| Subject | Re: [dq] Alusian Realm details request |
|---|---|
| From | Jonathan Bean |
| Date | Fri, 29 Jul 2005 14:11:50 +1200 |
Nice post Chris. Jonathan Bean Business Development Manager TME - Its all about time Phone 966 1656 PO Box 35902, Browns Bay Fax 448 1051 Auckalnd, New Zealand Mob 021 173 4060 www.tme.co.nz Free 0800 55 33 66 > -----Original Message----- > From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz] On Behalf Of > Chris Caulfield > Sent: 28 July 2005 3:41 p.m. > To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz > Subject: [dq] Alusian Realm details request > > Defining the realms / regions / areas on Alusia > > We (the campaign committe, GM who use Alusia and players with vested > interests in Alusia) are looking to get more detailed information on the > various realms on Alusia in order to enable better background details, > ease of use for GM¡¦s other than the GM who ¡¥owns¡¦ the area (the GM > listed in the Gazetteer) and more consistent information. > > The data desired is that which makes a place have some character or > ¡¥soul¡¦ when the PC¡¦s go through rather than just another realm / place > / town they pass through on route to adventure elsewhere. > > We¡¦d like the GM¡¦s who play on Alusia to please complete the form on the > last page and once done please place the information in the DQ Wiki > (http://www.dragonquest.org.nz/dqwiki/index.php/Main_Page) site and place > the data there in the appropriate realm. > There¡¦s no time limit on this ¡V it is merely a request for those GM¡¦s > interested in ¡¥fleshing out¡¦ their world to do so, thereby bettering the > game we all play for everyone. > > Please also note that the information asked for below is not an exhaustive > one but is merely meant to give those replying some ¡¥structure¡¦ for > their realms and standardisation of information types. Also feel free to > reformat the details below for your own use. > > PLEASE Don't reply to me, simply either submit the details of the Alusian > realms you set your DQ games in or not - Its your choice ;) > > Cheers > Chris > > ===> > Realm here means: A defined area. > > Information Desired > > „« Realm Name > > „« Realm Type: > Information such as maritime, mountain etc. The prevalent terrain type > or what mix the realm contains of the following types > ƒæ Cultivated area > ƒæ Marsh/Swamp > ƒæ Mountain > ƒæ Hills > ƒæ Forest > ƒæ Desert > ƒæ Tundra > ƒæ Other > > „« Location on map (referencing neighbouring realms and Carzala where > practical) > - This includes whether it is mainly a mountain hold, maritime, forest > or > whatever > - Super-areas: what this belongs to (i.e. this barony¡¦s liege lord is > Count X who¡¦s liege is Duke Y who hold sit on behalf of the king. > > „« Area (in sq miles) > > „« Who rules the realm? > - The name of the individual who is officially listed as being in > charge. > - The holders of major important offices who are key to the > administration/control of the realm > - Who really rules the realm? > o If anyone else the realm unofficially, this group makes sure that > things > get done or not get done > - The holders of official or bureaucratic power and bureaucratic style > - Alternative administrations (for those who don't like dealing with > nobles and other oiks) EG hobbits in MMHS > > - Alliances: > o Military > o Judicial > o Trade > o Political > o Social > > „« Population > - Based on Last census, Head count or Tax rolls etc > - Additional figures for particular situations like summer trading > seasons > o Summer sees the arrival of merchants / farmers. All looking to buy > and > sell. > o Winter sees the men returns to farms and merchants drift to follow > more > amenable weather and nobles¡¦ winter in their local baronies. > > „« Languages > - The prevalent language(s) spoken by the majority of the popn. > o The top 3 languages for each area. > - The % of Common speakers > - The Language used in trade > > „« Major Products > - Products the realm is known for > - What trade products are available to PC¡¦s (Examples: All, > Specialist > Herb traders, very little metal armour etc) > - Major market days (every second Monday?) > - Major holy days / feasts > > „« Professional Services available: E.g. Healing, Weaponsmithing etc > > „« Religious services: who by, what etc. > > „« Attitude towards PCs/guild > > „« State of roads > > „« Ease of finding accommodation > > „« Armed forces > - The official and unofficial military organisations > - These include militia, guards, mercenary bands > - The numbers listed are normal operating sizes rather than ¡¥full¡¦ > war > strength > > „« Lawfulness: how 'in your face' are the local police / militia / > armed > forces / thieves > > „« Security: how 'in your face' is the local militia / armed forces: > how > in your feet are the bandits? > > „« Notable Locations > > „« Notable People > > „« Important People > > > > > =======> > > Defining your Realm > > Realm Name: ________________________________________ > Type of Realm: > > Area (Sq Miles) of the Realm: > > Location of the Realm: > - Is this realm part of a greater realm? > > Ruler(s): > - Who is the Liege of this realms ruler? > > Alliances: > - Military > - Political > - Trade > - Other > > Population: > > Language(s): > - % Common speakers > - The Trade language > > Religion > - Major Holy days > - Services available? > > Major Products: > - Major Market Days > > Goods & Services: > - Types available: > - Availability to PC¡¦s: > - Ease of finding accommodation. > > Armed Forces: > - Lawfulness > - Security > > Infrastructure > - Major Towns/Cities > - Minor Towns/Cities > - State of Roads > > Notable Locations: > > Important People: > > Notable People: > > Realm Notes: > > > -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz -- -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz -- | |
