Arrrgh.  You are planning to use Warrior abilities to train in weapons that
will make you a better thief/assassin?!?!!?

In my day the Warrior guilds refused to train anyone with the Assassin
skill.  And as the guild does not have or train any Assassins (yeah right)
then it is extremely unlikely that guild Warriors will become Assassins.

Also I would hope that Shuriken, Fans, and Caltrops are not part of any
Warrior group as they are not Warrior weapons.  Warriors being concerned
with melee only and striking from front hexes only etc.

Cheers, Stephen.

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Noel Livingston [SMTP:arnauddemontfort@yahoo.com]
> Sent:	Wednesday, 27 June 2001 14:46
> To:	dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> Subject:	[dq] Kinlu weapons
> 
> Its just for thiefy assasin types the caltrop /
> sharken and fans could be really useful for committing
> murders etc and I doubt that the Kinlu would wish to
> teach them.
> 
> =====
> cheers noel
>


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --

Putting aside ethics (and it is very easy to do so), the warrior
boot-strapping only applies to weapons in warrior weapon categories.

Andrew
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Martin [mailto:stephenm@qed.co.nz]
Sent: Monday, 2 July 2001 11:04 a.m.
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Subject: Re: [dq] Kinlu weapons


Arrrgh.  You are planning to use Warrior abilities to train in weapons that
will make you a better thief/assassin?!?!!?

In my day the Warrior guilds refused to train anyone with the Assassin
skill.  And as the guild does not have or train any Assassins (yeah right)
then it is extremely unlikely that guild Warriors will become Assassins.

Also I would hope that Shuriken, Fans, and Caltrops are not part of any
Warrior group as they are not Warrior weapons.  Warriors being concerned
with melee only and striking from front hexes only etc.

Cheers, Stephen.

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Noel Livingston [SMTP:arnauddemontfort@yahoo.com]
> Sent:	Wednesday, 27 June 2001 14:46
> To:	dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> Subject:	[dq] Kinlu weapons
> 
> Its just for thiefy assasin types the caltrop /
> sharken and fans could be really useful for committing
> murders etc and I doubt that the Kinlu would wish to
> teach them.
> 
> =====
> cheers noel
>


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --

(Acknowledging Andrew's prior reply,)

I remember asking (years ago now) if skills reflected character in DQ. In
roleplaying competitions I thought skills would reflect the character, so
someone with assassin would have an appropriate skew rather than act like
say, an modern student. Probably more like a successful lawyer...

IIRC people were horified that this would remove the ability to gain utility
skills such as ranger (find north), herbalist (hearty meals), assassin
(strike better from behind), warrior (strike better from the front), etc
without paying even lip service to the type of life the architypes would
lead. Very modern, or so I thought.

I don't know if this is good for dq.

Are we becoming better at war gaming at the expense of roleplaying? A
roleplayer has a character before the statistics. There again,
characterisation may be fun, but dice rolling and rules lawyering keeps your
PC alive.

for example: In a recent combat, I decided that my character would not do
multiple strikes because there was an opponent who was worthy to fight on
their own. I was told afterward that I should have done multihex strikes
because DQ Combat is a Critical based system (most critical hits wins) and
hence I need to make as many dice rolls as possible. I consider this a
brilliant war game strategy, but not a good roleplaying one.

to the point - I do not see this as a rules issue, but rather a player
issue. Are we roleplaying or wargaming/warplaying? For me it comes down to a
question of how much morality there is in DQ - do we have values, or just
numbers?

If the former, then players should realise that Warrior and Assassin were
intended to be unstackable (actually you could only learn one or other - you
have to make a value choice rather than merely acquire a skill set).

If the latter, then I feel we are in a valueless, unethical realm (say like
tax lawyers). How boring, considering we do that every day...

I prefer the former, with ethics, moral choices, colour and character over
numbers, statistics and sticks with damage attached. (and for me, morality
goes beyond good/bad/evil to a set of behaviours that characterise me or my
PC (ie describes my character so that others would recognise me in a tale).
Moral choices means 'making decisions based on your character' rather than
on the 'numbers written on a scrap of paper and the situation at hand'.


love and hugs,

Ian

PS - good post Stephen.

-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Martin <stephenm@qed.co.nz>
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>
Date: Monday, 2 July 2001 11:06
Subject: Re: [dq] Kinlu weapons


>Arrrgh.  You are planning to use Warrior abilities to train in weapons that
>will make you a better thief/assassin?!?!!?
>
>In my day the Warrior guilds refused to train anyone with the Assassin
>skill.  And as the guild does not have or train any Assassins (yeah right)
>then it is extremely unlikely that guild Warriors will become Assassins.
>
>Also I would hope that Shuriken, Fans, and Caltrops are not part of any
>Warrior group as they are not Warrior weapons.  Warriors being concerned
>with melee only and striking from front hexes only etc.
>
>Cheers, Stephen.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Noel Livingston [SMTP:arnauddemontfort@yahoo.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, 27 June 2001 14:46
>> To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
>> Subject: [dq] Kinlu weapons
>>
>> Its just for thiefy assasin types the caltrop /
>> sharken and fans could be really useful for committing
>> murders etc and I doubt that the Kinlu would wish to
>> teach them.
>>
>> =====
>> cheers noel
>>
>
>
>-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>
>


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --

I agree with Ian on combat vs morality. Recently I found out that an "old" /
very experienced character who was reputed to be very nice, harmless and
"Good" always struck from behind while invisible in combat. Somehow their
white fluffy wings lost their shine after that.

You have to fight well to survive, but fighting dirty makes you a dirty
character, while fighting with style (e.g. single combat, as long as the
opposition accepts the concept) makes you a honourable character, as long as
the rest of your party doesn't die while you play - that makes you an
honourable but amoral character...

There is room in most combat to have some flavour/style. Occasionally it
should be so grim that all but the purest put aside their good intentions
and start fighting dirty, but this should be a rare and emotionally
turbulant situation, not every bar fight. However, as a player, I find it
hard to deliberately do sub-optimal things unless they feel dramatic or
exciting. Perhaps style should be encouraged more explicitly? how?

If you eye-gouge, use poison and slit throats in every scrap, you will(?)
win, but you are saying what sort of person you are. Again recently, a
character slit the throat of a neutral NPC in a combat situation, "just in
case" they turned on the party. Optimal wargaming (and assassin behaviour),
but the party was horrified, and rightly so.


Andrew
-----Original Message-----
 Are we roleplaying or wargaming/warplaying? For me it comes down to a
question of how much morality there is in DQ - do we have values, or just
numbers?


I prefer the former, with ethics, moral choices, colour and character over
numbers, statistics and sticks with damage attached. (and for me, morality
goes beyond good/bad/evil to a set of behaviours that characterise me or my
PC (ie describes my character so that others would recognise me in a tale).
Moral choices means 'making decisions based on your character' rather than
on the 'numbers written on a scrap of paper and the situation at hand'.


love and hugs,

Ian


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --

A rule clarification was asked, could warriors self
teach themselves kinlu weapons ?
Martin who is in charge of kinlu said it was not what
he intended and said in effect no ?

Case closed

=====
cheers noel

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/


-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --

Andrew Withy wrote:

>I agree with Ian on combat vs morality. Recently I found out that an "old"
/
>very experienced character who was reputed to be very nice, harmless and
>"Good" always struck from behind while invisible in combat. Somehow their
>white fluffy wings lost their shine after that.

I disagree Andrew. Without getting into the specifics of the character and
adventure (although I think you are not being fair to that player in your
description of her actions), this gets back to the old "good does not mean
stupid" arguement that used to rage in old Dragon Magazines.  Where, for
example, you are the victim of an un-provoked attack by a large number of
slavers that are looking to either enslave or kill you I dont think a
"good" character needs to attack from the front hex, fully visable, having
first issued a warning that you were about to use deadly force if they
don't surrender. That would be just plain stupidity in my hypothetical
example.

A better indication of whether you are "good" or not comes when you capture
(or have surrender) some of the bad guys hirelings. Where those hirelings
are just that (ie innocent pawns rather than goblins or demonic imps) what
you do with them may call into question what shade of grey your character
is - killing them because it is expedient to do so would certainly "darken"
that character in my eyes. The example cited above of attacking the slavers
from behind/while invis would not.

The old example cited in the Dragon magazines was could a Paladin cut the
throats of goblins (or stand by and watch another party member do it) who
had been slept by the Magic User. The answer, at least the one given in
that  magzine by TSR was that yes the Paladin could (given that the goblins
were inherently evil little creatures - as I believe they are meant to be
in DQ).

/\/\
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --