From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Mon Oct 23 07:29:28 2000 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by mae.sub.net.nz (8.9.3/NZSFI-20000705) id HAA18151; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 07:20:43 +1300 Received: from smtp4.ihug.co.nz (root@smtp4.ihug.co.nz [203.109.252.5]) by mae.sub.net.nz (8.9.3/NZSFI-20000705) with ESMTP id HAA18148 for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 07:20:41 +1300 Received: from work.ihug.co.nz (p99-tnt7.akl.ihug.co.nz [203.173.206.99]) by smtp4.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) with ESMTP id HAA03313 for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 07:20:40 +1300 X-Authentication-Warning: smtp4.ihug.co.nz: Host p99-tnt7.akl.ihug.co.nz [203.173.206.99] claimed to be work.ihug.co.nz Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.0.20001023071045.00b6e7a0@pop.ihug.co.nz> X-Sender: phaeton@pop.ihug.co.nz X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 07:24:04 +1300 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Subject: Re: Witchsight From: Keith Smith 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 request to dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz. To unsubscribe from all lists on this site, send a request to all-request@dq.sf.org.nz. Reply-To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz > > I had thought that the point of being invisible was that the character > > could use their stealth where it wouldn't normally be possible. To cross a > > narrow bridge under constant observation, for example. > >So? Why has the current rule changed that? You are >invis of high rank, you can attempt to sneak past >the guards. You would have to, anyway, I suppose, >but now, the guards PC multiplier becomes higher, >if they have Witchsight. If they don't, then they >may only be able to apply a 1 or 2 x PC roll. With >Witchsight, they may apply 4, 5 or even 6 x PC to >the Stealth of the Invis person(s). They do? Where in the current rules does it say that witchsight changes the PC multiplier of an observing entity? Or even that an observing entity using Witchsight, trying to see an invisible person needs to make a PC check anyway? As far as I can tell, from the way the Witchsight spell/talent is currently written, a witchsighted guard will always notice that someone invisible is going past because of that blue glow, amorphous or not. Keith (phaeton@ihug.co.nz) -- to unsubscribe see http://www.kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html -- From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Mon Oct 23 18:29:49 2000 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by mae.sub.net.nz (8.9.3/NZSFI-20000705) id SAA19743; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 18:28:58 +1300 Received: from smtp2.ihug.co.nz (root@smtp2.ihug.co.nz [203.109.252.8]) by mae.sub.net.nz (8.9.3/NZSFI-20000705) with ESMTP id SAA19740 for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 18:28:57 +1300 Received: from ihug.co.nz (p132-tnt2.akl.ihug.co.nz [203.173.216.132]) by smtp2.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) with ESMTP id SAA07073 for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 18:28:55 +1300 X-Authentication-Warning: smtp2.ihug.co.nz: Host p132-tnt2.akl.ihug.co.nz [203.173.216.132] claimed to be ihug.co.nz Message-ID: <39F4E445.EEBB417C@ihug.co.nz> Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 18:22:13 -0700 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Witchsight 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 request to dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz. To unsubscribe from all lists on this site, send a request to all-request@dq.sf.org.nz. Reply-To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz Keith Smith wrote: > > > > I had thought that the point of being invisible was that the character > > > could use their stealth where it wouldn't normally be possible. To cross a > > > narrow bridge under constant observation, for example. > > > >So? Why has the current rule changed that? You are > >invis of high rank, you can attempt to sneak past > >the guards. You would have to, anyway, I suppose, > >but now, the guards PC multiplier becomes higher, > >if they have Witchsight. If they don't, then they > >may only be able to apply a 1 or 2 x PC roll. With > >Witchsight, they may apply 4, 5 or even 6 x PC to > >the Stealth of the Invis person(s). > > They do? Where in the current rules does it say that witchsight changes > the PC multiplier of an observing entity? Or even that an observing entity > using Witchsight, trying to see an invisible person needs to make a PC > check anyway? As far as I can tell, from the way the Witchsight > spell/talent is currently written, a witchsighted guard will always notice > that someone invisible is going past because of that blue glow, amorphous > or not. No, the amorphous blue glow went years ago, Keith, as being stupid for words. The fact is that there is a basic sliding scale of PC multipliers, depending on the appropriateness of the senses to detect someone. It has always been reasonable to apply a reduction to the PC multiplier for Invis and Unseen characters. If you choose not to apply modifiers, simply because it's not explicitly stated, then you have failed to address what the rule is trying to achieve. -- to unsubscribe see http://www.kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html -- From owner-dq@dq.sf.org.nz Mon Oct 23 22:29:27 2000 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by mae.sub.net.nz (8.9.3/NZSFI-20000705) id WAA20163; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 22:26:52 +1300 Received: from smtp4.ihug.co.nz (root@smtp4.ihug.co.nz [203.109.252.5]) by mae.sub.net.nz (8.9.3/NZSFI-20000705) with ESMTP id WAA20160 for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 22:26:51 +1300 Received: from Debug (www-data@buttons-x86.ihug.co.nz [203.109.252.3]) by smtp4.ihug.co.nz (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) with SMTP id WAA08345 for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 22:26:46 +1300 Message-Id: <200010230926.WAA08345@smtp4.ihug.co.nz> X-Authentication-Warning: smtp4.ihug.co.nz: Host www-data@buttons-x86.ihug.co.nz [203.109.252.3] claimed to be Debug Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 09:26:47 GMT X-Mailer: Endymion MailMan Standard Edition v3.0.20 Subject: RE: Witchsight From: m_young@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 request to dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz. To unsubscribe from all lists on this site, send a request to all-request@dq.sf.org.nz. Reply-To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz > O, grow up, George. > > > Which small thing should we start with? Your > > > brain? > > > > Jim, comments like this are irrelevent and achieve nothing other than > > pissing people off. Please refrain from personal attacks. > > > O, grow up, George. > > It is good to see the true extent of your hypocrasy at work Jim. > > My thoughts go back to November 98 when we saw this little rant from Jim. > > > --- > > This is a community. A principle of living in communities is that we have > some basic and underlying concepts that determine our behaviour. One of the > most basic of these principles is that you are allowed to defend yourself, > unless there is an agency that is available to protect you. > Very few of you people offer public support when I'm attacked in this way, > although you expect it not to happen. I recieve private emails offering > support, but very few of you are actually prepared to do anything more than > take the apparent moral high ground, and excercise finger waving. > I do not start these personal attacks. I see no reason why I should have to > suffer them, in the face of a community to cowardly to offer public outrage > when they see such behaviour. I am allowed to defend myself and my > reputation, particularly if you won't do anything to offer such a defence > for me. > Jim. > --- > > Practice what you preach Jim. > > Mandos I'm with Mandos on this one. Hurling abuse at Jacqui does nothing other than make you feel better at someone elses expence. It upsets Jacqui for no good reason, pisses the rest of us off and does nothing to advance the discussion. With regards to your insulting behaviour it is clearly YOU that needs to grow up. As for the Witchsight discussion, I deleted it once I read it as it was clearly going nowhere useful. Michael Young -- to unsubscribe see http://www.kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --