting time, he
could concieveably get up to 6 "free" range or duration if he makes both
ceremony rolls (basically, each round of his is a ceremony roll, the last round
the roll to cast).
Comments on this?
%% > I plan to use a +2 = 1d3 conversion. Thus, a creature with a +10 bonus
%% > rolls 5d3. Easy to remember, and it keeps some randomeness.
%%
%% Personally, I think I'd just go +1, +1D3, +1D6, +1D6+1, +1D6+1D3, +2D6
%% and so on, myself.
Whatever is simpler for the group I guess. Might be moot if damage changes
(later on).
%% > Crit Slashed GS = max(2d6) +2d6 = 12+2d6, or about 19 hits...
%%
%% But the current rules don't agree with you. To kill an average human
%% (SIZ 13, CON 11) under the current rules, requires at least 24 points of
%% damage to do it outright no matter WHERE you do it.
I think it is a logical extension to the maim/sever rules that triple damage to
the head is fatal, if said amount of damage lops a limb ("heads and
shoulders, over the boulders" :). A pick in the brain (impale) or crushed
skull (blunt weapons) is just as bad.
%% > Not lazy, we just hated the "limb-fest" the melee table has. We just
%% > use the missle table for both.
%%
%% <Shrug>. At least for swinging weapons, I never felt the idea that an
%% awful lot of hits would go into the limbs was a flaw.
There were just too many leg hits, and to little chest exposed. In just
about every hack 'n slash film I saw, the victims go down with wounds to
the chest/abdomen more often then we see limbs cleaved. Personal Preferance
I guess.
===============================================================================
Graeme A Lindsell:
%% > I'll second this. I like realism in my games. It makes the fantasy
%% > elements seem so much more, well fantastic. I'm all for burning the
%% > heretics. :)
%%
%% Careful now: three people agree with him. Remember
%%
%% One's an Unbeliever
%% Two are Schismatics
%% Three are Heretics
%% Four makes a New Religion
Looks like we got a new Spirit Cult. Here's my 1 POW. :)
===============================================================================
Joerg Baumgartner:
%% > And the ability to control the
%% > motion of the fight is no more interrelated than is, say, your attack and
%% > your parry.
%%
%% Good point there: From what little experience I had with stick fighting one
%% evolves a skill of stick-handling, not of hitting or intercepting hits
%% separately. Mind: I like the possibility for slightly differing values in
%% attack and parry skills for melee weapons, but I find it hard to imagine a
%% master gladius attacker (90%+) with a parry skill of 30%, even if he uses a
%% hoplite shield all of the time.
The same reason I have rolled punch, kick and headbutt into "Brawling"
(including fist parry). It made little sense to have it seperate.
===============================================================================
Paul R.
%% If you are going to make a table that gives variable damage for the
%% weapon appropriate for a given size and strength, and another table that
%% give damage bonus based on size and strength, why not just fold both
%% tables into one and give damage based on the person a la PENDRAGON? (Or
%% Gurps.) The weapon is basically a tool to store kinetic energy and apply
%% it in a small area, but the energy is supplied in the first place by the
%% wielder.
Sounds reasonable to me. It's gonna be hell updating all the past products
to get stuff in line, but I like that way better anyways.
Hey Oliver, about how much chance does this concept have of replacing the
current way? Slim? None? Some?
-- Burton
P.S.
Any update on when the Sorcery Draft or 3.0 draft will be out?
0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:28:31 EEST