From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz  Mon Oct 11 01:41:02 1999
Received: (from bin@localhost)
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id BAA17424; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 01:41:02 +1300
Received: from smtp1.ihug.co.nz (tk1.ihug.co.nz [203.29.160.13])
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) with ESMTP id BAA17421
	  for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 01:41:01 +1300
Received: from dworkin (p28-max21.akl.ihug.co.nz [206.18.98.28])
	by smtp1.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id BAA08802
	for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 01:36:06 +1300
Message-ID: <001201bf091a$7bdc5460$4301a8c0@dworkin.ihug.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Damage from double and triple effects...
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 06:59:52 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
From: "Dworkin" <dworkin@ihug.co.nz>
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Precedence: bulk
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.
Reply-To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz


-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Arona <jimarona@ihug.co.nz>
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>
Date: Saturday, October 09, 1999 4:03 AM
Subject: Re: Damage from double and triple effects...



>>
>>Defence actually cannot exceed base chance. I've done the numbers. However
>>this is a game and not a calculator love-fest.
>
>    Well, I've just had another go at working it out, but I can't see how
>you calculate it any other way, and get a result where SC exceeds Defense.
>You'd have to show me how you worked it out, William.
>
Hmm...

Jedburg (one day in his dreams), a 25 AG, rank 10 warrior, with a tower
shield and javelin (rank 4 and 10 respective). Oh, and a handy R20 Enchant
armour from Axis. And one of those spastic rune shields also R 20 from
kilroy.

Defence base

25 (AG) + 30 (tower shield) + 22 (Warrior) + 42 (enchant armour) +25 (rune
shield) = 144 (119 without runeshields)

Evasion

144 (base) + 50 = 194 (169 without runeshields)


Gav (the PBI) the 25 MD, rank 10 warrior with a rank 10 glaive and 9 skill
ranks in the weapon with a r20 weapon spell. Oh and a r20 greater.

25 (MD) + 60 (glaive SC) + 11 (warrior) + 10 (weaponsmith) + 36 (rank bonus)
+ 21 (spell ) + 21 (enchantment) = 184. Close but no banana.

Brian (the basher) with 25 AG, 25 MD, 45 PS (r20 strength of stone), rank 10
warrior rank 20 enchantment. Rank 10 Unarmed.

50 (AG) + 25 (MD) + 30 (PS) + 11 (warrior) + 21 (enchantment) + 40 (skill) =
177.

 Aaron (the archer) with 25 MD, a rank 10 longbow, rank 10 in longbow, a R20
arrowflight and a R20 enchantment kneels and aims.

25 (MD) + 10 (weaponsmith) + 55 (SC) + 40 (skill) + 21 (spell) +21
(enchantment) + 10 (kneeling) + 20 (aiming) =202

Now is where it gets exciting

Jedburg doesn't get all his bonuses against Aaron and if Brian has a
runeshield of his own he can get into close. Someone changed the rule on
charging and closing, the runeshield is used to recieve the specific
grievious for running up the javelin. It's not like it's handy for anything
else <grin>.

Jedburg's missile defence

25 (AG) + 30 (shield) + 42 (spell) + 25 (abomination runeshield) + 20
(evading) + 5 (movement)= 142. 60 percent over leaving heaps for range
modifiers.

Prizes however go to our martial artist friend

With his own runeshield to take the hit Brian leaps in to savage Jedburg.
Again many bonuses (including the most foul runeshield) no longer apply.

Jedburg's close in defence (assuming he has he-man 45 PS courtesy of
Strength of stone)

25 (AG) +42 (Spell) = 77

Brian admittedly does not get his warrior bonus either leaving him at 166
giving him a 89 percent chance to tear off an offending limb.

Gav, our poor bloody infantryman actually cannot hit Jedburg. Rolling 01
isn't likely enough to count. He gets to die and so should the sadistic
thaumaturge who made him do it in the first place.

I forgot about runeshields the first time I did the numbers. That gives Gav
a 15% and 35 on the initial charge. Brian has it worse off at 8% and no way
to get in close. Aaron then wins at 85%.

For the toe to toe fighters combat with someone who wishes to not be hit
won't happen. Ranged weapons on the other hand are by far more deadly.

William


-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --
From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz  Mon Oct 11 02:40:13 1999
Received: (from bin@localhost)
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id CAA17476; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 02:40:13 +1300
Received: from smtp1.ihug.co.nz (tk1.ihug.co.nz [203.29.160.13])
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) with ESMTP id CAA17473
	  for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 02:40:12 +1300
Received: from dworkin (p28-max21.akl.ihug.co.nz [206.18.98.28])
	by smtp1.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id CAA13501
	for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 02:35:16 +1300
Message-ID: <001901bf0922$bfdc7f20$4301a8c0@dworkin.ihug.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Damage from double and triple effects...
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 07:59:02 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
From: "Dworkin" <dworkin@ihug.co.nz>
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Precedence: bulk
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.
Reply-To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz

>Jim wrote:
>>>Yes. In a game where the average player can get as much as a 51 pt bonus
>
>William wrote:
>>Unfortunately most dont. This is a roleplaying game and not an exercise in
>>chartered accountancy.
>
>    Neither do I expect them to have that much. However, it is bootless to
>say that a PC cannot get a 45 point bonus to MR versus a single college.
>And, while roleplaying isn't an excercise in chartered accountancy, the
game
>aspects of roleplaying GAMES are there for everyone to take advantage of.
>Therefore, if it is legal, and within the realms of the 'possible' for a
>player character to get their hands on a high ranked Enchantment, and to
>learn a counterspell or two, or buy them invested, then why won't they?

But do you have a Binder lifeforce link, invested rune banishment, windwalk,
lightning bolt, wings, a shadow-walk potion etc.

>    If William's point is that the game is about being part of a story,
then
>it is also about making use of the accepted products of story elements. It
>is an excercise in creating suspension of disbelief that npcs and pcs take
>advantage of such parts of the story that would reasonably be available to
>them.


Yes, agreed. My point still stands. I prefer using my character's abilities
and not a shopping list of premium power-ups. It's just too much effort to
get the whole lot and the trading between PCs between games bores me. If I
wanted to do that I'll go play Jyhad.


 Remember, that a player can protect themselves from the magic of
>>one
>>>entire college with two counterspells.

>>So all you do is ensure you resist and die under the current system. NPCs
>>having a high MR is a product of these spell effects, not a cause.
>
>    No idea what you mean, here, William.

I'm sorry I forget myself. It may be one of those concepts which leads to
your brain dribbling out.

 I don't have a specific beef
>against resisting a spell, and still dying because of the hideous amount of
>damage. The problem I have is where ALL of the player characters die as a
>result of an unusually low roll on the dice. This is why I think it would
be
>good to either reduce the amount of critical damage spells like Hellfire,
>Necrosis and Whirlwind Vortex do (i.e. when they double or triple effect)
or
>allow pcs to advance their FT 1 pt per game or season, whichever is less.
>    As far as I can see, all that making damage spells resistible for none
>means that counterspelled npcs are going to almost impossible to hurt with
>damage. You might as well use effects that are entirely binary in nature,
>like Sleep, Whitefire, Incinerate, Mental Attack, because they only require
>one failed resistance to have overcome the target. There is no sense of
>'whittling away' at the npc. They are either completely healthy and kicking
>twelve kinds of shit out of you, or they're a pulsating pile of goo on the
>floor. There is no sense of movement toward an end...It's just a waiting
>game to see which instant death effect gets the NPC first.
>


Minions and lots of em. Instant death spells don't slow down a good minion
rush. The necromancer (or whatever but most of the time it's a necromancer)
behind them all is still going to be mean but that's what we have all those
assasians and/or stealth types. Yes, the all powerful dude is often a fait
accompli so stage a viscous battle with swarms of viscious minions. Then you
are 'whittling them down' in the climatic scene.

>>
>>Actually I have a third suggestion.
>>It involves the concept of quality roleplaying with a lesser adherence to
>>easily manipulated numbers. So the PCs or NPCs can incinerate their
>>opposition. Gosh wow. Who cares.
>
>    Well, William, frankly, I do. A spell like Necrosis, Hellfire, or
>Whirlwind Vortex can take out an entire party of pcs, generating so much
>damage that the party cannot survive. So, then I am faced with having to
>fudge the die roll, or wipe out the party. I prefer that the game not
>require that kind of demand on a DM.

>>A clever GM (and are not we all) devises
>>scenarios where overwhelming firepower is not the best solution. Games
>where
>>cunning, diplomancy, intrigue, problem solving, daring and personal
>>development are involved have been amongst my best DQ experiences. I mean
>it
>>when I say I can roll dice with the best of them so a straight combat is a
>>bit of a bore. Combat is there to provide tension, not a win/loss
>situation.
>>Most other games (I'm thinking of the modern/SF genre) have instant death
>>weapons and yet somehow survive as popular concepts.
>
>    I have not seen one science fiction game that has had the kind of
>longevity that fantasy roleplaying games have. I have spent a lot of time
>looking at what games survive over time. Fantasy roleplaying games that
>don't put too much of an emphasis on historical accuracy are the ones that
>last the longest. AD&D, DQ (in the Guild's special condition), EarthDawn
>have some claim to long life. On the other hand, Traveller in it's various
>incarnations never seems to last longer than a couple of months, as does
>Star Wars. The Star Trek rpg was an extremely strange game with a few
>interesting ideas, and provided proof positive that the Prime Directive was
>written by a neurotic cretin with a bowel condition, and is almost
>unplayable as a game.
>    I would like to know which science fiction games you refer to here,
>William.


Mechwarrior or one of the clones. Space-master (ICE) too. But the longevity
is not an issue but the demand on problem solving caused by ultra-lethal
weapons.

>> I personally think
>>heroes should have zorching capability and so should some of thier
enemies.
>>It is not the rules which need changing but instead the way we get people
>to
>>play. If characterisation was more important than firepower than most
>>problems in the game would cease to be of issue.
>
>    The ability to characterise well, and an interest in firepower on the
>part of a player have no logical connection. What you seem to be saying is
>that characterisation is a natural restraint that can be applied to
>firepower. I don't agree. I think that you might find that SOME characters
>might have internal constraints that resist firepower at whatever level. I
>think there are more characters that have an honest and obvious interest in
>firepower, to wit, pouring destruction down on your enemies has been known
>to keep you alive (if you do it fast enough and in big enough lumps).

Certainly, so then the challenge to the GM is to come up with adventures
where mana-searing death isn't enough. Interaction, moral conflict, problem
solving are required and not resorting to reality-warps. Star Trek and it's
myriad appalling reasons why a battlecruiser cannot solve all your problems
is what we want to avoid.

>
>>
>>We need better games. Not better rules.
>
>    We always need better games. Always. We also need a good environment in
>which those games can be played. Some of that environment comes from rules.
>    If we address a part of the game that is flawed, and try to correct it
>or otherwise bring it to a more useful condition for the way that the game
>is played, then I don't see that any harm is caused. It is, after all, a
>free world, and we don't need to march to the beat of a single drum in the
>hopes of conquering Western Europe and driving the mongrel races out of our
>pure, Aryan gene pool.

Agreed, but at the moment I see the organisation of a grand orchestra
designed to bring all races into peacefull harmony while no-one has written
this marvelous symphony.

>    Others may not see this part of the game as being a problem, or they
may
>consider the solutions offered innappropriate ones. Or they may agree with
>some or all of it. Whatever else is happening, I don't think that the
>amelioration of the game is threatened in any way by this discussion.
>Jim.
>


I see it this way. If I'm right then the rules don't really matter because
the characters will remain (even if we convert to T@T). Lath will still be
Lath, Damien will be Damien, Balode will be Balode and Eidelon, well we can
but hope. I win.
If you're right and these rules amendments are great things which increase
our enjoyment of the game then I win again. Since I think we are both
correct I get to win in spades.

William




-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --
From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz  Mon Oct 11 07:46:12 1999
Received: (from bin@localhost)
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id HAA17696; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 07:46:12 +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 HAA17693
	  for <dq-pub@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 07:46:10 +1300
Received: from phaeton (p65-tnt7.akl.ihug.co.nz [203.109.203.65])
	by smtp2.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id HAA24776
	for <dq-pub@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 07:41:07 +1300
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19991011074412.009dada0@pop.ihug.co.nz>
X-Sender: phaeton@pop.ihug.co.nz
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32)
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 07:44:12 +1300
Subject: DQ Pub Test
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Keith Smith <phaeton@pop.ihug.co.nz>
To: dq-pub@dq.sf.org.nz
Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: dq-pub@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.
Reply-To: dq-pub@dq.sf.org.nz

Hmmm... Quiet in here isn't it.

Aqualina.



-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --
From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz  Mon Oct 11 07:58:01 1999
Received: (from bin@localhost)
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id HAA17716; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 07:58:01 +1300
Received: from enterprise.iconz.co.nz (enterprise.iconz.co.nz [210.48.22.40])
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) with SMTP id HAA17713
	  for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 07:58:00 +1300
Received: (qmail 15432 invoked from network); 10 Oct 1999 18:56:00 -0000
Received: from e0.firewall.ak.iconz.net.nz (HELO schroedinger) (202.14.100.208)
  by enterprise.iconz.co.nz with SMTP; 10 Oct 1999 18:56:00 -0000
Subject: RE: Damage from double and triple effects...
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 07:50:36 +1300
Message-ID: <NDBBKFMKDJLEKLKNEHLNGECICKAA.mandos@nexus.org.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
From: "Mandos D Shadowspawn Esq" <mandos@nexus.org.nz>
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Precedence: bulk
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.
Reply-To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz


> >I guess it all depends on style and I can easily do without the
> half damage
> >spells.
>
>
>     This position is not an argument. As far as I can see, the only thing
> George is bringing to the discussion is that he doesn't see the
> need to use
> half damage spells or effects. This particular line doesn't lead the
> discussion anywhere except into paroxysms of adulation for his wonderful
> DMing.
>     Until a point is made, I remain unconvinced.

The argument I am bringing is that it is possible to run a sucsessful game
without the need for half damage spells or instant death magics, of which
there are far too many. Within many colleges there are a host of cool combat
spells that do not get used because there are tougher options.

Necromany is the college I know the best and if you look at it is has a host
of combat spells. Lots of ways of doing damage and crippling the enemy and
so forth but do we ever see a Necro casting any of these spells? Very
rarely. Necro = Necrosis. End of story. I think if we removed or altered
some of the really nasty spells we would see a range of potential benifits.

1. A greater range of spell use. If there is no ONE killer spell that is
better than all the others you would see different styles among the players
and range of responses from the players.

2. It would be easier to run a difficult combat. At the moment you need a
huge number of opponents or some really funky special abilities just to
provide action to a medium level party. Removing the instant death spells
reduces the amount you have to throw at the party.

3. People have been complaining that Non mages have less of a role in DQ.
Many people jokingly suggested reducing the power of magic rather than
pumping up the fighters and it can be done.

I admit is is a style option, many GM's like lots of magic, the possibility
of instant death on a dice roll. Spells zipping through the air like
confetti. Removing some of the death and destruction from the spells might
reduce the quality of their games. So I think we should just leave things as
they are and let people play how they want. We have got this far with these
spells in play.

Mandos
/s


-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --
From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz  Mon Oct 11 12:19:24 1999
Received: (from bin@localhost)
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id MAA18287; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 12:19:24 +1300
Received: from smtp1.ihug.co.nz (tk1.ihug.co.nz [203.29.160.13])
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) with ESMTP id MAA18284
	  for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 12:19:23 +1300
Received: from phaeton (p176-tnt1.akl.ihug.co.nz [206.18.111.176])
	by smtp1.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id MAA29645
	for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 12:14:13 +1300
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19991011121715.007a4100@pop.ihug.co.nz>
X-Sender: phaeton@pop.ihug.co.nz
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.5 (32)
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 12:17:15 +1300
Subject: Revised witchsight
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Keith Smith <phaeton@pop.ihug.co.nz>
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Precedence: bulk
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.
Reply-To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz

I was typing up the revised Witchsight to send to Ross and what I have
doesn't seem right. This is what I have:

Witchsight now reads
Experience Multiplier 200
Base Chance: Automatic
Effect: The Adept may see objects or entities which are invisible and a
slight blue sheen around them. If the invisibility effect (excluding
Walking Unseen) is of a higher Rank than the Witchsight, the object or
entity may not be clearly identified or directly magically targeted. The
Adept may also see in the dark as a Human does on a cloudy day, with an
effective range of vision of 150ft under the open sky, and 75ft elsewhere"

Two questions:
1) Is that Base Chance correct for the Celestial Witchsight spell as well?
2) The first sentence is not right. Can someone suggest a more correct
wording?

Keith
(phaeton@ihug.co.nz)



-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --
From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz  Mon Oct 11 12:49:34 1999
Received: (from bin@localhost)
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id MAA18347; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 12:49:34 +1300
Received: from fclaklmr02.fcl.co.nz (mail.fcl.co.nz [203.98.14.148])
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) with ESMTP id MAA18344
	  for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 12:49:32 +1300
Received: from falaklex00.falum.co.nz ([10.8.1.28]) by fclaklmr02.fcl.co.nz  with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19);
	 Mon, 11 Oct 1999 12:44:21 +1300
Received: by FALAKLEX00 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
	id <4PK5N5JF>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 12:47:48 +1300
Message-ID: <311B3C3DD32FD311B33900805F770A725FB362@FALAKLEX00>
Subject: RE: Revised witchsight
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 12:47:46 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01BF1379.DB0E7790"
From: "Andrew Withy         (FAL AKL)" <AndrewW@falum.co.nz>
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Precedence: bulk
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.
Reply-To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz

This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

------_=_NextPart_001_01BF1379.DB0E7790
Content-Type: text/plain

Also, Illusionists have a related talent - enhanced vision. This lets them
see Invis & spot (though not see through) illusions, at a Base Chance.
To be consistent, the spot invis should go to rank dependance as per
standard witchsight and E&E see invis (or whatever we called it). But then,
do we change the spot illusions to being a Rank vs Rank thing as well?

