At 14:49 9/01/02 +1300, you wrote:
>As a GM, I play that binary spells & rituals only work on multi-hex
>creatures if they are of sufficient rank - 3 full ranks per hex. This was
>"taught" to me when I started DQ, and I like it. Some GMs play a similar
>rule, some don't.
>
>The major effect is that sleep, mental attack, incinerate, and other instant
>death spells can't take out a multi-hex creature as easily - they require
>ranks. It may only require Rank 9 to affect a giant, but a remarkable number
>of PC utility and takeout spells are below this rank, even in medium+ games.
>It gives more durability to big creatures. This already happens with damage
>spells, through them having more endurance / fatigue, so any rank bolt of
>energy will affect a big creature - it just takes more spells to kill it.

A question... How much mental energy does it take to knock out a bear of 
little brain (but a lot of bruin)?

If mind college spells affect the mind then its mental capacity that 
counts... I can make a dinosaur go unconscious as long as I can figure out 
where its brain(s) are, or can I?

(Oh, and I think the incinerate spell has gone bye-byes, so that paragraph 
needs changing.)

Jacqui


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

If the intent is that bigger creatures should be harder to take down, then
the body size matters. Their brain power (Willpower) affects your base
chance and their resistance already.

As always, desired game effects create rules which are then justified in
game terms.
I think this is why Jim is questioning the whole binary effect thing rather
than the details of the solution - do I have the right problem?

Andrew
-----Original Message-----
>As a GM, I play that binary spells & rituals only work on multi-hex
>creatures if they are of sufficient rank - 3 full ranks per hex. This was
>"taught" to me when I started DQ, and I like it. Some GMs play a similar
>rule, some don't.

A question... How much mental energy does it take to knock out a bear of 
little brain (but a lot of bruin)?

If mind college spells affect the mind then its mental capacity that 
counts... I can make a dinosaur go unconscious as long as I can figure out 
where its brain(s) are, or can I?

Jacqui


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

> A question... How much mental energy does it take to knock out a bear of
> little brain (but a lot of bruin)?

The same as for ANY target:   The *attempt* depends on the Mana level & whether you're using a
Special Knowledge spell;  You may have to make several attempts -- even then, the spell only works
if the target is a valid one


> If mind college spells affect the mind then its mental capacity that
> counts... I can make a dinosaur go unconscious as long as I can figure out
> where its brain(s) are, or can I?

No No No No No.  You must be careful to distinguish between mechanics and the rationalisation --
especially since the rationalisation is a simplification, & after the effect in an attempt to
explain the perceived effect.  Admittedly rationalisation is a good justification for gut feeling
(e.g. why illusionists should not have a real transport spell; or most of the Ice spells; etc).
Btw, the rationalisation applies for both player attitudes & character opinions  -- I'm sure Alusia
has an excess of ill-informed popularising non-practising experts on Magic who have good sounding
theories on how it works (and not just those Michaeline "witch"-burners).

Barring range, mana-restirctions, etc,  there are only 3 things that decide whether mind magic works
the category of target
the size of the target -- given the *imprecise* size "rule" under discussion
the relative WP of Target

That is based on the rules, as they are imperfectly written.  By all means porpose a rewrite of the
rules if you wish.  We probably need some "clarification" on the size guideline.

Jim's point, as I understand it is a good one, however ... What do we want as players (GMs &
non-GMs)?  Although I expect there may well be exceptions, I *lean* towards the 3 or 4 ranks/hex
argument -- expecially since it's a simple linear system for the GM to work out, but the EP required
is approximately quadratic (furthermore dragons are 7 hex-creatures).

To over-simplify :  If *no* binary spells *ever* work on large-ish creatures (say 3 hex giants,
etc), then you are reduced to brute force to subdue such an opponent; and I don't like that.

By the way [whimsical diversion, but there may be something in it] ... can a creature be so large
that insufficiently potent weapons can *never* harm it (unless perhaps one gets a truely mortal spot
like the eye) ?e.g. don't pester a collossus with a silly dagger or shortsword.
As I understand it --having been corrected in my GMing-- natural armour may still have it's weak
spots  [the only excpetion being the comment on p.92, regarding Demons; and that is perhaps merely a
way of explaining the "shorthand" NA in their write-ups].

regards, Michael


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

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Withy (DSL AK) [mailto:AndrewW@datacom.co.nz]
> 
> As always, desired game effects create rules which are then 
> justified in
> game terms.
> I think this is why Jim is questioning the whole binary 
> effect thing rather
> than the details of the solution - do I have the right problem?
> 

There are a number of 'binary' magics (either work or don't, as opposed to
made of two parts) in the game. Some are seen as 'a good thing', and don't
cause any major problems (eg Wings, Lesser Enchantment) in normal use. 

Others are perceived as causing problems sometimes (eg Sleep).

The 'need 3 ranks per hex' statement has been put forward as a
[guideline/rule of thumb/indication of what to expect] to use in situations
involving binary magics and big things. It looks to be useful, regardless of
any changes made to address the 'problem' magics. It doesn't make the
problems any worse, and reduces them in some cases. 

So long as no-one thinks 'need 3 ranks per hex' solves _all_ the problems
with binary magics, I think stating this as a guideline is a useful
addition.


Cheers
Errol


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

Errol Cavit wrote:

> So long as no-one thinks 'need 3 ranks per hex' solves _all_ the problems
> with binary magics, I think stating this as a guideline is a useful
> addition.

Ditto.

Finding ways to make Sleep, Mental Attack (and the like) non-binary would be
quite interesting.  I agree with Jim that binary is less dramatic... is is
better to have the giant troll awake/sleeping... or flailing around in a
"drugged" state, trying to pummel the PCs before the sleep overcomes him?

I've always disliked Sleep and Mental Attack as a GM in particular.. the "big"
take out spells generally have the slight saving grace of low BC and high EM...
but finding ways of altering binary-ism generally sounds worthwhile.

It could be amusing to see sleep work more like a tranquiliser dart... rank
dependant effect, takes down smaller targets easier than larger, etc., although
there is potentially more GM work involved -- a non-binary sleep type effect
should most probably effect BC, SC, TMR, Ag, etc... and recalculation is pain.

An elegant way of having progressive effects that are simple to GM would be
desirable.

Cheers,
Martin

--

 _/_/  Peace Software International     Email: martin.dickson@peace.com
_/     Martin Dickson                   Phone: +64-9-373-0400
       Senior Analyst                   Fax  : +64-9-373-0401


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

Martin Dickson wrote:

> An elegant way of having progressive effects that are simple to GM would be
> desirable.

How about rolling against WP times size every pulse, -20% to all basechances for
every failure, falling asleep when penalty reaches -80%. (Or perhaps (10 + rank in
sleep)% from basechances each failure.)

Sleep can also aid dramatic tension if you're doing the
sneak-through-guarded-complex bit instead of the all-out-melee bit. It would be
good if rules meddling left this still a possibility.

Damnum Minatum is also a binary takeout spell at high rank, although less reliable
- you can blind (not quite totally incapacitating), mute (incapacitates spell
casting) or amnesia, which is random as to what they forget, so might not do much
good. Neither are absolute take-out, as the right counterspell will disipate them.

Disclaimer - as far as I am concerned this is a theoretical discussion. I am not
attempting to have these changes introduced into the rules.


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

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C199ED.5D9306A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Apologies for the diversion, but does anyone have a spare Frodo figure pack
from the Burger-King marketing campaign.   It's not for myself, you
understand, ... it's for a friend ...

Thanks, Michael ( mailto:m.parkinson@auckland.ac.nz )


------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C199ED.5D9306A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE></TITLE>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4807.2300" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<P><FONT face=3D"Times New Roman">Apologies for the diversion, but does =
anyone=20
have a spare Frodo figure pack from the Burger-King marketing=20
campaign.&nbsp;&nbsp; It's not for myself, you understand, ... it's for =
a friend=20
...<BR><BR>Thanks, Michael ( <A=20
href=3D"mailto:m.parkinson@auckland.ac.nz">mailto:m.parkinson@auckland.ac=
.nz</A>=20
)</FONT></P></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0000_01C199ED.5D9306A0--


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

> There are a number of 'binary' magics (either work or don't, as opposed to
> made of two parts) in the game. Some are seen as 'a good thing', and don't
> cause any major problems (eg Wings, Lesser Enchantment) in normal use.


This is true, but then that wasn't raised as an issue. Binary attack spells
that render an opponent incapable of responding are, though.
>
> Others are perceived as causing problems sometimes (eg Sleep).
>
> The 'need 3 ranks per hex' statement has been put forward as a
> [guideline/rule of thumb/indication of what to expect] to use in
situations
> involving binary magics and big things. It looks to be useful, regardless
of
> any changes made to address the 'problem' magics. It doesn't make the
> problems any worse, and reduces them in some cases.
>
> So long as no-one thinks 'need 3 ranks per hex' solves _all_ the problems
> with binary magics, I think stating this as a guideline is a useful
> addition.


Useful in what way? I am wondering how it substantially improves the game.
All I see it doing is postponing the problem until the character has
sufficient xp to rank it higher. Once the spell is at a level when it can
effect a target, then the 'sudden death' issue of this kind of binary attack
spell becomes evident.


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

> Useful in what way? I am wondering how it substantially improves the game.
> All I see it doing is postponing the problem until the character has
> sufficient xp to rank it higher. Once the spell is at a level when it can
> effect a target, then the 'sudden death' issue of this kind of
> binary attack spell becomes evident.

I agree.

In order to make the spells non-binary we need to have some kind of effect
that increases with rank that can be if nessesary decreased with the size of
the target.

To put forward an example.

Sleep could do x points of sleep damage. When the total of sleep damage done
to a target is higher than their current fatigue they fall asleep.

Same could be done for mental attack except the 'mental attack damage' would
need to exceed the targets willpower.

Multiple casts would have a cumulative effect to the total.

I.E.

Dozy the E&E comes up against a sick dragon with 30 fatigue. He casts sleep
and does 15 points of sleep damage. The dragon attacks back missing Dozy.
Dozy casts again and does 12 points of sleep damage for a total this combat
of 27. The dragon again missed Dozy and Dozy's final spell does 8 points of
sleep and the dragon stumbles and goes down snoring.

This would allow these types of spells to be non-binary and not too much
additional work for the GM. The hard part would be balancing the numbers.

Mandos
/s


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

The main problem remains is that most PCs are 1-hex creatures (monsters?). My 
major adversaries are often mages who shoot back. A GM can be molified by the 
fact the the rest of the dark horde is still about to feast on the PCs 
eyeballs. A player who has been on the recieving end of mental attack had 
better of brought along a good book. Odds are they'll be out of it until the 
fight ends. Since this can be all evening it is pretty unexciting
indeed.


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

     ADVENTURE OFFERED

Experienced Binder required
 for an exciting adventure.

     (Other available
  Adventurers considered).

  Transportation supplied.

    Guaranteed reward.

     Departing as soon
      as practicable.

  Please contact Borghoff
   c/- Guild Security

"Borghoff" <salient@kccs.co.nz>


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