| Subject | [dq] Namers, Counterspells and Cold Iron |
|---|---|
| From | Martin Dickson |
| Date | Fri, 29 Jul 2005 16:34:43 +1200 |
Opinions sought from the list: Should Namers be able to cast Counterspells while in contact with Cold Iron? -- Background: DQ2 Cold Iron rules as written prevented Mages "preparing" while incontact with Cold Iron. Since Namers could cast Counterspells without preparation then those casts would appear to be implicitly exempt from the Cold Iron rule. Some GMs have allowed this, others have disallowed it. In version 1.4 we changed the wording of the Cold Iron rules to read that magic could not be cast (rather than prepared). The change log entry reads: "September 3, 2001 -- Change wording in restrictions on magic to enforce the limitation of cold iron on casting." This change removed any possibility of Namers casting in contact with Cold Iron. As a side note: Namer v2 (also introduced in version 1.4) made "Quick Casting" a talent, and learnt Talents are also affected by Cold Iron. If the Cold Iron wording had not been made, but the Namer change had been, then a Namer touching Cold Iron would have had their Talent negated, which would then have meant that they needed to Prepare a CS, which means that they could not have used CS anyway. The point at the base of all this is: Did we accidentally remove a legitimate Namer ability; an ability that allows for CS use while wearing Cold Iron. Or did we remove it deliberately... or do we feel the ability never existed? Cheers, Martin -- Martin Dickson ph: +64 9 3730400 x5115 User Experience Engineer fax: +64 9 3730401 Strategy, Research & Architecture email: martin.dickson@peace.com Peace Software http://www.peace.com -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz -- | |
| Subject | Re: [dq] Namers, Counterspells and Cold Iron |
|---|---|
| From | Struan Judd |
| Date | Fri, 29 Jul 2005 16:42:26 +1200 |
Whatever was the situation in the past, I believe that Namer's should
not be able to cast counterspells while in contact with Cold Iron.
So the rule as it is currently is correct and should stand and if
we've taken something away it's something they never should have had
in the first place.
{Gotta nerf those Hand and a half, Elven Namers somehow}
TTFN, Struan.
-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
| |
| Subject | Re: [dq] Namers, Counterspells and Cold Iron |
|---|---|
| From | Andrew\ Withy\ \(DSL\ AK\) |
| Date | Fri, 29 Jul 2005 16:44:33 +1200 |
I feel the ability never existed. Some disagree. ---------------------------- Some Research, for those who want to base their opinion on the DQ 2 rules: DQ 2 says in Definition of Magical Terms: Cold Iron: All metals in a non-liquid state that ar composed of wholly or substantially of iron ore products are termed Cold Iron. These include both iron and steel. Such metals in a liquid state (in a cruicile, for instance) are not "Cold". Cold Iron inhibits the ability of indiviuals to use Mana. Later in Restrictions of Magic, it says: An Adept cannot prepare a spell, use the special talents of his College, nor perform Ritual Magic while wearing armour made of cold iron or holding weapons or tools made of cold iron ... and Generally, no more than a few ounces is sufficient to prevent the working of all but a racial Talent Magic... and Restrictions of a general nature are discussed in this section. Restrictiosn covering only individual Colleges are discussed unde the sections dealing with those Colleges. Andrew -----Original Message----- From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz] On Behalf Of Martin Dickson Sent: Friday, 29 July 2005 4:35 p.m. To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz Subject: [dq] Namers, Counterspells and Cold Iron Opinions sought from the list: Should Namers be able to cast Counterspells while in contact with Cold Iron? -- Background: DQ2 Cold Iron rules as written prevented Mages "preparing" while incontact with Cold Iron. Since Namers could cast Counterspells without preparation then those casts would appear to be implicitly exempt from the Cold Iron rule. Some GMs have allowed this, others have disallowed it. In version 1.4 we changed the wording of the Cold Iron rules to read that magic could not be cast (rather than prepared). The change log entry reads: "September 3, 2001 -- Change wording in restrictions on magic to enforce the limitation of cold iron on casting." This change removed any possibility of Namers casting in contact with Cold Iron. As a side note: Namer v2 (also introduced in version 1.4) made "Quick Casting" a talent, and learnt Talents are also affected by Cold Iron. If the Cold Iron wording had not been made, but the Namer change had been, then a Namer touching Cold Iron would have had their Talent negated, which would then have meant that they needed to Prepare a CS, which means that they could not have used CS anyway. The point at the base of all this is: Did we accidentally remove a legitimate Namer ability; an ability that allows for CS use while wearing Cold Iron. Or did we remove it deliberately... or do we feel the ability never existed? Cheers, Martin -- Martin Dickson ph: +64 9 3730400 x5115 User Experience Engineer fax: +64 9 3730401 Strategy, Research & Architecture email: martin.dickson@peace.com Peace Software http://www.peace.com -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz -- | |
| Subject | Re: [dq] Namers, Counterspells and Cold Iron |
|---|---|
| From | Errol Cavit |
| Date | Fri, 29 Jul 2005 16:50:39 +1200 |
