From: David Dunham (ddunham@radiomail.net)
Date: Fri 21 Jan 1994 - 09:10:46 EET
> Do you have any other sheets worked up yet for RQ:Glorantha?
>Is this a two-sided sheet or one-sided? Is it generalized or does it
>have a bias towards one style of magic (a problem I've faced with my
>own sheets)?
My character sheet is biased towards being easy to use. Therefore, it's one
page, and has skills in alphabetic order. I chose not to leave space for
subskills (but there's plenty of room at the end). Also, it has the human
hit locations preprinted (making it hard to use for, say, windchildren).
We don't have any sorcerers in my playtest group, so I can't say if it's
biased towards one style of magic (I do have checkboxes for everything in
the magic system, so you could argue that it's biased towards sorcery :-).
I had sheets for earlier drafts of RQ4.
My biggest decision now is whether to rearrange things slightly and put
stats for a mount. I'd lose some skill space.
> I'd love to see your sheet. Is it by any chance based on the
>linear tracking sheet (the Mk. 4, I believe?).
I have no idea what you're talking about, so probably not.
> One thing that I still would like to know is whether or not
>reality testing is a basis for RQ. Of course there's no need to go to
>extremes, but it would be helpful to know if I should judge the hit
>location table (for example) based on how often I get hit in the arms
>or legs in LARP combat.
Only if you use real weapons that can penetrate your real armor. Otherwise
it's not a reality test.
If we were realistic, the hit location table would be different depending
on the target's style of fighting (e.g. fencing vs sword & shield) and
whether or not the target is left handed.
> About optional rules: I always liked the way that the optional
>rules were given in the back of RQ2. When such rules are scattered
>through the text the purpose of making them optional -- i.e. streamlining
>the main body of rules -- is defeated.
I've been trying to think of ways to present them. Boxed? Shaded? In
microscopic type? I think they have to be clearly presented as being
optional things you can add, rather than have any chance of confusing
people into thinking they're part of the mainstream rules (I can bore you
again with my stepdaughter trying to learn Elfquest if you don't agree :-)
. I like the way Elric separates the spot rules for combat.
David Dunham * Software Designer * Pensee Corporation
Voice/Fax: 206 783 7404 * AppleLink: DDUNHAM * Internet: ddunham@radiomail.net
"I say we should listen to the customers and give them what they want."
"What they want is better products for free." --Scott Adams
0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:31:30 EEST