From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Fri Nov 12 08:00:19 1999 Received: (from bin@localhost) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id HAA19321; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 07:53:20 +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 HAA19318 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 07:53:19 +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 HAA12641 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 07:51:33 +1300 (NZDT) Subject: Namer Draft Special Rituals Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 07:49:44 +1300 Message-ID: <000001bf2c75$854a2d50$2a7ad882@sci4.libraryserver.lbr.auckland.ac.nz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 From: "Michael Parkinson" 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 Dear all #1 Divination = close to what we play; better yet, what we want. #2 Expulsion = So we *can* get rid of a demon from an evil blackmage's "Call Master," or even a pc wiccan's "Summon Patron". Just tie him up for a few hours until he resists? ... Seriously, it is a suitable addition to the College. #3 Interregnum = Great idea, but needs adjustment & limits. I agree with the criticism that this is too powerful; but I like the idea, in moderation. Normally such a leave of grace should only last a finite, unrenewable time; yet, I also like the idea of a hero(ine) trying to hide forever, unsuccessfully, from Fate in a hermit's cell. I would prefer that the effects of Geas or Curses were not suspended (but perhaps ameliorated? -- like the good fairy did in Sleeping beauty, but more logically -- perhaps in a rank-dependant manner?) #4 Remove curse = I agree that "namers should be better at this." The write-up seems O.K., especially since Namers would not get the bonus with triangles etc, but in the medium-to-long-term the per-rank & GTN bonuses would overtake a comparable non-namer who uses a true-silver triangle. #5 Sealing = this suits the college as described in the introduction. Having seen the a version of the ritual in action, this corrects my major discomfort with that prototype ritual -- its area of effect. #6 True Form = Good idea, again in keeping with the college's theme. I do like the limitation; I'd be uncomfortable if the ritual undid *everything* that had a magical origin. And I see it as an undoing of magic, rather than a prohibition/prevention of magic to come; so I disagree with the suggestion that it "should also prevent the target from shifting form by any means for some period of time." [or presumably prevent a from being transformed??] both of which would be too powerful. Btw, we might have to tweak the wording, or else be more explicit. As written, I'd assume it would undo a Necro Rejuvenation ritual (which actually removes years from the target and hence reverses the true nature of a mortal) but would not undo a healer life-prolonging (which merely slows down the effects of ageing on a mortal -- i.e. doesn't effect the fundamental nature of being mortal). I actually like this, but do others agree? #7 True Speaking = I like this. It is an effect which we supposedly have in the game. And here is an alternative to the Rune of Truth. Frankly many namers might decide that, between ranking a Special 300EM ritual or hand-&-a-half, the sword wins every time. But personally I think the EM & limitations are about right. Admittedly many PC namers might not rank this ritual, for many reasons -- e.g., prefer the Rune-mage spell, prefer to torture, prefer the necro-interogation option, don't trust the GM, etc. Btw, concerning "And those slippery little Bards get to tell you lies and you'll never know anyway." I guess some things *do* have to be resolved the old-fashioned way. Concerning the criticism (Adam's, I think, to judge from the Arghs) "This can be a major adventure spoiler." It's a ritual; if the party gets the chance to perform a ritual on somebody who wants to lie to them, then this one is weak when compared, say, to Bind Will etc. the party can get a better effect from a couple of spells of other colleges. Besides the target *can* "take the fifth" unless it has been forced to speak; since it need not volunteer information. 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 ------------------------------------------------- Of all the sciences, astronomy is the one in which you can least experiment. ... Experimentation is a convenient is a tool, but large bodies of science have been developed without it. -- von Neumann (1955) in “The Neumann Compendium” edited by Brody & Vamos (1995) ====================================== -- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers -- From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Fri Nov 12 08:15:20 1999 Received: (from bin@localhost) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id IAA19360; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 08:07:02 +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 IAA19357 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 08:07:01 +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 IAA14917 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 08:05:15 +1300 (NZDT) Subject: Namer Draft: Special spells Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 08:03:26 +1300 Message-ID: <000101bf2c77$6ed2c3a0$2a7ad882@sci4.libraryserver.lbr.auckland.ac.nz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 From: "Michael Parkinson" 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 Dear Martin & all First of all: Congratulations on dumping "charm" -- Namers shouldn't charm. Instead they variously should (according to personality-type): ingratiate themselves with those they wish to charm or bribe; threaten them with a big sword; compel the suckers. Although mind mages *should* have the choice between charming & controlling (not to mention hypnotism, mind-reaming, etc and all the other shades of red which make up the mind-mage rainbow), namers shouldn't. In the introduction & appendices, I feel Martin has taken the right tack with Names: use them to reinforce what intrinsically is, or to force magic upon the target. S1 Bane = whilst this spell *would* reduce the danger of facing a rogue GM with an NPC of undisclosed college (perhaps even multi-colleged, or with a new pseudo-college), and whilst it *is* in keeping with the feel of the Namer college (now with flavour added!!), please weaken it. I prefer little/no increased area of effect, maybe an even shorter duration [5+5/R]. You could perhaps adopt the suggested "lower-all-magic-base-chances area of effect spell?" I suggest that the spell says, instead: At the time of casting, the adept specifies the one branch (Thaum. / Elemental / Ent. ) of magic which they are abjuring. This spell strengthens reality and distorts mana in an area 15 feet in diameter such that no practitioner of that branchwithin the area is able to draw mana for spells or rituals, or even access the minute amounts required for talents. The spell has no affect on the stored magics (such as invested items), nor on shaped items, nor casting the non-colleged "Curse" spell. A hex may not be under the effect of more than one Bane." Fortunately this may encourage adepts of different branch to work/conspire together. If the GM *has* gone Rogue & whipped up a new college, they must decide which of the three branches it fundamentally is. I assume we definitely want "racial" talents to be covered -- If so, add sentence that: "Living creatures count as Thamaumaturgies; Animates/Avatars are entities or elemental, according to source." Sorry, extra words, I know. S3 Compel Obedience = This is a good correction to the extant spell which was too powerful as written: upto Rank targets; long duration (1+1/Rk hours), non-concentration; totality of control; etc... that GMs would try to weasel out of its effects [one of the reasons why I gave up ranking it for my namer PC]. This is a nice balance. Weak for GTN, as it should be; but a spell to dread if an unfriendly namer has your ITN. Several, but seldom all targets. Concentration [therefore avoiding multiple castings; ??have I got that right?] -- you can't give the targets orders & go to sleep, as in the old version; or have a permanent cadre of servants obeying your every order [including "don't resist the spell I'm about to cast"] for only 2 or 3 casts per day. S4 Disjunction = I don't understand the criticism "a bit too much of a one-spell wonder. Too tough" I think it is cute, and I envisage lots of amusement from this one. s5 Dispel Magic = good balance. Beginner-to-middle Namers will still use dissipation. S6 Forbidding = again good balance. The barrier is visible to those it might effect. It only takes a MR to pass through it -- & even if you fail, you can still cast or fire through it; so it's less effective than a solid wall & does no damage to those of the specified GTN; it only effects one GTN per casting (so less effective against most guild parties; especially if they have a namer). Frankly I would prefer that it did NOT damage, even if used with an ITN S7 Mana Sense = interesting & balanced. It's effective, but still a combat or quasi-combat spell, given the short duration, and hence drama-enhancing, rather and adventure-breaking. S8 Scry shield = a spell so necessary, that I've invented several versions of it [all inferior, in design, to this]. S9 Spell shield = I&B, again. no criticism (but good call, about the anti-nesting aspect [difficult to word exactly, I suspect.] S11 True Seeing = A good effect, often used in epics & romances. It does *not* destroy illusions - counterspells do that! (besides, this spell is much weaker than the Rune spell which lasts hours, bigger range, etc). I'd suggest emphasising that the effect is stationary and proceeds from where the Namer was standing [BDE: from the point he smites with his staff]. Might I suggest a smaller area, but perhaps with the option, say: a radius of 5 feet (+5 per 2 ranks) or a straight path 10 feet; 10 feet (+10/rank) long. 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 ------------------------------------------------- Of all the sciences, astronomy is the one in which you can least experiment. ... Experimentation is a convenient is a tool, but large bodies of science have been developed without it. -- von Neumann (1955) in “The Neumann Compendium” edited by Brody & Vamos (1995) ====================================== -- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers -- From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Fri Nov 12 08:30:56 1999 Received: (from bin@localhost) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id IAA19399; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 08:20:24 +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 IAA19396 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 08:20:22 +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 IAA16998 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 08:18:37 +1300 (NZDT) Subject: RE: MR as Stat Check [was Re: November meeting minutes] Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 08:16:48 +1300 Message-ID: <000201bf2c79$4d210da0$2a7ad882@sci4.libraryserver.lbr.auckland.ac.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 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 From: "Michael Parkinson" 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 >What other stat checks are there in the > RULES not covered by a skill? MR is one. No it is NOT an *other* one -- it IS the exception. Martin's argument that if it's not a stat-check, what is it still applies. As far as I'm aware, the only argument *against* it being a stat check is that you usually only ever have a 1x multiplier. > If we are to go the whole hog, how about SC > (Strike Chance) > which has an MD component and Stun Recovery (and which stat would > you use out of WP and FT?). a) no stat check has more than one stat. b) by your argument there is no such thing as a skill check -- they are all stat checks since they have factors based on stats c) don't use stupid examples -- they weaken your cause. I prefer the reling as it was made; but I suspect I could be won around by sensible arguments; not drivel like this. -- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers -- From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Fri Nov 12 08:31:47 1999 Received: (from bin@localhost) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id IAA19390; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 08:17:54 +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 IAA19387 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 08:17:51 +1300 Message-ID: <382B15B3.EB662F03@peace.com> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 08:14:59 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Namer revision: draft available Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Martin Dickson 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 Mark Simpson wrote: > I have less of a problem with the spell detecting that an Illusion is there > (if we think that namers need such a spell?! - I personally don't) > , but why should the namer be able to "see through" the illusion as well. No, probably not. Revealing that one is present is sufficient. As for needing such a spell... as we have revised some of the Colleges we have removed some of the weaknesses/balances that were built in. Several people have stated that there is no other spell in the game that reveals illusions and suggested that this was a reason for _not_ having one. Read that again. There is no spell in the game that reveals illusions. To me, this is the primary defence for having such a spell. By revising the illusion college in the way we have certain weaknesses of illusion have been removed. This spell (suitably cut down I agree) will not destroy the illusion college. But it might add a balancing weakness. > I understand, although Andrew will be able to confirm this, that a major > problem with the old Illusion college was you could just "disbelieve" it > away. From my own (possibly idiosyncratic) point of view the major problems with the old illusionsit college were a) that it let you do absolutely anything and thus GMs let you do nothing, and b) when people tried to figure out how disbelieving tactile illusions worked, their heads exploded. (I could be mis-remembering the last part). :) > Oh course you could just argue that illusions do not "magically alter" > anything and that anything under/within/below an illusion has not been > "altered" by the spell at all > and therefore there is nothing to see with the spell. Illusion magic's primary focus is concealment and deception. > Also, how is this spell supposed to work with the mind spell molecular > re-arrangement? Wiccan skin change? Someone that has been turned to stone? > Do you see what the person or thing really is or was? No... and that's the best reason for suggesting that one can't see through illusions either. > Did anyone notice the last line "cursed or transformed entities and objects > become highly conspicuous". > Not much point making cursed items if whenever a party finds bunch of items > the party leader pipes up > " are any of these cursed in any way? - namer front and centre" - two pulse > delay - "the sword on the left > and the amulet, all the rest are ok." Yes... that is not what was intended, by I see I failed my English grammar skill roll. The intent is magically transformed entities and objects... including those altered by curses. It is not meant to cover all curses, backfires, evil eyes, or blighted crops. If "the sword on the left" is really an elephant in disguse the spell would reveal it... if it merely made the possessor's head explode it would not be revealed. I think its a bit of a spurious example anyway... if you have a Namer present then the DAs are going to fly before anyone touches one of those things anyway. > Suggested changes - I'd be tempted to make this spell into a ritual - the > one hour delay will curb some of the excesses - > that should stop is being the spell of first resort - "something doesnt > seem right here - namer - true see time!". Changes that will be made from the last round of discussion are: Duration dropped to 30 seconds (+10/Rank) Only Reveals magic of equal or lesser rank (using MA-10 for weird unrankable effects). Does not make illusions transparent -- just obvious English tightened up to remove percieved ability to see backfire curses. Regards, Martin -- _/_/ Peace Software New Zealand Ltd Email: Martin.Dickson@peace.com _/ Martin Dickson Fax : +64-9-373-0401 Analyst Phone: +64-9-373-0400 -- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers -- From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Fri Nov 12 09:00:13 1999 Received: (from bin@localhost) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id IAA19466; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 08:58:31 +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 IAA19463 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 08:58:30 +1300 Message-ID: <382B1F65.44C6CFBE@peace.com> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 08:56:21 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Namer Draft Special Rituals Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Michael Woodhams 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 Michael Parkinson wrote: > #7 True Speaking = I like this. It is an effect which we supposedly have in [...] > Besides > the target *can* "take the fifth" unless it has been forced to speak; since > it need not volunteer information. As I read the current writeup, this is not so - the person must answer any questions put to them. The 'not volunteer' means if they are asked 'Did you kill the elf princess?', the answer can be 'No' instead of 'I killed the person you mean, but they weren't really a princess.' -- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers -- From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Fri Nov 12 09:46:38 1999 Received: (from bin@localhost) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id JAA19543; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 09:35:58 +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 JAA19540 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 09:35:55 +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 JAA28194 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 09:34:06 +1300 (NZDT) Subject: RE: Namer Draft Special Rituals Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 09:32:18 +1300 Message-ID: <000201bf2c83$d907d3d0$2a7ad882@sci4.libraryserver.lbr.auckland.ac.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 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 From: "Michael Parkinson" 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 R7 True Speaking > > Besides > > the target *can* "take the fifth" unless it has been forced to > > speak; since it need not volunteer information. > > As I read the current writeup, this is not so - the person must answer any > questions put to them. The 'not volunteer' means if they are asked > 'Did you kill the elf princess?', the answer can be 'No' instead of 'I killed > the person you mean, but they weren't really a princess.' > Sorry. Yours is probably the correct reading of what was intended [Martin, could you please clarify?]. I thought the "to the best of their knowledge" referred to the truth, not to the attempt to answer. I'd be happiest if the target could deceive, but only if they use the *exact* truth. This magic is something which can now be done with a spell [the deservedly maligned "Compel obedience"] that lasts hours, not just the rest of the hour of the ritual. I think the Namer should be able to force the target to tell the truth. It *is* a ritual, and hence weaker than some of the alternatives from other colleges. Furthermore the target should realise that they are being forced to tell the truth -- especially if their intention was to lie, even a little white lie, or a half-truth [which usually includes all NPCs a party reacts with] and presumably they'll be unhappy about it. This is no hassle if the party was intending to mete out swift justice. Rather embarrassing of the target is a comparatively honest local resident or personage. In practice I suspect that parties will find it much easier to use telepathy, etc. But there *is* a place in our game for this ritual; & this is the college where it should be. -- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers -- From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Fri Nov 12 09:47:43 1999 Received: (from bin@localhost) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id JAA19534; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 09:34:52 +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 JAA19531 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 09:34:50 +1300 Message-ID: <382B27BD.2746878C@peace.com> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 09:31:57 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Comments on Namer Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Martin Dickson 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 Hi Jim, Jim Arona wrote: > Bane...I don't like this spell... I don't mind if it reduces cast chances. > That sort of thing gives value to high > rank, after all. Bane will definitely be changing. BC reduction is a good idea... FT increase was another suggestion... Rank reduction a third, etc. > Compelling Obedience... I could wish that the English were a little tidied > up.... I understand that you don't want it to be > able to deliver commands contrary to nature and common sense. Yes. Well... not necessarily common sense... the person being commanded may have precious little of that. :) > I suggest that this requires the active judgment of the DM, Always. > and that in any event, the number of words used in such a spell should be no > more than 2. That wasn't explicitly intended -- and tends to lead to the "Infocom game" where you try to find the exact 2 word combination that fits the situation and descibes exactly what you want... "Defenestrate yourself"... rather than "Jump out the window". I'd rather rely on GM common sense. > I suggest this, so that a > character might refuse to do something unpleasant, but not necessarily > abhorrent or directly suicidal. In addition, it offers the character an > opportunity for noble martyrdom. Noble matyrdom seems a good cause. > Disjunction...I don't mind this, too much, EXCEPT...I don't believe it > should work on potions. At 2 FT to stop one potion... I don't think anyone would use it... I mean they might, but I don't think it is too powerful. > Forbidding...I've never liked denial magic, really, and this is no > exception. My biggest problem with it is that it's treated like a wall, and > yet, the description behaves to me like an area... Well, that's probably just poor writing on my part. It it meant to be a wall... and there is a good argument against it having a ring form... I honestly didn't think at the point I wrote it that it could be used to trap someone -- I was thinking of a circle of protection and a blue-crackly wall effect of Forbidding out of the Thomas Covenant books. > Expulsion...I would never allow this ritual to work as an escape mechanism. > For that reason, I will never allow this ritual to work in this fashion in > my game. The only adventure that becomes threatening to the players are ones > that are on plane, if they bring a Namer along. I tend to agree about the "get out of jail" aspect... but I think that perhaps at an hour ritual its not going to be used in life threatening circumstances... it'll take 6-7 hours to send the whole party home. > Sealing...I've seen this effect in play, with Sabrina. It's abominable, and > I'm not prepared to have more player characters with this ability. There appear to be two parts to this objection. The first is Sabrina's ritual which has the advantages of being a) enormous -- I mean really, really big... miles in diameter. b) permanent... once sealed, its sealed forever, c) potentially covering multiple planes. This ritual is a much, much, cut down form. The second objection is a deeper philosophical one, and I don't see that debating will lead to us agreeing... however, I will suggest this: Whatever plane or place that Fire Elementals come from in your world, "Plane of Origin?" is one of the standard DA questions. Sealing against the hypothetical Plane of Fire may well protect against Fire Elementals in my world.. but it need not do so in yours. But a Namer could presumably get Plane of Origin on a Fire Elemental in your world and then seal an area against them... the same sealing may not work in my world. Regards, Martin -- _/_/ Peace Software New Zealand Ltd Email: Martin.Dickson@peace.com _/ Martin Dickson Fax : +64-9-373-0401 Analyst Phone: +64-9-373-0400 -- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers -- From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Fri Nov 12 10:45:24 1999 Received: (from bin@localhost) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id KAA19642; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 10:33:35 +1300 Received: from fclaklmr03.fcl.co.nz (mail.fcl.co.nz [203.98.14.148]) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) with ESMTP id KAA19639 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 10:33:33 +1300 Received: from falaklex00.falum.co.nz - 10.8.1.28 by fclaklmr03.fcl.co.nz with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1774.114.11); Fri, 12 Nov 1999 10:30:56 +1300 Received: by FALAKLEX00 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 10:35:29 +1300 Message-ID: <311B3C3DD32FD311B33900805F770A725FB4A1@FALAKLEX00> Subject: Namers & Conversion Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 10:35:28 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01BF2C8C.AC0389E0" From: "Andrew Withy (FAL AKL)" 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_01BF2C8C.AC0389E0 Content-Type: text/plain This may be too soon to raise this issue, but how are we going to handle conversion for exisitng Namers. I suggest the following: 1) All ep on specials to be respent. That on rituals -> rituals, spells -> spells to avoid the time thing. 2) Either the Namer gets access to the new spells, or they can keep the two or three other colleges they have. Its (2) that I am "concerned" about - because Namers have had 3 (?) spells, they have often been given lots of other colleges - Mind/E&E being the most common - I think 3-5 high namers have significant college chunks. On the other hand, sometimes someone has picked up one out-of-college spell (like so many other PCs), and should get to keep them. Maybe its not a problem. Andrew ------_=_NextPart_001_01BF2C8C.AC0389E0 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Namers & Conversion

This may be too soon to raise this = issue, but how are we going to handle conversion for exisitng Namers. I = suggest the following:

1) All ep on specials to be respent. = That on rituals -> rituals, spells -> spells to avoid the time = thing.
2) Either the Namer gets access to = the new spells, or they can keep the two or three other colleges they = have.

Its (2) that I am = "concerned" about - because Namers have had 3 (?) spells, = they have often been given lots of other colleges - Mind/E&E being = the most common - I think 3-5 high namers have significant college = chunks. On the other hand, sometimes someone has picked up one = out-of-college spell (like so many other PCs), and should get to keep = them.

Maybe its not a problem.

Andrew

------_=_NextPart_001_01BF2C8C.AC0389E0-- -- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers -- From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Fri Nov 12 11:00:36 1999 Received: (from bin@localhost) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id KAA19669; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 10:53:10 +1300 Received: from qedweb.qed.co.nz ([203.97.23.140] (may be forged)) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) with ESMTP id KAA19666 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 10:53:08 +1300 Received: by QEDWEB with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 10:50:01 +1300 Message-ID: Subject: RE: Comments on Namer Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 10:50:00 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) Content-Type: text/plain From: Stephen Martin 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 The other big risk with this is that while the Namer is sending everyone home, the party is split for a number of hours and vulnerable. You would have to be pretty sure of your safety, particularly for the Namer who is last to go. I think that it's a ritual which could lend a certain comfort factor when going into unknown planes but in practical escape terms is not very effective. And as for getting out of jail - everyone knows that the only sure way to imprison a mage is in an iron cage :). A benefit of it is that the GM does not necessarily have to provide a means of returning home - "our astrology readings say that if you don't take a powerful namer you will not return...". > -----Original Message----- > From: Martin Dickson [SMTP:martind@peace.com] > Sent: Friday, November 12, 1999 9:32 AM > > Jim Arona wrote: > > Expulsion...I would never allow this ritual to work as an escape > mechanism. > > For that reason, I will never allow this ritual to work in this fashion > in > > my game. The only adventure that becomes threatening to the players are > ones > > that are on plane, if they bring a Namer along. > > I tend to agree about the "get out of jail" aspect... but I think that > perhaps > at an hour ritual its not going to be used in life threatening > circumstances... > it'll take 6-7 hours to send the whole party home. > > -- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers -- From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Fri Nov 12 11:15:26 1999 Received: (from bin@localhost) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id LAA19693; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 11:01:10 +1300 Received: from qedweb.qed.co.nz ([203.97.23.140] (may be forged)) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) with ESMTP id LAA19689 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 11:01:09 +1300 Received: by QEDWEB with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 10:58:04 +1300 Message-ID: Subject: RE: Namers & Conversion Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 10:58:03 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) Content-Type: text/plain From: Stephen Martin 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 One other conversion point is ranks in ITNs, with the new revision it only takes half as long to rank ITNs (Months to Fortnights). Simplest conversion is to give them an appropriate rank for the time spent. E.g. Rk 5 ITN (25 Months) => Rk 10 (110 Weeks). > -----Original Message----- > From: Andrew Withy (FAL AKL) [SMTP:AndrewW@falum.co.nz] > Sent: Friday, November 12, 1999 10:35 AM > To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz > Subject: Namers & Conversion > > This may be too soon to raise this issue, but how are we going to handle > conversion for exisitng Namers. I suggest the following: > > 1) All ep on specials to be respent. That on rituals -> rituals, spells -> > spells to avoid the time thing. > 2) Either the Namer gets access to the new spells, or they can keep the > two or three other colleges they have. > > Its (2) that I am "concerned" about - because Namers have had 3 (?) > spells, they have often been given lots of other colleges - Mind/E&E being > the most common - I think 3-5 high namers have significant college chunks. > On the other hand, sometimes someone has picked up one out-of-college > spell (like so many other PCs), and should get to keep them. > > Maybe its not a problem. > > Andrew > -- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers -- From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Fri Nov 12 11:31:50 1999 Received: (from bin@localhost) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id LAA19732; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 11:22:01 +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 LAA19729 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 11:21:59 +1300 Message-ID: <382B4103.1F232249@peace.com> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 11:19:47 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Namers & Conversion Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Michael Woodhams 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 Stephen Martin wrote: > One other conversion point is ranks in ITNs, with the new revision it only > takes half as long to rank ITNs (Months to Fortnights). Simplest conversion > is to give them an appropriate rank for the time spent. > E.g. Rk 5 ITN (25 Months) => Rk 10 (110 Weeks). If the time per rank is halved, then the equivalent-time rank goes up by 40%, not by 100% as in your example. Rank 5 ITN is only 15 months, not 25. Rk 5 ITN (15 months) => Rk 7 (56 weeks). Michael