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C593F9.11423AA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I think it was deliberately removed from the rules. Given this: Does it matter if it was ever intended to be allowed? A conscious decision was made that it shouldn't be allowed, and the rules changed to make this explicit. Anyone arguing that it should be allowed should state their case in terms of benefits to the campaign. Errol > -----Original Message----- > From: Martin Dickson [mailto:martin.dickson@peace.com] > Sent: Friday, 29 July 2005 16:35 > To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz > Subject: [dq] Namers, Counterspells and Cold Iron > > > Opinions sought from the list: Should Namers be able to cast > Counterspells while in contact with Cold Iron? > > -- > > Background: DQ2 Cold Iron rules as written prevented Mages > "preparing" > while incontact with Cold Iron. Since Namers could cast Counterspells > without preparation then those casts would appear to be implicitly > exempt from the Cold Iron rule. Some GMs have allowed this, > others have > disallowed it. > > In version 1.4 we changed the wording of the Cold Iron rules to read > that magic could not be cast (rather than prepared). The change log > entry reads: "September 3, 2001 -- Change wording in restrictions on > magic to enforce the limitation of cold iron on casting." > This change > removed any possibility of Namers casting in contact with Cold Iron. > > As a side note: Namer v2 (also introduced in version 1.4) made "Quick > Casting" a talent, and learnt Talents are also affected by > Cold Iron. If > the Cold Iron wording had not been made, but the Namer change > had been, > then a Namer touching Cold Iron would have had their Talent negated, > which would then have meant that they needed to Prepare a CS, which > means that they could not have used CS anyway. > > The point at the base of all this is: Did we accidentally remove a > legitimate Namer ability; an ability that allows for CS use while > wearing Cold Iron. Or did we remove it deliberately... or do we feel > the ability never existed? > > Cheers, > Martin > > -- > Martin Dickson ph: +64 9 3730400 x5115 > User Experience Engineer fax: +64 9 3730401 > Strategy, Research & Architecture email: > martin.dickson@peace.com > Peace Software http://www.peace.com > > > -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz -- > ------_=_NextPart_001_01C593F9.11423AA0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; = charset=3Diso-8859-1"> <META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version = 5.5.2653.12"> <TITLE>RE: [dq] Namers, Counterspells and Cold Iron</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>I think it was deliberately removed from the = rules.</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Given this:</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Does it matter if it was ever intended to be = allowed? A conscious decision was made that it shouldn't be allowed, = and the rules changed to make this explicit. Anyone arguing that it = should be allowed should state their case in terms of benefits to the = campaign.</FONT></P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Errol</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> -----Original Message-----</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> From: Martin Dickson [<A = HREF=3D"mailto:martin.dickson@peace.com">mailto:martin.dickson@peace.com= </A>]</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Sent: Friday, 29 July 2005 16:35</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Subject: [dq] Namers, Counterspells and Cold = Iron</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Opinions sought from the list: Should Namers be = able to cast </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Counterspells while in contact with Cold = Iron?</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> --</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Background: DQ2 Cold Iron rules as written = prevented Mages </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> "preparing" </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> while incontact with Cold Iron. Since Namers = could cast Counterspells </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> without preparation then those casts would = appear to be implicitly </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> exempt from the Cold Iron rule. Some GMs = have allowed this, </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> others have </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> disallowed it.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> In version 1.4 we changed the wording of the = Cold Iron rules to read </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> that magic could not be cast (rather than = prepared). The change log </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> entry reads: "September 3, 2001 -- Change = wording in restrictions on </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> magic to enforce the limitation of cold iron on = casting." </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> This change </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> removed any possibility of Namers casting in = contact with Cold Iron.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> As a side note: Namer v2 (also introduced in = version 1.4) made "Quick </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Casting" a talent, and learnt Talents are = also affected by </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Cold Iron. If </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> the Cold Iron wording had not been made, but = the Namer change </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> had been, </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> then a Namer touching Cold Iron would have had = their Talent negated, </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> which would then have meant that they needed to = Prepare a CS, which </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> means that they could not have used CS = anyway.