Solutions:
1) Do nothing. No change.

2) Change the see invis part only to the witchsight wording, keep base
chance for spot illusion.

3) Change the spot illusions bit as well so illusions of an equal or lower
rank can be spotted automatically (like witchsight).

4) Do something more complex, as per #3 , _and_ the Adepts's own illusions
of an equal or lower rank can be seen through by the Adept. This is an
enhancement to the vision talent (or the illusion college), but also means
that high-rank illusions might be cast at a lower effective rank for seeing
(only), giving the opposition more chance of spotting it and knowing that
there is an illusionist around, letting the slimy gits be hoist on their own
petard as they out-clever themselves again.

Not being able to see through ones own illusions can be counter-intuitive to
some GMs/players (they get a shock when I say "No, I can't see through that
wall - how should I know what the enemy is doing?")

I think that #3 is probably the best/simplest/most integrated solution, but
like #4 as well.

I can generate "rules-ese" for any of these proposals as required.

BTW Keith, the Witchsight spell has its old base chance (15%?).

Andrew
> -----Original Message-----
> I was typing up the revised Witchsight to send to Ross and ...
> 
> 1) Is that Base Chance correct for the Celestial Witchsight spell as well?
> 
> Keith
> 

------_=_NextPart_001_01BF1379.DB0E7790
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
5.5.2448.0">
<TITLE>RE: Revised witchsight</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>

<P><FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Also, Illusionists =
have a related talent - enhanced vision. This lets them see Invis &amp; =
spot (though not see through) illusions, at a Base Chance.</FONT></P>

<P><FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">To be consistent, =
the spot invis should go to rank dependance as per standard witchsight =
and E&amp;E see invis (or whatever we called it). But then, do we =
change the spot illusions to being a Rank vs Rank thing as =
well?</FONT></P>

<P><FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Solutions:</FONT>
<BR><FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">1) Do nothing. No =
change.</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">2) Change the see =
invis part only to the witchsight wording, keep base chance for spot =
illusion.</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">3) Change the spot =
illusions bit as well so illusions of an equal or lower rank can be =
spotted automatically (like witchsight).</FONT></P>

<P><FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">4) Do something more =
complex, as per #3 , _and_ the Adepts's own illusions of an equal or =
lower rank can be seen through by the Adept. This is an enhancement to =
the vision talent (or the illusion college), but also means that =
high-rank illusions might be cast at a lower effective rank for seeing =
(only), giving the opposition more chance of spotting it and knowing =
that there is an illusionist around, letting the slimy gits be hoist on =
their own petard as they out-clever themselves again.</FONT></P>

<P><FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Not being able to =
see through ones own illusions can be counter-intuitive to some =
GMs/players (they get a shock when I say &quot;No, I can't see through =
that wall - how should I know what the enemy is =
doing?&quot;)</FONT></P>

<P><FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">I think that #3 is =
probably the best/simplest/most integrated solution, but like #4 as =
well.</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">I can generate =
&quot;rules-ese&quot; for any of these proposals as required.</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">BTW Keith, the =
Witchsight spell has its old base chance (15%?).</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Andrew</FONT>
<UL>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D1 FACE=3D"Arial">-----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">I was typing up the revised =
Witchsight to send to Ross and</FONT> <FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 =
FACE=3D"Arial">...</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">1) Is that Base Chance correct for the =
Celestial Witchsight spell as well?</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Keith</FONT>
</P>
</UL>
</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01BF1379.DB0E7790--

-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --
From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz  Mon Oct 11 13:35:21 1999
Received: (from bin@localhost)
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id NAA18417; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 13:35:21 +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 NAA18414
	  for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 13:35:20 +1300
Received: from paul (p87-max14.akl.ihug.co.nz [203.109.243.123])
	by smtp2.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id NAA32380
	for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 13:30:09 +1300
Message-ID: <007401bf137f$ba927d00$6564640a@paul>
Subject: Re: Damage from double and triple effects...
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 13:29:47 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
From: "Paul Schmidt" <rodking@ihug.co.nz>
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Precedence: bulk
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.
Reply-To: "Paul Schmidt" <rodking@ihug.co.nz>, dq@dq.sf.org.nz

William,

Basically you're partially right  in your maths. You are pre-supposing
people deliberatley take spec-revs etc, or walk up weapons, actions that can
only be helpful in a broken system - why not fix the system? Additionally a
blow can also be parried, something that isn't covered by your remarks, but
clearly giving an evading character a major advanage
To top it all off, the poor sob who is attacking (and driving the action of
the scene) must also roll % to hit - which acts as a penatly to a blow of an
average of 55%.
So most of the time defence does outstrip defence.

The last point that should be made to yourself and to Mandos, is that just
becuase you adjust your game to get round some of the inanity in the rules,
doesn't mean the rules themselves shouldn't be fixed. Some people do not
have the flexibility to adjust their games on the spot and others prefer a
different type of game to yours, one predicated on wargaming/tabletopping -
here rules ARE very important (though personally I prefer a storied approach
as you know).

cheers
Paul


-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --
From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz  Mon Oct 11 14:00:45 1999
Received: (from bin@localhost)
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id OAA18470; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 14:00:45 +1300
Received: from enterprise.iconz.co.nz (enterprise.iconz.co.nz [210.48.22.40])
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) with SMTP id OAA18467
	  for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 14:00:44 +1300
Received: (qmail 28842 invoked from network); 11 Oct 1999 00:58:35 -0000
Received: from e0.firewall.ak.iconz.net.nz (HELO schroedinger) (202.14.100.208)
  by enterprise.iconz.co.nz with SMTP; 11 Oct 1999 00:58:35 -0000
Subject: FW: Mind College 1.3 Preamble and Talents
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 13:53:10 +1300
Message-ID: <NDBBKFMKDJLEKLKNEHLNMECNCKAA.mandos@nexus.org.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
From: "Mandos D Shadowspawn Esq" <mandos@nexus.org.nz>
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Precedence: bulk
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.
Reply-To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz

I suggested this a little while ago and wondered if anyone had any comment
on the possibility of including it in the Rewrite.


T3.     Sense Danger
Base Chance: PC + 3/rank
Experience multiple: 300
Storage: Potion
The adept recieves a 5 seconds + 5/5 full ranks warning of impending danger.


Mandos
/s


-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --
From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz  Mon Oct 11 14:05:31 1999
Received: (from bin@localhost)
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id OAA18491; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 14:05:31 +1300
Received: from fclaklmr02.fcl.co.nz (mail.fcl.co.nz [203.98.14.148])
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) with ESMTP id OAA18488
	  for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 14:05:27 +1300
Received: from falaklex00.falum.co.nz ([10.8.1.28]) by fclaklmr02.fcl.co.nz  with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.197.19);
	 Mon, 11 Oct 1999 14:00:16 +1300
Received: by FALAKLEX00 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
	id <4PK5N5LJ>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 14:03:39 +1300
Message-ID: <311B3C3DD32FD311B33900805F770A725FB364@FALAKLEX00>
Subject: RE: Mind College 1.3 Preamble and Talents
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 14:03:34 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01BF1384.73E00DC0"
From: "Andrew Withy         (FAL AKL)" <AndrewW@falum.co.nz>
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Precedence: bulk
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.
Reply-To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz

This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

------_=_NextPart_001_01BF1384.73E00DC0
Content-Type: text/plain

Seems a hell of a lot simpler than anything else. Unsure about the 5s/5Rks &
low base chance - given its EM, a bit harsh?

The mind mages would never go for it - its too simple and clear - they
couldn't all insist that it worked differently.

Otherwise, I'd say "why not?"

Andrew
> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Mandos D Shadowspawn Esq [SMTP:mandos@nexus.org.nz]
> Sent:	Monday, October 11, 1999 1:53 PM
> To:	dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> Subject:	FW: Mind College 1.3 Preamble and Talents
> 
> I suggested this a little while ago and wondered if anyone had any comment
> on the possibility of including it in the Rewrite.
> 
> 
> T3.     Sense Danger
> Base Chance: PC + 3/rank
> Experience multiple: 300
> Storage: Potion
> The adept recieves a 5 seconds + 5/5 full ranks warning of impending
> danger.
> 
> 
> Mandos
> /s
> 
> 
> -- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --

------_=_NextPart_001_01BF1384.73E00DC0
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
5.5.2448.0">
<TITLE>RE: Mind College 1.3 Preamble and Talents</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>

<P><FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Seems a hell of a =
lot simpler than anything else. Unsure about the 5s/5Rks &amp; low base =
chance - given its EM, a bit harsh?</FONT></P>

<P><FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">The mind mages would =
never go for it - its too simple and clear - they couldn't all insist =
that it worked differently.</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Otherwise, I'd say =
&quot;why not?&quot;</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Andrew</FONT>
<UL>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D1 FACE=3D"Arial">-----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><B><FONT SIZE=3D1 FACE=3D"Arial">From:&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT></B> <FONT =
SIZE=3D1 FACE=3D"Arial">Mandos D Shadowspawn Esq =
[SMTP:mandos@nexus.org.nz]</FONT>
<BR><B><FONT SIZE=3D1 FACE=3D"Arial">Sent:&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT></B> <FONT =
SIZE=3D1 FACE=3D"Arial">Monday, October 11, 1999 1:53 PM</FONT>
<BR><B><FONT SIZE=3D1 =
FACE=3D"Arial">To:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT></B> <FONT SIZE=3D1 =
FACE=3D"Arial">dq@dq.sf.org.nz</FONT>
<BR><B><FONT SIZE=3D1 =
FACE=3D"Arial">Subject:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</FONT>=
</B> <FONT SIZE=3D1 FACE=3D"Arial">FW: Mind College 1.3 Preamble and =
Talents</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">I suggested this a little while ago =
and wondered if anyone had any comment</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">on the possibility of including it in =
the Rewrite.</FONT>
</P>
<BR>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">T3.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Sense =
Danger</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Base Chance: PC + 3/rank</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Experience multiple: 300</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Storage: Potion</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">The adept recieves a 5 seconds + 5/5 =
full ranks warning of impending danger.</FONT>
</P>
<BR>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Mandos</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">/s</FONT>
</P>
<BR>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">-- see unsubscribe instructions in =
message headers --</FONT>
</P>
</UL>
</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01BF1384.73E00DC0--

-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --
From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz  Mon Oct 11 14:09:07 1999
Received: (from bin@localhost)
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id OAA18508; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 14:09:07 +1300
Received: from enterprise.iconz.co.nz (enterprise.iconz.co.nz [210.48.22.40])
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) with SMTP id OAA18505
	  for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 14:09:06 +1300
Received: (qmail 29413 invoked from network); 11 Oct 1999 01:06:57 -0000
Received: from e0.firewall.ak.iconz.net.nz (HELO schroedinger) (202.14.100.208)
  by enterprise.iconz.co.nz with SMTP; 11 Oct 1999 01:06:57 -0000
Subject: RE: Mind College 1.3 Preamble and Talents
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 14:01:31 +1300
Message-ID: <NDBBKFMKDJLEKLKNEHLNGECOCKAA.mandos@nexus.org.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_004C_01BF13F1.1F04D640"
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
From: "Mandos D Shadowspawn Esq" <mandos@nexus.org.nz>
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Precedence: bulk
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.
Reply-To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_004C_01BF13F1.1F04D640
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

    Seems a hell of a lot simpler than anything else. Unsure about the
5s/5Rks & low base chance - given its EM, a bit harsh?

    The mind mages would never go for it - its too simple and clear - they
couldn't all insist that it worked differently.

    Otherwise, I'd say "why not?"



        T3.     Sense Danger
        Base Chance: PC + 3/rank
        Experience multiple: 300
        Storage: Potion
        The adept recieves a 5 seconds + 5/5 full ranks warning of impending
danger.

 I just nicked the original stuff. This version is a lot tougher than their
current "You might spot an ambush or get a niggly feeling if the GM
remembers you have the talent :-)

I am going to play it for a while and see how it goes but I will formally
propose it for introduction into the collage.

Mandos
/s

------=_NextPart_000_004C_01BF13F1.1F04D640
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>

<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dus-ascii" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type><TITLE>RE: Mind College 1.3 Preamble and =
Talents</TITLE>
<META content=3D'"MSHTML 4.72.3612.1706"' name=3DGENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 solid 2px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: =
5px">
    <P><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2>Seems a hell of a lot =
simpler than=20
    anything else. Unsure about the 5s/5Rks &amp; low base chance - =
given its=20
    EM, a bit harsh?</FONT></P>
    <P><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2>The mind mages would =
never go for=20
    it - its too simple and clear - they couldn't all insist that it =
worked=20
    differently.</FONT> </P>
    <P><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2>Otherwise, I'd say =
&quot;why=20
    not?&quot;</FONT> </P>
    <UL><BR>
        <P><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>T3.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Sense =

        Danger</FONT> <BR><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Base Chance: PC +=20
        3/rank</FONT> <BR><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Experience =
multiple:=20
        300</FONT> <BR><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Storage: =
Potion</FONT> <BR><FONT=20
        face=3DArial size=3D2>The adept recieves a 5 seconds + 5/5 full =
ranks=20
        warning of impending danger.</FONT> </P></UL></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D184555900-11101999><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3D"Book =
Antiqua"=20
size=3D3>&nbsp;I just nicked the original stuff. This version is a lot =
tougher=20
than their current &quot;You might spot an ambush or get a niggly =
feeling if the=20
GM remembers you have the talent :-)</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D184555900-11101999><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3D"Book =
Antiqua"=20
size=3D3></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D184555900-11101999><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3D"Book =
Antiqua"=20
size=3D3>I am going to play it for a while and see how it goes but I =
will formally=20
propose it for introduction into the collage.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D184555900-11101999><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3D"Book =
Antiqua"=20
size=3D3></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D184555900-11101999><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3D"Book =
Antiqua"=20
size=3D3>Mandos</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D184555900-11101999><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3D"Book =
Antiqua"=20
size=3D3>/s&nbsp;</FONT></SPAN></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_004C_01BF13F1.1F04D640--


-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --
From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz  Mon Oct 11 15:03:56 1999
Received: (from bin@localhost)
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id PAA18656; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 15:03:56 +1300
Received: from smtp1.ihug.co.nz (tk1.ihug.co.nz [203.29.160.13])
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) with ESMTP id PAA18653
	  for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 15:03:55 +1300
Received: from paul (p20-max14.akl.ihug.co.nz [203.109.227.212])
	by smtp1.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id OAA31860
	for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 14:58:40 +1300
Message-ID: <001d01bf138c$1934c0a0$6564640a@paul>
Subject: Re: Revised witchsight
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 14:58:18 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0018_01BF13F9.0D9F6E80"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
From: "Paul Schmidt" <rodking@ihug.co.nz>
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Precedence: bulk
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.
Reply-To: "Paul Schmidt" <rodking@ihug.co.nz>, dq@dq.sf.org.nz

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0018_01BF13F9.0D9F6E80
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Option 3 seems pretty stright forward

Cheers
Paul
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Andrew Withy (FAL AKL) <AndrewW@falum.co.nz>
    To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>
    Date: Monday, 11 October 1999 12:44
    Subject: RE: Revised witchsight
   =20
   =20
    Also, Illusionists have a related talent - enhanced vision. This =
lets them see Invis & spot (though not see through) illusions, at a Base =
Chance.

    To be consistent, the spot invis should go to rank dependance as per =
standard witchsight and E&E see invis (or whatever we called it). But =
then, do we change the spot illusions to being a Rank vs Rank thing as =
well?

    Solutions:=20
    1) Do nothing. No change.=20

    2) Change the see invis part only to the witchsight wording, keep =
base chance for spot illusion.=20

    3) Change the spot illusions bit as well so illusions of an equal or =
lower rank can be spotted automatically (like witchsight).

    4) Do something more complex, as per #3 , _and_ the Adepts's own =
illusions of an equal or lower rank can be seen through by the Adept. =
This is an enhancement to the vision talent (or the illusion college), =
but also means that high-rank illusions might be cast at a lower =
effective rank for seeing (only), giving the opposition more chance of =
spotting it and knowing that there is an illusionist around, letting the =
slimy gits be hoist on their own petard as they out-clever themselves =
again.

    Not being able to see through ones own illusions can be =
counter-intuitive to some GMs/players (they get a shock when I say "No, =
I can't see through that wall - how should I know what the enemy is =
doing?")