W. -- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers -- From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Fri Nov 12 11:41:32 1999 Received: (from bin@localhost) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id LAA19741; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 11:28:55 +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 LAA19738 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 11:28:54 +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 LAA17986 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 11:27:03 +1300 (NZDT) Subject: RE: Comments on Namer Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 11:28:21 +1300 Message-ID: <000201bf2c94$0f5c4370$2a7ad882@sci4.libraryserver.lbr.auckland.ac.nz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 From: "Michael Parkinson" 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 thoroughly endorse Stephen's comments on the Safety issue. I have been in a medium party that was rune-mage banished [using the spell]. It took us a session & a half to get to the guild. AND the GM chose not to punish us for "escaping" his world. > I think that it's a ritual which could lend a certain comfort factor when > going into unknown planes but in practical escape terms is not very > effective. Agreed. There are lots of unpleasant places on Alusia. Therefore a party will normally only use this Ritual to escape a plane with the connivance of the GM; or in the most extreme circumstances -- and if thing are suddenly that dire, will the party really have the necessary 7 hours, or whatever, in which to perform as the rituals. Even using banishment spells (Namer if appropriate; or Runemage), parties can be split up if the GM want it to happen; appear in dangerous or immanently lethal places/situations, .... as I'm sure is obvious. 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 ------------------------------------------------- “But you cant prove a negative.” Its a great line. In one pithy utterance it declares that we cannot absolutely certify the nonexistence of elves or of Elvis. Mathematicians know better. -- William Dunham, The Mathematical Universe, 1994. ====================================== -- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers -- From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Fri Nov 12 12:00:22 1999 Received: (from bin@localhost) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id LAA19797; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 11:54:25 +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 LAA19794 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 11:54:24 +1300 Message-ID: <382B486F.7B566AE@peace.com> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 11:51:27 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Namers & Conversion Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Martin Dickson 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 Stephen Martin wrote: > One other conversion point is ranks in ITNs, with the new revision it only > takes half as long to rank ITNs (Months to Fortnights). Fortnight? 1.2 Benefits Ranking Names Unlike the Adepts of other Colleges, Namers may gain Rank with True Names: Both Generic and Individual names take 1 week x Rank to be achieved. (Not to say this won't change through discussion but the current proposal is weeks...) Rank 10 current (55 months/238 weeks) goes to Rank 20 (210 weeks) with some remainder. Current +50% (10 x 5) goes to +40% (20 x 2). Rank 5 (15 months/65 weeks) goes to either Rank 11 (66 weeks) with a top-up of 1 week required, or Rank 10 with remainder Current +25% (5 x 5) goes to either 22% or 20%. Cheers, Martin > Simplest conversion > is to give them an appropriate rank for the time spent. > E.g. Rk 5 ITN (25 Months) => Rk 10 (110 Weeks). > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Andrew Withy (FAL AKL) [SMTP:AndrewW@falum.co.nz] > > Sent: Friday, November 12, 1999 10:35 AM > > To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz > > Subject: Namers & Conversion > > > > This may be too soon to raise this issue, but how are we going to handle > > conversion for exisitng Namers. I suggest the following: > > > > 1) All ep on specials to be respent. That on rituals -> rituals, spells -> > > spells to avoid the time thing. > > 2) Either the Namer gets access to the new spells, or they can keep the > > two or three other colleges they have. > > > > Its (2) that I am "concerned" about - because Namers have had 3 (?) > > spells, they have often been given lots of other colleges - Mind/E&E being > > the most common - I think 3-5 high namers have significant college chunks. > > On the other hand, sometimes someone has picked up one out-of-college > > spell (like so many other PCs), and should get to keep them. > > > > Maybe its not a problem. > > > > Andrew > > > > -- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers -- -- _/_/ Peace Software New Zealand Ltd Email: Martin.Dickson@peace.com _/ Martin Dickson Fax : +64-9-373-0401 Analyst Phone: +64-9-373-0400 -- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers -- From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Fri Nov 12 12:31:21 1999 Received: (from bin@localhost) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id MAA19842; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 12:18:30 +1300 Received: from qedweb.qed.co.nz ([203.97.23.140] (may be forged)) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) with ESMTP id MAA19839 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 12:18:26 +1300 Received: by QEDWEB with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 12:15:22 +1300 Message-ID: Subject: RE: Namers & Conversion Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 12:15:21 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) Content-Type: text/plain From: Stephen Martin 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 Ooops, twice wrong in making my point. However I think the intention was understood even if my brain to keyboard interface has a few glitches... Thank you Michael & Martin for pointing out my failings :) Stephen. > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Martin [SMTP:stephenm@qed.co.nz] > Sent: Friday, November 12, 1999 10:58 AM > To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz > Subject: RE: Namers & Conversion > > One other conversion point is ranks in ITNs, with the new revision it only > takes half as long to rank ITNs (Months to [Stephen] Weeks ). Simplest > conversion > is to give them an appropriate rank for the time spent. > E.g. Rk 5 ITN (15 Months) => Rk 10/11 > > -- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers -- From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Fri Nov 12 13:30:39 1999 Received: (from bin@localhost) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id NAA19977; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 13:24:22 +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 NAA19974 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 13:24:21 +1300 Message-ID: <382B5DAD.2CF436D1@peace.com> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 13:22:06 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Namers & Conversion Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Michael Woodhams 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 Martin Dickson wrote: > Rank 10 current (55 months/238 weeks) goes to Rank 20 (210 weeks) with some > remainder. > > Current +50% (10 x 5) goes to +40% (20 x 2). > > Rank 5 (15 months/65 weeks) goes to either Rank 11 (66 weeks) with a top-up of 1 > week required, or Rank 10 with remainder > > Current +25% (5 x 5) goes to either 22% or 20%. I suggest converted rank = twice current rank. This is close enough and much simpler. -- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers -- From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Fri Nov 12 14:00:45 1999 Received: (from bin@localhost) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id NAA20009; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 13:47:55 +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 NAA20006 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 13:47:52 +1300 Message-ID: <382B6303.10719562@peace.com> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 13:44:51 +1300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Namer Draft Special Rituals Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Martin Dickson 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 Michael Parkinson wrote: > R7 True Speaking > > > > Besides > > > the target *can* "take the fifth" unless it has been forced to > > > speak; since it need not volunteer information. > > > > As I read the current writeup, this is not so - the person must answer any > > questions put to them. The 'not volunteer' means if they are asked > > 'Did you kill the elf princess?', the answer can be 'No' instead of 'I > killed > > the person you mean, but they weren't really a princess.' > > > > Sorry. Yours is probably the correct reading of what was intended [Martin, > could you please clarify?]. I thought the "to the best of their knowledge" > referred to the truth, not to the attempt to answer. I'd be happiest if the > target could deceive, but only if they use the *exact* truth. The more writing I do, the more I realise that English is my second language... unfortunately my mother tongue appears to be gibberish. The intent was: The target must answer -- if they do not know the answer, that is still an answer. The target may not "take the fifth" The target need only answer the question as put to them -- this is not a compulsion to co-operate. The example of the Elf princess given above is a good example of this. The target answered "No" (ie. must answer, cannot _not_ answer) and told the exact truth, and did not volunteer additional information (and thus lied by ommision). If the target is co-operative (and the ritual is being used to verify what they say) then of course they may choose to volunteer extra information. However, presuming that the target is not co-operating they may be considered -- by analogy with a courtroom -- to be a hostile witness who cannot "take the fifth", and who will not perjure themself. Cheers, Martin -- _/_/ Peace Software New Zealand Ltd Email: Martin.Dickson@peace.com _/ Martin Dickson Fax : +64-9-373-0401 Analyst Phone: +64-9-373-0400 -- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers -- From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Fri Nov 12 23:15:40 1999 Received: (from bin@localhost) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id XAA20594; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 23:10:12 +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 XAA20591 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 23:10:10 +1300 Received: from jimarona.ihug.co.nz (p256-tnt7.akl.ihug.co.nz [203.109.205.16]) by smtp1.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id XAA03347 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 23:08:03 +1300 Subject: Re: Namers & Conversion Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 23:06:55 +1300 Message-ID: <01bf2cf5$a63712a0$10cd6dcb@jimarona.ihug.co.nz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_002B_01BF2D62.9D305AA0" 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" 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_002B_01BF2D62.9D305AA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 2) Either the Namer gets access to the new spells, or they can keep = the two or three other colleges they have.=20 =20 Its (2) that I am "concerned" about - because Namers have had 3 (?) = spells, they have often been given lots of other colleges - Mind/E&E = being the most common - I think 3-5 high namers have significant college = chunks. On the other hand, sometimes someone has picked up one = out-of-college spell (like so many other PCs), and should get to keep = them. =20 =20 =20 I don't think the rewrite of the college has any bearing on PC = Namers who have gained access to out of college magic, including the = characters you mean, Silverfoam and Engleton. I awarded those abilities = carefully and with some thought to the balance and level of the = characters. Even with a revamped college, those characters, who are, = after all, primary spell casters do not have the range of magic to = fulfill that role. =20 On the other hand, I'm the DM who awarded them those abilities, = and I'd say that, I suppose. =20 Nevertheless, I've tracked the progress of these characters, and = see little that is unbalancing in it. =20 Jim. =20 =20 =20 ------=_NextPart_000_002B_01BF2D62.9D305AA0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Namers & Conversion

2) Either the Namer gets access to = the new=20 spells, or they can keep the two or three other colleges they = have.=20

Its (2) that I am = "concerned" about -=20 because Namers have had 3 (?) spells, they have often been given = lots of=20 other colleges - Mind/E&E being the most common - I think 3-5 = high=20 namers have significant college chunks. On the other hand, sometimes = someone=20 has picked up one out-of-college spell (like so many other PCs), and = should=20 get to keep them.

 

    I don't=20 think the rewrite of the college has any bearing on PC Namers who = have=20 gained access to out of college magic, including the characters you = mean,=20 Silverfoam and Engleton. I awarded those abilities carefully and = with some=20 thought to the balance and level of the characters. Even with a = revamped=20 college, those characters, who are, after all, primary spell casters = do not=20 have the range of magic to fulfill that role.

    On the=20 other hand, I'm the DM who awarded them those abilities, and I'd say = that, I=20 suppose.

   =20 Nevertheless, I've tracked the progress of these characters, and see = little=20 that is unbalancing in it.

Jim.

 

------=_NextPart_000_002B_01BF2D62.9D305AA0-- -- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers -- From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Fri Nov 12 23:30:42 1999 Received: (from bin@localhost) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id XAA20638; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 23:26:04 +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 XAA20635 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 23:26:03 +1300 Received: from jimarona.ihug.co.nz (p256-tnt7.akl.ihug.co.nz [203.109.205.16]) by smtp1.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id XAA04659 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 23:23:56 +1300 Subject: Re: Comments on Namer Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 23:22:47 +1300 Message-ID: <01bf2cf7$dd809900$10cd6dcb@jimarona.ihug.co.nz> 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 4.71.1712.3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 From: "Jim Arona" 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 have been in a medium party that was rune-mage banished [using the spell]. >It took us a session & a half to get to the guild. AND the GM chose not to >punish us for "escaping" his world. > >> I think that it's a ritual which could lend a certain comfort factor when >> going into unknown planes but in practical escape terms is not very >> effective. > >Agreed. There are lots of unpleasant places on Alusia. Therefore a party >will normally only use this Ritual to escape a plane with the connivance of >the GM; or in the most extreme circumstances -- and if thing are suddenly >that dire, will the party really have the necessary 7 hours, or whatever, in >which to perform as the rituals. Even using banishment spells (Namer if >appropriate; or Runemage), parties can be split up if the GM want it to >happen; appear in dangerous or immanently lethal places/situations, .... as >I'm sure is obvious. > They are obvious. And, as derailing to a story as this ritual would be. You have raised no point that convinces me that this ritual is one that is useful to a developing campaign. Jim. -- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers -- From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Fri Nov 12 23:32:00 1999 Received: (from bin@localhost) by mail.sf.org.nz (8.8.6/NZSFI-19980830) id XAA20625; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 23:19:31 +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 XAA20622 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 23:19:30 +1300 Received: from jimarona.ihug.co.nz (p256-tnt7.akl.ihug.co.nz [203.109.205.16]) by smtp1.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) with SMTP id XAA04169 for ; Fri, 12 Nov 1999 23:17:23 +1300 Subject: Re: Comments on Namer Date: Fri, 12 Nov 1999 23:16:16 +1300 Message-ID: <01bf2cf6$f4d46380$10cd6dcb@jimarona.ihug.co.nz> 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 4.71.1712.3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 From: "Jim Arona" 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 Stephen Marting wrote: >The other big risk with this is that while the Namer is sending everyone >home, the party is split for a number of hours and vulnerable. You would >have to be pretty sure of your safety, particularly for the Namer who is >last to go. >I think that it's a ritual which could lend a certain comfort factor when >going into unknown planes but in practical escape terms is not very >effective. >And as for getting out of jail - everyone knows that the only sure way to >imprison a mage is in an iron cage :). >A benefit of it is that the GM does not necessarily have to provide a means >of returning home - "our astrology readings say that if you don't take a >powerful namer you will not return...". > I'm not interested in providing players with comfort factors. If they need them, let them bring security blankets. And explain it to the other players. All that has to happen is for one character to get back, and have the rest summoned by someone like Turf, or a friendly Summoner. No, I'm not prepared to see this ritual in my game. Alusia is too story-polluted for me to run a game there, probably ever. I'm not going to have a story ruined by players making use of such a device to avoid consequences. And as for providing a means of returning home, I have no problem with creating one, if I feel there is a need in the story. Jim. -- see unsubscribe instructions in message headers --