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> The point at the base of all this is: Did we = accidentally remove a </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> legitimate Namer ability; an ability that = allows for CS use while </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> wearing Cold Iron. Or did we remove it = deliberately... or do we feel </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> the ability never existed?</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Cheers,</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Martin</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> -- </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Martin Dickson &nbs= p; &nbs= p; ph: +64 9 = 3730400 x5115</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> User Experience = Engineer &nbs= p; fax: +64 9 3730401</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Strategy, Research & = Architecture email: </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> martin.dickson@peace.com</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Peace = Software &nbs= p; &nbs= p; <A HREF=3D"http://www.peace.com" = TARGET=3D"_blank">http://www.peace.com</A></FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> -- to unsubscribe notify <A = HREF=3D"mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz">mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz</= A> --</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT> </P> </BODY> </HTML> ------_=_NextPart_001_01C593F9.11423AA0-- -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz -- | |
| Subject | Re: [dq] Namers, Counterspells and Cold Iron |
|---|---|
| From | Michael Parkinson |
| Date | Fri, 29 Jul 2005 17:01:08 +1200 |
Much as I like the idea of a squad of Michaeline namers in full battle-armour dealing to evil [i.e., pretty much any] magic-users; I too have never thought that the ability existed; however I complement the person who plotted this trap in the rules -- such a pity we've ruined their surprise. I mean, what REAL mage would ever try casting while in contact with cold iron. Michael > -----Original Message----- > From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]On Behalf Of > Andrew Withy (DSL AK) > Sent: Friday, 29 July 2005 4:45 p.m. > To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz > Subject: Re: [dq] Namers, Counterspells and Cold Iron > > > I feel the ability never existed. > > Some disagree. > ---------------------------- > Some Research, for those who want to base their opinion on the DQ 2 > rules: > > DQ 2 says in Definition of Magical Terms: > Cold Iron: All metals in a non-liquid state that ar composed of wholly > or substantially of iron ore products are termed Cold Iron. These > include both iron and steel. Such metals in a liquid state (in a > cruicile, for instance) are not "Cold". Cold Iron inhibits the ability > of indiviuals to use Mana. > > > Later in Restrictions of Magic, it says: > An Adept cannot prepare a spell, use the special talents of > his College, > nor perform Ritual Magic while wearing armour made of cold iron or > holding weapons or tools made of cold iron ... > and > Generally, no more than a few ounces is sufficient to prevent the > working of all but a racial Talent Magic... > and > Restrictions of a general nature are discussed in this section. > Restrictiosn covering only individual Colleges are discussed unde the > sections dealing with those Colleges. > > Andrew > > -----Original Message----- > From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz] On > Behalf Of > Martin Dickson > Sent: Friday, 29 July 2005 4:35 p.m. > To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz > Subject: [dq] Namers, Counterspells and Cold Iron > > > Opinions sought from the list: Should Namers be able to cast > Counterspells while in contact with Cold Iron? > > -- > > Background: DQ2 Cold Iron rules as written prevented Mages > "preparing" > while incontact with Cold Iron. Since Namers could cast Counterspells > without preparation then those casts would appear to be implicitly > exempt from the Cold Iron rule. Some GMs have allowed this, > others have > > disallowed it. > > In version 1.4 we changed the wording of the Cold Iron rules to read > that magic could not be cast (rather than prepared). The change log > entry reads: "September 3, 2001 -- Change wording in restrictions on > magic to enforce the limitation of cold iron on casting." > This change > removed any possibility of Namers casting in contact with Cold Iron. > > As a side note: Namer v2 (also introduced in version 1.4) made "Quick > Casting" a talent, and learnt Talents are also affected by > Cold Iron. If > > the Cold Iron wording had not been made, but the Namer change > had been, > then a Namer touching Cold Iron would have had their Talent negated, > which would then have meant that they needed to Prepare a CS, which > means that they could not have used CS anyway. > > The point at the base of all this is: Did we accidentally remove a > legitimate Namer ability; an ability that allows for CS use while > wearing Cold Iron. Or did we remove it deliberately... or do we feel > the ability never existed? > > Cheers, > Martin > > -- > Martin Dickson ph: +64 9 3730400 x5115 > User Experience Engineer fax: +64 9 3730401 > Strategy, Research & Architecture email: > martin.dickson@peace.com > Peace Software http://www.peace.com > > > -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz -- > -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz -- | |