The current draft, yet again.

From: Carl Fink (carlf@panix.com)
Date: Fri 21 Jan 1994 - 06:39:34 EET


rune@trystero.com (Peter Maranczi) writes:

R> 1) Does anyone have Oliver's email address? His old one doesn't
>work, and I have a bunch of specific comments to send to him. Kinda silly
>to be a playester when I can't give feedback! 8^>}

  He's now jovanovic@columbia.edu.

R> 3) Am I the only one whose copy of RQ:AiG lacks the appendices?
>I was interested in seeing the character sheet, conversion rules, and
>index.

  They don't exist yet. Give us a couple of weeks. There won't be an
index until the whole manuscript exists.

R> 5) The unified hit table is fine with me, but everyone else I
>know hates it.

  We'd like to hear more opinions on this, but basically it was a way to
speed up combat. People who played RQ2 learned the hit table and never
had to look at it again -- this didn't happen as much in RQ3 because there
were two tables.

R> 6) Why do Sorcerers gain the Law Rune as they progress, as
>opposed to Priests and Shaman?

  Because sorcery is manipulating the Natural Law.

R> 7) Is the plural of shaman 'shaman'? 8^>}

  No. Tell Oliver that. I've been trying to convince him to use
"shamans" for months now, but he won't listen to me. :-)

David Dunham writes:

>I came in late, but I saw the email address for the list written on a big
>piece of paper at the RQ4 seminar.

 You can read my writing! David, you're one of a select group. (It was
also in the convention booklet.)

============================================================================
 Belief in the precognitive powers of an Asian pastry is really no wackier
 than belief in ESP, subluxation, or astrology, but you just don't hear
 anyone preaching Scientific Cookie-ism. --Penn and Teller
   Carl Fink carlf@panix.com CARL.FINK (GEnie)
                      

0,,


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:31:29 EEST