From: JOVANOVIC@CUCCFA.CCC.COLUMBIA.EDU
Date: Wed 26 Jan 1994 - 13:04:31 EET
A few comments on recent comments <g>.
As a general comment, thanks for the comments and
constructive criticism. There's been a lot of helpful
feedback.
Loren's comment on the introduction (having a simpler
>From the comments on hit location tables, it sounds like a
initial introduction) sounds like a good idea, as does
splitting magic items and enchantments out of basic magic.
good idea might be to add an appendix of alternative rules.
This would primarily consist of optional rules that enhance
the realism of the game, but add to the complexity and time
it takes to resolve situations. Seperate melee and spear/
missile/spell hit location tables would be a good example of
what could go into this appendix, more detailed skill resolution
results (the Botch), etc. How would that sound to people?
I though it might be helpful to make some clarifications on a few
With respect to sorcery duration, the basic problem is that
Divine Extension can extend spells for great durations, but it requires
of the points being discussed. With respect to the terminology,
"battle magic" was the old Gloranthan term that encompassed the
low level magic taught by both shaman and the cults. Another general
term used by Greg Stafford is "personal magic". Gloranthan priests
(divine magicians) do not call this spirit magic - that
term specifically applies to what shaman teach, thus the
distinction between spirit and cult magic. A good general
term would be useful, and we'll gladly take suggestions
for something better than "battle magic".
in Glorantha (at least according to Greg Stafford) sorcerers,
even Brithini, at skill levels well above 100%, simply do not
walk around with dozens of long duration spells on them. Rather,
a typical sorcerer may keep up one or two spells, which
he may shift around (say from blessing the castle forge to
shielding his lord when a seige occurs). A village's wizard
keeps the village plow blessed. He does not enhance the
strength, etc. of each villager as well. The RQIII duration
table simply don't work for Glorantha. Even using the RQIII tables
with skill limits unfortunately doesn't solve the problem, because
as soon as a sorcerer reaches a high level of skill, he begins to
churn out dozens of spells again. The Maintain manipulation
is specifically meant to be used to maintain long duration spells,
but in a way that brings sorcerers more in line with how
sorcery works in Glorantha.
an immense initial investment of POW (10 POW of Extension only gets you
10 days duration), and neither the Extension spell nor the extended
divine spell can be recovered until the spells expire. Although this
is impressive, the immense initial investment limits the effectiveness
of this approach. I suspect most players can come up with a better use
for 30 points of POW than keeping up a Shield 10 at all times. Though
I've seen numerous RQ sorcerers wandering about with dozens of spells up,
I've never seen a player in a game wandering around with extended divine
magic. Out of curiosity, have any of you actually had a problem with
greatly extended divine magic in a game?
With respect to the nomenclature of sorcery, for the Dragon Pass region,
With respect to character generation, we had a number of complaints
The way we currently have it set up costs you a background choice
sorcery is the common term. If we were doing a Western supplement,
Wizardry would be more appropriate, but we really aren't focusing on
Western wizards. The Lunars, for example, do call it sorcery, and are
among the most common users in region the book focuses on. Also, the
West isn't the only tradition - the Kralori call it sorcery, for
example, and it is nearly as common there as in the West.
that the last set of character generation rules was overly complex and
that character generation took too long. These comments far outweighed
those from people saying that they liked the system just the way it was.
The system currently presented is meant to allow you to generate
characters very quickly, particularly if they belong to a single
profession. However, if you want to generate characters that belong
to more than one profession, it is quite possible. If you read
the descriptions on purchasing skills, I think you'll see
that it really isn't any less flexible than the previous
system, though it is presented differently. A key point of
the system is that you can purchase skills at lower levels
for lower costs, which allows you to fill out a character
fairly well. It sounds like we may have to rewrite this
section to make this even clearer.
to enter another profession, but you can purchase any skills you
want from that profession. Another approach we considered was to
make only a few skills 'special' to a profession, and have
those skills (only) cost double when purchased by someone outside
the profession (eliminating the one background choice cost to enter
the profession). Would people prefer the second approach?
The Hrestoli wizard knight example is actually not that bad.
With respect to trained characters starting as initiates, we
With respect to the use of the term "adventurer" - the term was used
To even begin to study as a Hrestoli wizard requires that you
have Plant Lore and a Craft at 60%, two weapon skills at 90%,
and one other military skill at 90%. This is obviously a Master
level character. We do not present a specific template for
Hrestoli because we focus character generation on Dragon Pass,
but we provide enough information that a GM should be able to
come up with a Hrestoli template fairly quickly. Even if you
do not do so, you can purchase such a character easily with
the generic templates provided. You would not purchase such a
character as a Sorcerer (one trained in magic from the start),
rather as a Warrior with a few Farmer skills (or as a Farmer
with a few Warrior skills). Even if you charge the Warrior a
background choice for purchasing Farmer skills (which I would not
do for a Hrestoli), after purchasing Plant Lore and a Craft at 60%,
this would leave you with 6 choices to spend (not 2.5 choices),
plenty to differentiate characters. If you actually used a
Hrestoli template, you would end up with 7 choices to spend.
You could make him a skilled wizard, or focus skills elsewhere.
purposefully wanted to make trained characters go to extra
effort if they wanted to start as an initiate (Orlanthi
nonwithstanding). What about the simple solution of making
the starting age for trained PCs 14-19 (13+1D6) and the starting
age for skilled PCs 16-24 (14+2D6)? The other approach would be
to make all characters start as initiates, but I think that makes
less sense in non-Orlanthi societies.
because a number of playtesters commented that they preferred using
the term to "character". I'd be very happy to hear from people as to
their preference. I suspect that both terms have their fans and
detractors.
Thanks again for all the comments to date,
Oliver
0,,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:32:12 EEST