What is the current guild tax rate?

clare


-- to unsubscribe see http://www kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --

Hi All,

The 2.02 draft of Namer is (finally) available at my DragonQuest Vault
site:

http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~apollyon/dq_index.html

Thank you all for the feedback you provided on the previous draft,  the
major changes in this revision are listed at the bottom of the College,
the rest of the mods were wording changes for grammar and clarity, etc.

There is still one small section to fix -- the language benefit for
Namers -- although with the changes to the Language skill and the
dropping of similar benefits for Philosophers, it may be more
appropriate to lose the benefit altogether.  What do other people think?

Also available is a slightly altered draft of the Counterspells
document.  Neither True Names nor Auras has yet been altered.

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




-- to unsubscribe see http://www kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --

>There is still one small section to fix -- the language benefit for
>Namers -- although with the changes to the Language skill and the
>dropping of similar benefits for Philosophers, it may be more
>appropriate to lose the benefit altogether.  What do other people think?

When the new Language document came out the following was added to 
Namer.  'The familiarity with Names allows Namers to Rank any Language in 
the Protonic Language Group as if they know a language in that group at 
Rank 5'.

May as well stick with that.

Keith
(phaeton@ihug.co.nz)



-- to unsubscribe see http://www kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --

Thanks Keith,

That looks fine.  I will amend section 1.2 Benefits to read:

"Due to their knowledge of True Names, Namers may Rank any Language in the
Protonic Language Group as if they already know another language in that
group at Rank 5.  (See Languages xx.xx)".

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




-- to unsubscribe see http://www kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --

The first glitch I ran into is the True seeing spell. It would appear to
depower the illusion college to a great extent. I believe the spell should
be self only as the ability to cast it on the whole party detracts somewhat
from the range limitations.

Mandos
/



-- to unsubscribe see http://www kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --

-1) A volunteer is nominated to take the minutes.

0) Adventures Going Out
??

1) Campaign Voting Issues
- New Chair and Second for next session. 
  NB Currently Stephen is Chair and we have no second, someone else will
need to chair the guild meeting too.

2) Rules Voting Issues
None?

3) Other Campaign Issues
- Dark Circle, Seagate, and Guild Status and Future Direction.

4) Other Rules Issues  (probably re-convened in a Cafe somwhere so as not to
tie up Michael P any longer)
- Witchsight/Invis Discussion

NB Progress Reports should be supplied by Email prior to Sunday.

Cheers, Stephen.




-- to unsubscribe see http://www kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --

If the True Seeing spell does similar things to the Rune College Rune of
Truth - no problem.

If it makes the Illusion college transparent to the target of the spell, we
simply kill all the Namers - no problem.

If you won't allow us to wipe out 20-30 PCs, we introduce a spell that lets
you ignore 80% of any other college, starting with Namer - we share the
problem.

Seriously, the ability to detect that something is an illusion (DA or true
seeing), coupled with having the illusion CSs ranked, means that Namers can
deal with most illusions without worrying, and far better than anyone else
except an Illusionist. Getting to see through them is too much - we recently
seemed to confirm that Illusionists didn't get to see through their *own*
illusions. I read "translucent" for transparent when describing how the
illusion changed for the viewer.

Andrew

-----Original Message-----
From: Mandos Mitchinson [mailto:mandos@nz.asiaonline.net]
Sent: Friday, 1 December 2000 2:20 p.m.
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Subject: Re: [dq] New draft of Namer College available


The first glitch I ran into is the True seeing spell. It would appear to
depower the illusion college to a great extent. I believe the spell should
be self only as the ability to cast it on the whole party detracts somewhat
from the range limitations.

Mandos
/



-- to unsubscribe see http://www kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --


-- to unsubscribe see http://www kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --

Hi Mandos,

The True Seeing spell was the subject of considerable discussion last version
and has been substantially depowered from its initial appearance.

The spell is an area effect spell rather than cast upon either the Namer or
other people so that it is static -- making it mobile by casting on Self would
give the Namer a chance to cover a far greater area.  So, for a short time (1/2
a minute up to 4 minutes at Rank 20) and only within a fairly tight and static
area illusions, invisible things and transformed things are revealed (providing
the magic is of equal or lesser rank).

Another reason for not making the spell Self is to allow the GM to describe
what is seen to the entire party rather than having the more akward situation
of having to describe it to only the Namer.

Cheers,
Martin

---

Mandos Mitchinson wrote:

> The first glitch I ran into is the True seeing spell. It would appear to
> depower the illusion college to a great extent. I believe the spell should
> be self only as the ability to cast it on the whole party detracts somewhat
> from the range limitations.
>
> Mandos
> /
>
> -- to unsubscribe see http://www kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --

--

 _/_/  Peace Software New Zealand Ltd   Email: Martin.Dickson@peace.com
_/     Martin Dickson                   Fax  : +64-9-373-0401
       Analyst                          Phone: +64-9-373-0400




-- to unsubscribe see http://www kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --

"Andrew Withy (DSL AK)" wrote:

> I read "translucent" for transparent when describing how the
> illusion changed for the viewer.

I think that changing "slightly transparent" to "translucent" would be a fair
alteration -- the intention is _not_ to allow the Namer to see through the
Illusion, only to detect that it is there.

--

 _/_/  Peace Software New Zealand Ltd   Email: Martin.Dickson@peace.com
_/     Martin Dickson                   Fax  : +64-9-373-0401
       Analyst                          Phone: +64-9-373-0400




-- to unsubscribe see http://www kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --

> Hi Mandos,
>
> The True Seeing spell was the subject of considerable discussion
> last version
> and has been substantially depowered from its initial appearance.
>
> The spell is an area effect spell rather than cast upon either
> the Namer or
> other people so that it is static -- making it mobile by casting
> on Self would
> give the Namer a chance to cover a far greater area.  So, for a
> short time (1/2
> a minute up to 4 minutes at Rank 20) and only within a fairly
> tight and static
> area illusions, invisible things and transformed things are
> revealed (providing
> the magic is of equal or lesser rank).

Ah, my error, I misread the spell in my brief overview. :-) It is therefore
fine.

Mandos
/s



-- to unsubscribe see http://www kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --

Re - Trueseeing - I still think the spell is a problem if it "sees through"
illusions (is that the intention of the wording "illusions are obvious and
slightly transparent"?). Unfortunately, unlike other colleges to whom this
spell only counteracts one or two spells in the college (eg Mind, E&E etc.)
for illusionist's it counters/nullifies the effect of 90% or more  of the
spells in the college. By way of an example disguise illusion is far more
dangerous to use now - any powerful npc will have his/her court namer mage
cast the spell and then have the party "shown in" to the meeting room by
the guards and hey presto - "Hey , you lot are not [orc's/drow/insert
disguise here] - your are really XYZ, Guards!!! .... ". You get the idea.
And disguise is a high em spell thats primary use is exactly that sort of
subterfuge (sp?).

How does the spell work with Illusionary aura? Not that ultimately that
will matter if you have used that ritual in conjunction with disguise to
change your race as that will be obvious when the disguise is "seen
through". The spell would also disable the project image talent I would
assume. What about concealed casting?

At the end of the day the spell still renders ineffective most/all of one
college.  Yes its for a limited time/area - but nevertheless we are talking
about 2 minutes 10 seconds and 130 feet at rank 10. I just don't see how
there is a workable compromise here - either the spells doesn't effect
illusions or it negates most of the college (although I hope i'm wrong on
this).

Somewhat Off topic mini-rant:
The rank restriction (only seeing the true nature of  lesser ranked things)
is ultimately more annoying (to both gm's and players) than helpful in my
humble opinion (yes, I also hate the new invis. rules as well). I think we
should avoid as much as possible this rank comparison in spells where the
net effect is a binary "higher rank wins - lower rank spell is completely
ineffective" result.  If thats the only reason for ranking a spell then we
should re-write the spell so that theres another more legitimate one.

/\/\ark




---------------------------------------------------------------------
The contents of this e-mail are confidential.
If you have received this communication by mistake,
please advise the sender immediately and delete the message and
any attachments.
The views expressed in this e-mail are not necessarily the views of
Westpac Banking Corporation.
Westpac Banking Corporation is incorporated in New South Wales, Australia.
---------------------------------------------------------------------




-- to unsubscribe see http://www kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --

Hi Mark,

I think you've hit on the compromise... more on that below...

Mark Simpson wrote:

> Re - Trueseeing - I still think the spell is a problem if it "sees through"
> illusions (is that the intention of the wording "illusions are obvious and
> slightly transparent"?).

My bad.  The wording was just mean to be a variant on "it is obvious"... and
wasn't meant to mean that the illusion vould be seen through.  Andrew's
"translucent" is closer to what I was actually thinking and "illusions glow a
bit" would be OK too.


> Somewhat Off topic mini-rant:
> The rank restriction (only seeing the true nature of  lesser ranked things)
> is ultimately more annoying ... I think we should avoid as much as possible
> this rank comparison in spells where the net effect is a binary "higher rank
> wins - lower rank spell is completely ineffective" result.

This could well be a solution/compromise.

How about something like:

Compare rank of True Seeing with Rank of alteration magic/Invis/Illusion

Lower: Nothing detected
Equal: Slight imperfections only revealed, Perception based % chance of
noticing, Invis glows a bit (Will 'o' Wisp effect)
1-5 Ranks higher: Somewhat more obvious... Better PC%...
6-10 Ranks higher: Quite obvious... Toads that are really Princes have little
gold crowns... Invis appears spectral...
More than 10 Ranks higher: Bleeding obvious... Illusions translucent... Invis
revealed...

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




-- to unsubscribe see http://www kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --

I'll be running a med-high game next session.

Cheers
Paul
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Martin" <stephenm@qed.co.nz>
To: <dq-announce@dq.sf.org.nz>
Sent: Friday, December 01, 2000 2:57 PM
Subject: [dq-announce] DQ Gods Meeting Agenda: 3rd December 2000


>
> -1) A volunteer is nominated to take the minutes.
>
> 0) Adventures Going Out
> ??
>
> 1) Campaign Voting Issues
> - New Chair and Second for next session.
>   NB Currently Stephen is Chair and we have no second, someone else will
> need to chair the guild meeting too.
>
> 2) Rules Voting Issues
> None?
>
> 3) Other Campaign Issues
> - Dark Circle, Seagate, and Guild Status and Future Direction.
>
> 4) Other Rules Issues  (probably re-convened in a Cafe somwhere so as not
to
> tie up Michael P any longer)
> - Witchsight/Invis Discussion
>
> NB Progress Reports should be supplied by Email prior to Sunday.
>
> Cheers, Stephen.
>
>
>
>
> -- to unsubscribe see http://www kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --
>



-- to unsubscribe see http://www kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --

Well I havent read the new Namer college yet AT ALL, so I may be shooting in
the dark but from what I have seen here I have to agree with Mark. I'm not
sure what the problem with Illusions and Witchsight are that you are all
having cos its not a problem when I GM. But then I'm a genius, right?  LOL


Be real useful if say Andrew W. explained the problem to me as I REALLY dont
understand what all the fuss is about regard Witchsight and invisible
effects. Ditto with all the illusion problems the rest of you seem to be
having. So someone give me a call or email and try and get it through my
thick skull. Because I'm cant see whats the problem!


Regards,
Michael Young

----- Original Message -----
From: Mark Simpson <Mark_Simpson@westpactrust.co.nz>
To: <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>
Sent: Friday, December 01, 2000 5:08 PM
Subject: Re: [dq] New draft of Namer College available


> Re - Trueseeing - I still think the spell is a problem if it "sees
through"
> illusions (is that the intention of the wording "illusions are obvious and
> slightly transparent"?). Unfortunately, unlike other colleges to whom this
> spell only counteracts one or two spells in the college (eg Mind, E&E
etc.)
> for illusionist's it counters/nullifies the effect of 90% or more  of the
> spells in the college. By way of an example disguise illusion is far more
> dangerous to use now - any powerful npc will have his/her court namer mage
> cast the spell and then have the party "shown in" to the meeting room by
> the guards and hey presto - "Hey , you lot are not [orc's/drow/insert
> disguise here] - your are really XYZ, Guards!!! .... ". You get the idea.
> And disguise is a high em spell thats primary use is exactly that sort of
> subterfuge (sp?).
>
> How does the spell work with Illusionary aura? Not that ultimately that
> will matter if you have used that ritual in conjunction with disguise to
> change your race as that will be obvious when the disguise is "seen
> through". The spell would also disable the project image talent I would
> assume. What about concealed casting?
>
> At the end of the day the spell still renders ineffective most/all of one
> college.  Yes its for a limited time/area - but nevertheless we are
talking
> about 2 minutes 10 seconds and 130 feet at rank 10. I just don't see how
> there is a workable compromise here - either the spells doesn't effect
> illusions or it negates most of the college (although I hope i'm wrong on
> this).
>
> Somewhat Off topic mini-rant:
> The rank restriction (only seeing the true nature of  lesser ranked
things)
> is ultimately more annoying (to both gm's and players) than helpful in my
> humble opinion (yes, I also hate the new invis. rules as well). I think we
> should avoid as much as possible this rank comparison in spells where the
> net effect is a binary "higher rank wins - lower rank spell is completely
> ineffective" result.  If thats the only reason for ranking a spell then we
> should re-write the spell so that theres another more legitimate one.
>
> /\/\ark
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> The contents of this e-mail are confidential.
> If you have received this communication by mistake,
> please advise the sender immediately and delete the message and
> any attachments.
> The views expressed in this e-mail are not necessarily the views of
> Westpac Banking Corporation.
> Westpac Banking Corporation is incorporated in New South Wales, Australia.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> -- to unsubscribe see http://www kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --
>



-- to unsubscribe see http://www kurahaupo.gen.nz/mailing-lists.html --