Jacqui,
Just to set matters straight.
When I started playing DQ with the group that eventually became the
Adventurer's Guild in 1982, the term Half-devil was already in use as there
were several Black Mage characters in play with familiars already (eg Ariel
Quicksilver, Ed the Tent). The half devil document that I wrote in 1984
was intended to provide some consistency in the playing and GMing of
familiars as the two paragraphs within the Black Mage college did not
provide enough explanation as to the appearance, abilities and motivations
of these "half-devil" familiars.
I have not, until now, ever compared them with Imps. Half devils are
smaller, and less powerful in terms of stats, but better suited to being
companions or familiars than imps. Is there a problem with keeping both ?
>I'd be curious to know when the choice of companion for Summoners changed
>from "imp or devil" to "imp or half-devil", however.
It never did. On making a Lesser Pact, Black mages were assigned a
familiar in the form of a half devil, whereas Greater Summoners were
granted from 1 to 3 Imps and/or Devils as companions, usually in exchange
for the dismissal of the summoned demon, and they usually did not serve for
long as they became more trouble than they were worth.
If you are doing work on Greater Summoner, it would be worthwhile getting
the copy of Ares magazine (issue 7 from memory) which contained more
information about the college, which was pruned from DQ1 prior to publication.
I guess that now that Black Magics is no more, and Wicca have well defined
familiars, the Imp and Half-devil write ups could be amalgamated.
Presumably the Powers document still refers to pacts and the granting of
familiars, and needs to be modified appropriately. At some stage it was
suggested that 10% of a pacted adept's EP should be given to the familiar
so that it was able to advance in its abilities and not become a liability
for a high-level character. This also meant that familiars would not be a
known commodity of rank 5 in all magics, as different familiars would rank
different abilities.
Hope this helps.
Cheers,
Brent.
At 15:42 27/11/01 +1300, Jacqui Smith wrote:
>At 11:49 27/11/01 +1300, Stephen Martin wrote:
>>Just refer to them as one and the same. They have all the same stats and
>>abilities but are referred to by 2 different names.
>>Let the philosophers argue over whether they are the same or different.
>>But as far as abilities and GTNs go they are one and the same.
>
>And therefore get one entry in the Bestiary, probably under the heading
>"Imp", with a sentence like "sometimes referred to as "half-devil" on the
>end. This makes sense.
>
>Further to the research - the old College of Black Magics refers to a
>"familiar, a minor devil with half the statistics and rank of a devil". The
>term "half-devil" was derived from this, probably by Brent Jackson, since
>his name is at the top of the write-up of half-devils. There was no further
>description of half-devils in the 2nd Ed. rule book, and it doesn't look as
>if the word half-devil was used there.
>
>I'd be curious to know when the choice of companion for Summoners changed
>from "imp or devil" to "imp or half-devil", however.
>
>Incidentally, I think it's important that there is a certain level in
>consistency in monster descriptions from GM to GM, so that players can play
>out their characters' experience of these things. It's not good, to give an
>extreme example, if a named monster is especially vulnerable to fire under
>one GM, and then invulnerable to that element under the next.
>
>Is this not why we are developing a bestiary?
>
>Jacqui
>
>
>-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>
-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
|