    I think that #3 is probably the best/simplest/most integrated =
solution, but like #4 as well.=20

    I can generate "rules-ese" for any of these proposals as required.=20

    BTW Keith, the Witchsight spell has its old base chance (15%?).=20

    Andrew=20

        -----Original Message-----=20
        I was typing up the revised Witchsight to send to Ross and ...=20

        1) Is that Base Chance correct for the Celestial Witchsight =
spell as well?=20

        Keith=20


------=_NextPart_000_0018_01BF13F9.0D9F6E80
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>

<META content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Diso-8859-1 =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type><TITLE>RE: Revised witchsight</TITLE><!DOCTYPE =
HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<META content=3D'"MSHTML 4.72.3110.7"' name=3DGENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>Option 3 seems pretty stright=20
forward</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Cheers</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Paul</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 solid 2px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: =
5px">
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><B>-----Original =
Message-----</B><BR><B>From:=20
    </B>Andrew Withy (FAL AKL) &lt;<A=20
    =
href=3D"mailto:AndrewW@falum.co.nz">AndrewW@falum.co.nz</A>&gt;<BR><B>To:=
=20
    </B><A href=3D"mailto:dq@dq.sf.org.nz">dq@dq.sf.org.nz</A> &lt;<A=20
    href=3D"mailto:dq@dq.sf.org.nz">dq@dq.sf.org.nz</A>&gt;<BR><B>Date:=20
    </B>Monday, 11 October 1999 12:44<BR><B>Subject: </B>RE: Revised=20
    witchsight<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
    <P><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2>Also, Illusionists =
have a related=20
    talent - enhanced vision. This lets them see Invis &amp; spot =
(though not=20
    see through) illusions, at a Base Chance.</FONT></P>
    <P><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2>To be consistent, the =
spot invis=20
    should go to rank dependance as per standard witchsight and E&amp;E =
see=20
    invis (or whatever we called it). But then, do we change the spot =
illusions=20
    to being a Rank vs Rank thing as well?</FONT></P>
    <P><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2>Solutions:</FONT> =
<BR><FONT=20
    color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2>1) Do nothing. No =
change.</FONT> </P>
    <P><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2>2) Change the see =
invis part only=20
    to the witchsight wording, keep base chance for spot =
illusion.</FONT> </P>
    <P><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2>3) Change the spot =
illusions bit as=20
    well so illusions of an equal or lower rank can be spotted =
automatically=20
    (like witchsight).</FONT></P>
    <P><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2>4) Do something more =
complex, as=20
    per #3 , _and_ the Adepts's own illusions of an equal or lower rank =
can be=20
    seen through by the Adept. This is an enhancement to the vision =
talent (or=20
    the illusion college), but also means that high-rank illusions might =
be cast=20
    at a lower effective rank for seeing (only), giving the opposition =
more=20
    chance of spotting it and knowing that there is an illusionist =
around,=20
    letting the slimy gits be hoist on their own petard as they =
out-clever=20
    themselves again.</FONT></P>
    <P><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2>Not being able to see =
through ones=20
    own illusions can be counter-intuitive to some GMs/players (they get =
a shock=20
    when I say &quot;No, I can't see through that wall - how should I =
know what=20
    the enemy is doing?&quot;)</FONT></P>
    <P><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2>I think that #3 is =
probably the=20
    best/simplest/most integrated solution, but like #4 as well.</FONT> =
</P>
    <P><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2>I can generate=20
    &quot;rules-ese&quot; for any of these proposals as required.</FONT> =
</P>
    <P><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2>BTW Keith, the =
Witchsight spell has=20
    its old base chance (15%?).</FONT> </P>
    <P><FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial size=3D2>Andrew</FONT>=20
    <UL>
        <P><FONT face=3DArial size=3D1>-----Original Message-----</FONT> =
<BR><FONT=20
        face=3DArial size=3D2>I was typing up the revised Witchsight to =
send to Ross=20
        and</FONT> <FONT color=3D#0000ff face=3DArial =
size=3D2>...</FONT> </P>
        <P><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>1) Is that Base Chance correct =
for the=20
        Celestial Witchsight spell as well?</FONT> </P>
        <P><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Keith</FONT> =
</P></UL></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0018_01BF13F9.0D9F6E80--


-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --
From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz  Mon Oct 11 15:08:10 1999
Received: (from bin@localhost)
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id PAA18672; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 15:08:10 +1300
Received: from smtp1.ihug.co.nz (tk1.ihug.co.nz [203.29.160.13])
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) with ESMTP id PAA18669
	  for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 15:08:09 +1300
Received: from paul (p20-max14.akl.ihug.co.nz [203.109.227.212])
	by smtp1.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id PAA00364
	for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 15:02:55 +1300
Message-ID: <002801bf138c$b144f9a0$6564640a@paul>
Subject: Re: Mind College 1.3 Preamble and Talents
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 15:02:34 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
From: "Paul Schmidt" <rodking@ihug.co.nz>
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Precedence: bulk
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.
Reply-To: "Paul Schmidt" <rodking@ihug.co.nz>, dq@dq.sf.org.nz


This is kind of ridiculous.
If you go for this then several pulses between most encounters the party
receives a premonition that something dangerous is about to occur. This
pretty much destroys entire classes of encounters. I can't see too many GM's
going for it. The present write up, vague as it is does what is required -
it allows a GM to provide a clue via a character if they desire it.

Cheers
Paul
>
>
>T3.     Sense Danger
>Base Chance: PC + 3/rank
>Experience multiple: 300
>Storage: Potion
>The adept recieves a 5 seconds + 5/5 full ranks warning of impending
danger.
>
>
>Mandos
>/s
>
>
>-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --
>


-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --
From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz  Mon Oct 11 15:25:24 1999
Received: (from bin@localhost)
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id PAA18714; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 15:25:24 +1300
Received: from enterprise.iconz.co.nz (enterprise.iconz.co.nz [210.48.22.40])
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) with SMTP id PAA18711
	  for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 15:25:23 +1300
Received: (qmail 4832 invoked from network); 11 Oct 1999 02:23:12 -0000
Received: from e0.firewall.ak.iconz.net.nz (HELO schroedinger) (202.14.100.208)
  by enterprise.iconz.co.nz with SMTP; 11 Oct 1999 02:23:12 -0000
Subject: RE: Mind College 1.3 Preamble and Talents
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 15:17:47 +1300
Message-ID: <NDBBKFMKDJLEKLKNEHLNEECPCKAA.mandos@nexus.org.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
From: "Mandos D Shadowspawn Esq" <mandos@nexus.org.nz>
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Precedence: bulk
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.
Reply-To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz

> This is kind of ridiculous.
> If you go for this then several pulses between most encounters the party
> receives a premonition that something dangerous is about to occur. This
> pretty much destroys entire classes of encounters. I can't see
> too many GM's
> going for it. The present write up, vague as it is does what is required -
> it allows a GM to provide a clue via a character if they desire it.

What classes of encounters are destroyed? Could you provide some examples?

Mandos
/s


-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --
From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz  Mon Oct 11 15:28:55 1999
Received: (from bin@localhost)
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id PAA18738; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 15:28:55 +1300
Received: from peace.com (defacto.peace.co.nz [202.14.141.225])
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) with SMTP id PAA18735
	  for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 15:28:53 +1300
Message-ID: <38014A1C.EA1D6AFF@peace.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 15:23:25 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Revised witchsight
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Michael Woodhams <michaelw@peace.com>
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Precedence: bulk
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.
Reply-To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">

<blockquote TYPE=CITE>
<blockquote 
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 solid 2px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"><font face="Arial"><font color="#0000FF"><font size=-1>Also,
Illusionists have a related talent - enhanced vision. This lets them see
Invis &amp; spot (though not see through) illusions, at a Base Chance.</font></font></font>
<p><font face="Arial"><font color="#0000FF"><font size=-1>To be consistent,
the spot invis should go to rank dependance as per standard witchsight
and E&amp;E see invis (or whatever we called it). But then, do we change
the spot illusions to being a Rank vs Rank thing as well?</font></font></font>
<p><font face="Arial"><font color="#0000FF"><font size=-1>Solutions:</font></font></font>
<br><font face="Arial"><font color="#0000FF"><font size=-1>1) Do nothing.
No change.</font></font></font>
<p><font face="Arial"><font color="#0000FF"><font size=-1>2) Change the
see invis part only to the witchsight wording, keep base chance for spot
illusion.</font></font></font>
<p><font face="Arial"><font color="#0000FF"><font size=-1>3) Change the
spot illusions bit as well so illusions of an equal or lower rank can be
spotted automatically (like witchsight).</font></font></font>
<p><font face="Arial"><font color="#0000FF"><font size=-1>4) Do something
more complex, as per #3 , _and_ the Adepts's own illusions of an equal
or lower rank can be seen through by the Adept. This is an enhancement
to the vision talent (or the illusion college), but also means that high-rank
illusions might be cast at a lower effective rank for seeing (only), giving
the opposition more chance of spotting it and knowing that there is an
illusionist around, letting the slimy gits be hoist on their own petard
as they out-clever themselves again.</font></font></font></blockquote>
</blockquote>

<p><br>I like #2 - it is the simplest, minimal change that keeps consistency
with how Witchsight now works. The primary driver for the witchsight change
was that when you had 10 guards looking for 6 invisible party members,
the rolling for who saw what was horrible. We aren't ever likely to have
lots of illusionists looking at lots of illusions, so this argument fails
for the detect illusions case. (I'm not at all convinced it succeeded for
the the invisibility case in the first place.) My second rated preference
is for #1.
<p>Michael W.
<br>&nbsp;
</body>
</html>


-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --
From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz  Mon Oct 11 15:36:38 1999
Received: (from bin@localhost)
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id PAA18778; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 15:36:38 +1300
Received: from enterprise.iconz.co.nz (enterprise.iconz.co.nz [210.48.22.40])
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) with SMTP id PAA18775
	  for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 15:36:37 +1300
Received: (qmail 5646 invoked from network); 11 Oct 1999 02:34:26 -0000
Received: from e0.firewall.ak.iconz.net.nz (HELO schroedinger) (202.14.100.208)
  by enterprise.iconz.co.nz with SMTP; 11 Oct 1999 02:34:26 -0000
Subject: RE: Mind College 1.3 Preamble and Talents
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 15:29:00 +1300
Message-ID: <NDBBKFMKDJLEKLKNEHLNKECPCKAA.mandos@nexus.org.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
From: "Mandos D Shadowspawn Esq" <mandos@nexus.org.nz>
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Precedence: bulk
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.
Reply-To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz


> This is kind of ridiculous.
> If you go for this then several pulses between most encounters the party
> receives a premonition that something dangerous is about to occur. This
> pretty much destroys entire classes of encounters. I can't see
> too many GM's
> going for it. The present write up, vague as it is does what is required -
> it allows a GM to provide a clue via a character if they desire it.

As I see it if anything occours to put the party into pulse time then the
mind mage may get a few extra pulses. I cannot percieve a situation where
this will cause a great deal of problems. Most situations would be
pre-empted by a mind mage anyway in most cases. ESP and Telepathy are far
more likly to give away a possible confrontation. And also how does this
change the current writeup except it clarifies any preparation time the
party has and makes less work for the GM and the players?

Mandos
/s


-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --
From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz  Mon Oct 11 16:23:46 1999
Received: (from bin@localhost)
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id QAA18830; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:23:46 +1300
Received: from mailhost.auckland.ac.nz (mailhost.auckland.ac.nz [130.216.1.4])
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) with ESMTP id QAA18827
	  for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:23:39 +1300
Received: from sci4 (lbr-122-42.lbrsc.auckland.ac.nz [130.216.122.42])
	by mailhost.auckland.ac.nz (8.9.2/8.9.2/8.9.2-ua) with SMTP id QAA10323
	for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:18:25 +1300 (NZDT)
Message-Id: <199910110318.QAA10323@mailhost.auckland.ac.nz>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:23:39 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: RE: Mind College 1.3 Preamble and Talents
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.53/R1)
From: "Michael Parkinson" <M.parkinson@auckland.ac.nz>
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Precedence: bulk
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.
Reply-To: m.parkinson@auckland.ac.nz, dq@dq.sf.org.nz


> > This is kind of ridiculous.
> > If you go for this then several pulses between most encounters the party
> > receives a premonition that something dangerous is about to occur. This
> > pretty much destroys entire classes of encounters. I can't see
> > too many GM's
> > going for it. The present write up, vague as it is does what is required -
> > it allows a GM to provide a clue via a character if they desire it.
> 
> What classes of encounters are destroyed? Could you provide some examples?

Don't know if this is what you're asking for, but ... 

I've been an observer of an encounter when Kree (who has such a
talent) though he knew we were going to be shot from behind, so he
leaps about and (because of the spare pulse of warning) killed the
"innocent" bystander would-be archer-assassin before he even loaded
the arrow.  Naturally the party took Kree's word for it, but I feel
the situation was not what the GM had in mind.


regards, Michael





Michael Parkinson
Mathematics & Statistics Subject Librarian
Science Library, University of Auckland,
Private Bag 92019, AUCKLAND, N.Z.
Email: m.parkinson@auckland.ac.nz
Phone: (09) 3737 599 x 5858      Fax: (09) 3082 304
--------------------------------------------------------------

As a mathematical discipline travels far from its empirical source, ... 
It becomes more and more pure aestheticizing, more and more purely 
_l'art pour l'art._  This need not be bad if the field is surrounded 
by correlated subjects which still have closer empirical connections, 
or if the discipline is under the influence of men with exceptionally 
well-developed taste. -- von Neumann (1947) in "The Neumann Compendium" 
edited by Brody & Vamos (1995)
========================================================================

-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --
From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz  Mon Oct 11 16:47:02 1999
Received: (from bin@localhost)
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id QAA18858; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:47:02 +1300
Received: from letterbox.cs.auckland.ac.nz (letterbox.cs.auckland.ac.nz [130.216.35.1])
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) with ESMTP id QAA18855
	  for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:46:58 +1300
Received: from [130.216.108.110] (clare.cs.auckland.ac.nz [130.216.108.110]) by letterbox.cs.auckland.ac.nz (8.8.6/8.8.6/cs-master) with ESMTP id QAA06088 for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:41:41 +1300 (sender clare@cs.auckland.ac.nz)
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: clare@staffpop.cs.auckland.ac.nz
Message-Id: <v04210101b426fd46f2c3@[130.216.108.110]>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 16:41:37 +1300
Subject: Re:Revised witchsight
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
From: clare@cs.auckland.ac.nz (Clare West)
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Precedence: bulk
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.
Reply-To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz

>I was typing up the revised Witchsight to send to Ross and what I have
>doesn't seem right. This is what I have:
>
>Witchsight now reads
>Experience Multiplier 200
>Base Chance: Automatic
>Effect: The Adept may see objects or entities which are invisible and a
>slight blue sheen around them.If the invisibility effect (excluding
>Walking Unseen) is of a higher Rank than the Witchsight, the object or
>entity may not be clearly identified or directly magically targeted. The
>Adept may also see in the dark as a Human does on a cloudy day, with an
>effective range of vision of 150ft under the open sky, and 75ft elsewhere"
>
>Two questions:
>1) Is that Base Chance correct for the Celestial Witchsight spell as well?
>2) The first sentence is not right. Can someone suggest a more correct
>wording?

Change the first sentence to:

The Adept may see objects or entities which are invisible with a 
slight blue sheen around them.

Or if you want to be less ambiguous try:

The Adept may see objects or entities which are invisible and they 
appear to have a slight blue sheen around them

And in the maybe too late department:

Let me see if I have it right:

1. The old rule was that the witchsight spell allowed you to see all 
invis/unseen people all the time - usually played with some kind of 
blue glow/sheen, but the talent had a base chance.

2. The new rule means that if the rank of invis is higher than the 
rank of the witchsight you now can't target them. BUT the talent no 
longer has a base chance and so elves (for example) can now see (to 
some extent) all invis/unseen things all the time.

This seems like a step backwards to me, making invisibility and 
unseen less powerful, as usually being seen at all (targetable or 
not) is enough to destroy the usefulness of the spells. I understand 
that the driving force behind these changes it a desire to reduce the 
rolling required when guards look for invisible things. Rolling is 
currently only required if the guards have the witchsight talent 
(elves and some colleges if I recall correctly) or the party is 
undetectable. Can witchsight now see undetectable entities?

Or am I missing the point or have I been playing a different game all 
these years?

I like the rank-vs-rank thing, but think that the results if your 
rank in witchsight is lower should be weaker:

If the invisibility effect (excluding Walking Unseen) is of a higher 
Rank than the Witchsight, the object or entity cannot be seen. If the 
object or entity is under the effect of a walking unseen of a higher 
rank than the witchsight then the object or entity may not be clearly 
identified or directly magically targeted.

This gives good reason to rank invisibilty, and some reason to rank 
Unseen. And excellent reason to rank Witchsight.

clare
--
Clare West, Rm 111, Ext 8266
clare@cs.auckland.ac.nz

-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --
From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz  Mon Oct 11 18:29:36 1999
Received: (from bin@localhost)
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id SAA18951; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 18:29:36 +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 SAA18948
	  for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 18:29:35 +1300
Received: from jimarona.ihug.co.nz (p43-max9.akl.ihug.co.nz [206.17.117.43])
	by smtp2.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id SAA31209
	for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 18:24:16 +1300
Subject: Re: Revised witchsight
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 18:25:18 +1300
Message-ID: <01bf13a9$017663c0$2b7511ce@jimarona.ihug.co.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0036_01BF1415.F86FABC0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3
From: "Jim Arona" <jimarona@ihug.co.nz>
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Precedence: bulk
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.
Reply-To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0036_01BF1415.F86FABC0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


-----Original Message-----
    From: Michael Woodhams <michaelw@peace.com>
    To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>
    Date: Monday, 11 October 1999 15:23
    Subject: Re: Revised witchsight
   =20
   =20
    Also, Illusionists have a related talent - enhanced vision. This =
lets them see Invis & spot (though not see through) illusions, at a Base =
Chance.=20
            To be consistent, the spot invis should go to rank =
dependance as per standard witchsight and E&E see invis (or whatever we =
called it). But then, do we change the spot illusions to being a Rank vs =
Rank thing as well?=20
           =20
            Solutions:=20
            1) Do nothing. No change.=20
           =20
            2) Change the see invis part only to the witchsight wording, =
keep base chance for spot illusion.=20
           =20
            3) Change the spot illusions bit as well so illusions of an =
equal or lower rank can be spotted automatically (like witchsight).=20
           =20
            4) Do something more complex, as per #3 , _and_ the Adepts's =
own illusions of an equal or lower rank can be seen through by the =
Adept. This is an enhancement to the vision talent (or the illusion =
college), but also means that high-rank illusions might be cast at a =
lower effective rank for seeing (only), giving the opposition more =
chance of spotting it and knowing that there is an illusionist around, =
letting the slimy gits be hoist on their own petard as they out-clever =
themselves again.
           =20
            Michael Woodhams wrote:
    I like #2 - it is the simplest, minimal change that keeps =
consistency with how Witchsight now works. The primary driver for the =
witchsight change was that when you had 10 guards looking for 6 =
invisible party members, the rolling for who saw what was horrible. We =
aren't ever likely to have lots of illusionists looking at lots of =
illusions, so this argument fails for the detect illusions case. (I'm =
not at all convinced it succeeded for the the invisibility case in the =
first place.) My second rated preference is for #1.=20
   =20
   =20
   =20
        What about the argument that the more highly ranked the Illusion =
the harder it should be to penetrate? As it stands, the Illusionist's =
ability to spot one is not modified in any way by the, presumably, more =
devious deception. In fact, if you are a complete bunny Illusionist, you =
have as much chance of spotting the illusions of a master as you have of =
penetrating your own.
   =20
        I favour door # 3.
   =20
    Jim.
   =20

------=_NextPart_000_0036_01BF1415.F86FABC0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>

<META content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Diso-8859-1 =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type><!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 =
transitional//en">
<META content=3D'"MSHTML 4.71.1712.3"' name=3DGENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 solid 2px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-LEFT: =
5px">
    <DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><B>-----Original =
Message-----</B><BR><B>From:=20
    </B>Michael Woodhams &lt;<A=20
    =
href=3D"mailto:michaelw@peace.com">michaelw@peace.com</A>&gt;<BR><B>To: =
</B><A=20
    href=3D"mailto:dq@dq.sf.org.nz">dq@dq.sf.org.nz</A> &lt;<A=20
    href=3D"mailto:dq@dq.sf.org.nz">dq@dq.sf.org.nz</A>&gt;<BR><B>Date:=20
    </B>Monday, 11 October 1999 15:23<BR><B>Subject: </B>Re: Revised=20
    witchsight<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
    <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE =3D CITE>
        <BLOCKQUOTE=20
        style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 solid 2px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
PADDING-LEFT: 5px"><FONT=20
            face=3DArial><FONT color=3D#0000ff><FONT size=3D-1>Also, =
Illusionists have=20
            a related talent - enhanced vision. This lets them see Invis =
&amp;=20
            spot (though not see through) illusions, at a Base=20
            Chance.</FONT></FONT></FONT>=20
            <P><FONT face=3DArial><FONT color=3D#0000ff><FONT =
size=3D-1>To be=20
            consistent, the spot invis should go to rank dependance as =
per=20
            standard witchsight and E&amp;E see invis (or whatever we =
called=20
            it). But then, do we change the spot illusions to being a =
Rank vs=20
            Rank thing as well?</FONT></FONT></FONT>=20
            <P><FONT face=3DArial><FONT color=3D#0000ff><FONT=20
            size=3D-1>Solutions:</FONT></FONT></FONT> <BR><FONT =
face=3DArial><FONT=20
            color=3D#0000ff><FONT size=3D-1>1) Do nothing. No=20
            change.</FONT></FONT></FONT>=20
            <P><FONT face=3DArial><FONT color=3D#0000ff><FONT =
size=3D-1>2) Change the=20
            see invis part only to the witchsight wording, keep base =
chance for=20
            spot illusion.</FONT></FONT></FONT>=20
            <P><FONT face=3DArial><FONT color=3D#0000ff><FONT =
size=3D-1>3) Change the=20
            spot illusions bit as well so illusions of an equal or lower =
rank=20
            can be spotted automatically (like =
witchsight).</FONT></FONT></FONT>=20
           =20
            <P><FONT face=3DArial><FONT color=3D#0000ff><FONT =
size=3D-1>4) Do=20
            something more complex, as per #3 , _and_ the Adepts's own =
illusions=20
            of an equal or lower rank can be seen through by the Adept. =
This is=20
            an enhancement to the vision talent (or the illusion =
college), but=20
            also means that high-rank illusions might be cast at a lower =

            effective rank for seeing (only), giving the opposition more =
chance=20
            of spotting it and knowing that there is an illusionist =
around,=20
            letting the slimy gits be hoist on their own petard as they=20
            out-clever themselves=20
    again.</FONT></FONT></FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
    <P>Michael Woodhams wrote:<BR>I like #2 - it is the simplest, =
minimal change=20
    that keeps consistency with how Witchsight now works. The primary =
driver for=20
    the witchsight change was that when you had 10 guards looking for 6=20
    invisible party members, the rolling for who saw what was horrible. =
We=20
    aren't ever likely to have lots of illusionists looking at lots of=20
    illusions, so this argument fails for the detect illusions case. =
(I'm not at=20
    all convinced it succeeded for the the invisibility case in the =
first=20
    place.) My second rated preference is for #1. &nbsp;
    <P>&nbsp;</P>
    <P><FONT color=3D#000000 size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <FONT =
size=3D3>What about the=20
    argument that the more highly ranked the Illusion the harder it =
should be to=20
    penetrate? As it stands, the Illusionist's ability to spot one is =
not=20
    modified in any way by the, presumably, more devious deception. In =
fact, if=20
    you are a complete bunny Illusionist, you have as much chance of =
spotting=20
    the illusions of a master as you have of penetrating your=20
    own.</FONT></FONT></P>
    <P><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3D"" size=3D2>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <FONT =
size=3D3>I=20
    favour door # 3.</FONT></FONT></P>
    <P><FONT color=3D#000000 face=3D"" size=3D2><FONT=20
size=3D3>Jim.</FONT></FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0036_01BF1415.F86FABC0--


-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --
From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz  Mon Oct 11 21:51:51 1999
Received: (from bin@localhost)
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id VAA19119; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 21:51:51 +1300
Received: from ecgserver3.ecg.com.au (aaexec.activ.net.au [203.76.29.49] (may be forged))
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) with ESMTP id VAA19116
	  for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 21:51:47 +1300
Received: by ECGSERVER3 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
	id <4VV1N58J>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 18:31:09 +1000
Message-ID: <D162619EA3C7D111B8F800805FC71AC24B5F4F@ECGSERVER3>
Subject: RE: Damage from double and triple effects... & SC% vs DF%
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 18:31:09 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Phil Judd <pjudd@ecg.com.au>
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Precedence: bulk
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.
Reply-To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz

posted by Phil Judd
skip down to the areas between lots of ********'s to see proposals and avoid
all of my analysis

1. Damage from double and triple effects.
The doubling and tripling of damage for spells has some strange effects, as
all spells have a random component to their damage when you double the
damage you end up doubling the random part (the d10) as well.
Consider also something like a lightning bolt (an extreme case)
the average damage from a doubled rank 0 lightening bolt (2x(d + 5)) is
around 21.
the average damage from a normal rank 20 lightning bolt (d + 13) is 18.5.
Lightening bolt (fireball is a little similar) in that it causes problems if
the suggested double = +1/Rank & tripling = +2/Rank as these spells normally
only do +1/3 ranks or +1/2 ranks.

Ironically all of these problems occurred in the original write up of the
E&E spell Enhancing Enchantment which added the rank of the Enhance onto the
effect of the spell (so a Rank 20 Enhance added 20 DM to a Rank 1 lightening
bolt)

****************************************************************************
****************************************************************************
*******************************
So a possible solution is the one we came up with for Enhancing Enchant. (by
the way this isn't my idea I last heard it from Dean)
Treat a double as a Rank 5 Enhance Enchant - the adept can add 5 ranks (or
their own rank of the spell if they are less than rank 5) onto one component
of the spell.
Treat a triple as a Rank 10 Enhance Enchant - the adept can add 10 ranks (or
their own rank of the spell if they are less than rank 10) onto one
component of the spell or add 5 ranks onto two components.
****************************************************************************
****************************************************************************
*******************************

When the spell cast is low ranks a double or triple will tend to almost
double the component desired. At high ranks it will have less effect. A
doubled rank 20 spell will only gain slightly less than 25% more damage and
a triple would give under 50% more damage.

I think this may have the desired effect.

2. SC% vs DF
Before I launch into the table comparing the two I would like to say that
prior to the combat play-test we reviewed the high-level parties Strike
Chance and Defence and found that not one of them had more defence than
strike chance except when evading. This was using defence spells and not
weapon spells. Pent, my agility based fighter,  has one more strike chance
as his defence whilst evading without his weapon spell or a magic javelin.
Anyway here is the table - if I miss anything out please post corrections

The value in brackets is the example of a person with
MD 20
AG 25
Rank 4 Kite shield
Rank 7 Hand & Half (weapon smithed to give +3%)
no Armour
Rank 11 greater
Rank 20 shadowform (ignore the Runeshield issue)
Amulet of Luck

Item								Strike
Chance							Defence
Evading
:Non Magical - typical
Base								30 - 65	(60)
0							10		(10)
Stat (MD / AG)						5 - 28	(16)
4 - 26	(25)					4 - 26	(25)
Ranks								0 - 40	(28)
0							0 - 40	(28)
Weapon smithing					0 - 15	(3)
0							0
Shield								0
0 - 30	(25)					0 - 30	(25)
Totals								35 - 136
(107)							4 - 56	(50)
14 - 96	(88)

:Magic
Amulet of Luck						0
0 - 2	(2)					0 - 2	(2)
Greater Enchantment				0 - 21	(12)
0							0
Defence Spell						0
0 - 42	(42)					0 - 42	(42)
Weapon spell						0 - 21
0							0
Totals								35 - 178
(119)							4 - 100	(94)
14 - 140	(132)

:Warrior
Bonuses							0 - 11
0 - 22						0 - 22
Totals								35 - 189
4 - 122						14 - 162

I've left out such things as amulet of diamonds, charging, multihex strike,
and a number of situational modifiers.
Often there are magic weapons with bonuses to strike on them but I have
ignored them - you could substitute them for the weapon spell.

Looking down the table there is a fair amount of symmetry to it.
Non Magic:
A Stat appears in both SC% and DF
Ranks have the same effect +4% (only when evading for DF)
The main difference is the difference between DF from  shield and Base SC
from a weapon.
Magic:
Ironically this nearly all balances out
A greater and a weapon spell (or magic weapon) balances out a defence spell.
Warrior:
Gives double the defence it give strike chance.

So what does this tell us?
Our example fighter without magic could hit herself 57% of the time or 19%
if evading.
With that Rank 20 defence spell and  Rank 11 greater she can hit herself 25%
of the time or not at all if evading.

Note that this is a fighter with a minimalist amount of magic supporting
them. If you try to attack magic supported fighters without it yourself...
well there is a saying about taking a knife to a gunfight.

At the top end the numbers are bigger but there is still a 67% chance of
hitting or 27% if the enemy is evading.

Unfortunately there is one big problem:
If you have higher initiative than the enemy you can effectively strike
every second pulse and always be evading when the enemy tries to strike you.
eg
pulse one: higher initiative person goes first and evades, enemy strikes and
misses (possible reposting)
pulse two: higher initiative person goes second thus is still evading when
the enemy strikes and misses (possible reposting), then after the enemy
strikes.
pulse three: higher initiative person goes first and evades, etc....

Actually this isn't two bad with the 67% / 27% example as the enemy gets two
shots at 27% (47% one will hit-still issues with repostes) before the 67%
return shot.
But it is very bad when the evading defence exceeds the enemies strike
chance.

It doesn't matter if defence is bigger than strike chance if all an evading
person can do is dodge.

So perhaps the issue is more related to initiative than to actual defence.
(there may still be a problem to repostes)
****************************************************************************
****************************************************************************
*******************************
I think that one of the engaged initiative options should be to hold your
action until after a designated opponent acts, effectively waiting for the
other person to make the first move. If the opponent who you are waiting for
to act first declares they are holding their action till after you act
neither of you do anything that pulse.
****************************************************************************
****************************************************************************
*******************************
What this does to the go first/Evade then go second/Attack option is allow
the slower person to go after the faster in the second pulse or prevent them
from attacking. It won't allow you to beat the faster person but you
certainly can frustrate and nullify their evade option.


pjudd@clear.net.nz
Phil



-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --
From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz  Mon Oct 11 22:43:18 1999
Received: (from bin@localhost)
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id WAA19175; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 22:43:18 +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 WAA19172
	  for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 22:43:17 +1300
Received: from paul (p27-max14.akl.ihug.co.nz [203.109.227.219])
	by smtp2.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id WAA14717
	for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 22:37:52 +1300
Message-ID: <000a01bf13cc$3f04d280$6564640a@paul>
Subject: Re: Damage from double and triple effects... & SC% vs DF%
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 22:37:31 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
From: "Paul Schmidt" <rodking@ihug.co.nz>
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Precedence: bulk
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.
Reply-To: "Paul Schmidt" <rodking@ihug.co.nz>, dq@dq.sf.org.nz


So a possible solution is the one we came up with for Enhancing Enchant. (by
>the way this isn't my idea I last heard it from Dean)
>Treat a double as a Rank 5 Enhance Enchant - the adept can add 5 ranks (or
>their own rank of the spell if they are less than rank 5) onto one
component
>of the spell.
>Treat a triple as a Rank 10 Enhance Enchant - the adept can add 10 ranks
(or
>their own rank of the spell if they are less than rank 10) onto one
>component of the spell or add 5 ranks onto two components.

I like this - fast and easy to administer as well as resolving the problem.
This would make a good meta-rule change.


Strike chance....
What people seem to miss in this argumnet is the strike chance for people is
still subject to a 55% penalty - the dice roll. That being said however, the
main problem is evading. A simple change to 10% +2%Rank would address most
of this (and only one Parry per pulse). Equally re-writing warrior to give a
2% flat attack bonus and no defence bonus would also help - it seems silly
to gain a defence bonus for rank with a weapon while evading and then gain
an additioal bonus in the same pulse for warrior rank with the weapon.

Cheers
Paul


-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --
From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz  Mon Oct 11 23:38:40 1999
Received: (from bin@localhost)
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id XAA19232; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 23:38:40 +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 XAA19229
	  for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 23:38:39 +1300
Received: from dworkin (p129-tnt5.akl.ihug.co.nz [203.109.194.129])
	by smtp2.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id XAA23915
	for <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 23:33:14 +1300
Message-ID: <002b01bf13d4$2ff5dde0$4301a8c0@dworkin.ihug.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Mind College 1.3 Preamble and Talents
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 23:34:23 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
From: "Dworkin" <dworkin@ihug.co.nz>
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Precedence: bulk
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.
Reply-To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz


Paul


>> This is kind of ridiculous.
>> If you go for this then several pulses between most encounters the party
>> receives a premonition that something dangerous is about to occur. This
>> pretty much destroys entire classes of encounters. I can't see
>> too many GM's
>> going for it. The present write up, vague as it is does what is
required -
>> it allows a GM to provide a clue via a character if they desire it.
>

Mandos

>What classes of encounters are destroyed? Could you provide some examples?
>


Examples I have seen.

#1    Somewhere in a truly dangerous place while sleeping peacefully
Isil Eth recieves a premonition to awake in time to give warning and be able
to act from pulse 1.

#2     Deep underwater Starflower recieves a premonition of impending doom.
Ignoring it and neglecting to tell the party everyone is caught unawares by
the school of hungry rippy-fish.

#3    On a magical island Liessa recieves a sense of danger and runs towards
the characters in the next room ordering them to stop whatever they were
even thinking of. Flamis does not burn the suspicously unlooted (and heavily
cursed) book.

In all three cases the mind mage did not recieve any real clue as to what
was wrong. The situations for each were quite different. The encounter in
each example was significantly altered by the subsequent actions of the
mage. A good time was had by all except mabye in #2 but that battle was site
of some of the worst luck I have ever seen.

William


-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --
From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz  Mon Oct 11 23:44:58 1999
Received: (from bin@localhost)
	  by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id XAA19251; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 23:44:58 +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 XAA19248
	  for <dq-pub@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 23:44:57 +1300
Received: from dworkin (p129-tnt5.akl.ihug.co.nz [203.109.194.129])
	by smtp2.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id XAA24822
	for <dq-pub@dq.sf.org.nz>; Mon, 11 Oct 1999 23:39:31 +1300
Message-ID: <003e01bf13d5$118edb80$4301a8c0@dworkin.ihug.co.nz>
Subject: Re: DQ Pub Test
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 23:40:40 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
From: "Dworkin" <dworkin@ihug.co.nz>
To: dq-pub@dq.sf.org.nz
Sender: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Errors-To: owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: dq-pub@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.
Reply-To: dq-pub@dq.sf.org.nz




>Hmmm... Quiet in here isn't it.
>
>Aqualina.
>


That's because it's a grim nasty world out there at the moment. Every
millenial doomsday device and it's slobbering retainer is rising up at the
moment. SOMEONE obviously didn't tell them about the calender changes. Most
sensible people are on another plane ready to watch the fireworks.

Liessa


-- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --