From: David Cake (davidc@cs.uwa.edu.au)
Date: Thu 02 Sep 1993 - 09:51:00 EEST
I have a few questions about RQ4 magic to get people talking about
RQ4 again.
The first is about shamanic fetches. The RQ4d2 rules say that a
shamans fetch gets two separate actions, presumably most of the time a
cast spell action or two. Does anyone besides me think that this could have
a really big effect on game balance, partly because all shamans effectively
have an allied spirit, andpartly because there is no species max on fetch POW,
and while PC shamans are unlikely to have fetchs as gross as some NPCs (like
in Dorastor - Mistress Last and Babool both clock in at around 280, from memory)
. Does anyone have a big problem with this - it seemed like it was put in
almost as an afterthought, and it is a big change, making shamans way more
combat deadly.
The second is a speculative one about sorcery. With reference to
Burton Cholinskis Sorcery with studies system, does anybody have objections to
this in principle? There are some problems with it from a practical point of
view (its very incompatible with existing sorcery), but I want to know what
people think about the basic idea. The basicgame effects are
to complicate sorcery for most users, but give practitioners grater flexibilty
and many new abilities (some of them rather curious and many not very useful). I liked the basic idea a lot but hadproblems with the implementation, as I
thought that Burtons striving for purity of implementation made it very
incompatible, and was inappropriate in other parts. I also thought that it
could benefit from being combined with the Paul Reilly Presence system.
So I have given some thought to writing my own version with the
emphasis on compatibility with existing rules and the draft version. Will
I get shouted down for overcomplication? or does the idea meet with guarded
approval? I like the idea, because it seems to me that it has the capability to
bring a very Ars Magica like feel (or manipulating complex laws, and with the
possibilty of on the spot creation of complex spells) to advanced practitioners
of sorcery. SHould I present my version?
Cheers
Dave Cake
0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:29:34 EEST