From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Sat Dec 5 19:03:56 1998 Received: (from bin@localhost) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id TAA09792; Sat, 5 Dec 1998 19:03:56 +1300 Received: from smtp2.ihug.co.nz (tk2.ihug.co.nz [203.29.160.14]) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) with ESMTP id TAA09783 ; Sat, 5 Dec 1998 19:03:54 +1300 Received: from [209.79.137.130] (p2-max41.akl.ihug.co.nz [209.79.137.130]) by smtp2.ihug.co.nz (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id TAA06083 ; Sat, 5 Dec 1998 19:00:42 +1300 Message-Id: <199812050600.TAA06083@smtp2.ihug.co.nz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 5 Dec 1998 19:02:19 +1300 Subject: Re: Cold Iron proposal From: flamis@pop.ihug.co.nz (Jacqui Smith) To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Reply-To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz X-Loop: dq@dq.sf.org.nz X-Requests: To unsubscribe from this list, or change your subscription address, send a message to dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz. >> I think 1.5 x Prot (with an optional max. 15) is probably about right. So >>Mail is what 6? so +9 MR, Improved plate @ 8 = +12, Heavy Plate @ 10 = 15. >>15-odd could be put on as a cap, but personally I don't see many people >>choosing to go into battle in Hv. Jousting Plate anyway, so it may not be a >>problem. >> >> So, this is simple, static, and can be calculated beforehand. Doesn't >>"double-dip" and gives about the right range. >> Opinions? I'd prefer an integral multiplier. Preferably equal to one. It's just that much simpler. So I concur with Mike. Consider Tyson the Tank fighter... Say 15 WP, +20 for being a non-mage, +15 for quality cold iron plate. That's 50% chance that spells bounce even without a Greater. >I see no reason for a multiplier. The Armour Protection is fine. I also have >no problem with the Armourer skill increasing Magic Resistance along with the >Armour Protection (AP). Agreed. > Having said that I think we should drop the level of the Guild Armourer >down to Ranks 5-7 so that 8+ is only given out by GM's. I fail to see any real >reason for Martin's concern with double dipping here. High quality, expensive >armour should generally be a bonus not just pretty and after all we are >talking about 1 or maybe 2 points except in rare cicumstances (eg Demons). It >also removes the need for the Guild Armourer to be administered by a GM >(Currently Greg Gradon). Very sensible. After all, the Guild Armourer seems to be spending most of his time churning out 5-point leather for all those mages and fighter mages. >Bye the bye as GM's we should restrict the access of mages to high levels of >AP, but if they are prepared to use silvered armour at -10% to Cast Chances or >wear cold iron and not cast then thats fine. So items such as porcelain plate >(far to common in my veiw) end up in the hands of fighters rather than mages >where they belong. Fighter-Mages are already very tough, so limiting their AP >gives the rest of the world a chance. Unfortunately, you'll find that non-metallic armour for fighter-mages is a very popular item, and hence high on the sought-after treasure list. The usual tactic is to kill the monster and tan its hide... Jacqui -- See message headers to unsubscribe from --