You have missed the point, Bernard.

This is not a discussion about the toughness of the spell vs its Exp. Mult.

The issue raised, and remains this:

Necrosis, Whirlwind Vortex and Hellfire are spells that are so good that any
player who has them faces no dramatic conflict over which spell to cast. They
will almost always be the best choice to cast.

Most encounters hardly ever happen at distances where the range is important. It
is a very occasional factor. In any case, the player rarely experiences any
sense of concern over whether it's the right decision. Either the targets are
in range or they're not. If they're in range, use HF, WV or Necrosis. If not,
use another spell (in this case, Harming Entity).

I don't think that the FT costs are worth worrying about, either. A fight where
a mage made 6 consecutive casts would be a rare one.

At levels of medium and beyond, spell casters have only two states of FT. Enough
or Not Enough. The only time I have ever had to worry about whether or not I
had enough FT was when I had to kill this dragon thing, and I went through
every Restorative/Waters of Healing that I had to make sure the thing was dead.

And in that situation, the only spell I cast was Hellfire.

Quoting Bernard Hoggins <nevyn0ad@yahoo.co.uk>:

> Also any situation where you base chance is being adversly affected via a
> bane/active resist/weird magical effect.
>   Hellfires base chance is a real limiting factor, and at rank 20 it does
> only get to 110ft range and 7 targets, for a large sp and EM cost.
>
>   I would note harming entity happens to be a general knowledge spell for
> comparisons here, and assuming an MA of 20(which is less than min for Wiccan
> college) can be ranked to rank 20(315' range, 85% BC) for 31500ep.
>   For the same EP you can rank hellfire to rank 9(55' range, 37% BC).
>
>   Given these numbers, if you want a spell you can be sure of in the middle
> of a fight, for some effect, I'd go with harming entity myself, if your hard
> pressed and need to pull a rabbit out of the hat, then kick out hellfires.
> Comparing the effect of both spells at rank 20 is not a fair comparison, as
> to get hellfire to rank 20 has taken greater effort so should have a greater
> reward.
>
>   As a side point, fire does have the single target spell which is an
> alternative, Malignent Flames, and as the party from my last game can attest
> to, that spell can be a pain, as it comes at high ranks with a minor curse,
> which hits you even if fire armour stops the damage.  Though it would be nice
> if it was a little tougher spell, or a lower EM, but fire has valid
> alternatives for use.
>
>   If you really want to address broken spells, try Dragon flames with it's
> hundred odd potential targets, D+3/rank damage, and doubles and triples with
> do double or triple, unlike hellfires allready limited double and triple
> damage(+1/rank and +2/rank damage respectivly rather than double or triple)
> so a Rank 20 D-Flames is D+60 resist for half before any additions, and under
> an enhance enchant can reach D+120, then add doubles or triples, and this
> over half a battle field.
>   Or Agony, with it's resist and be slowed over an entire battlefield while
> an E&E gets 7 targets if they don't resist at rank 20 with slow.
>
>   Not to say Hellfire and Necrosis aren't powerfull spells, but they do
> require a very large investment in time and ep to get them there, and there
> are far more devastating spells out there than a 7 target spell.
>   Hellfire having a general knowledge spell which applies considerable
> defence against it.
>
> raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz wrote:
>   I knew someone would post a situation where you MIGHT cast Harming Entity
> in preference to Hellfire. When Hellfire becomes castable, the range is as
> much as you practically have a use for. Yes, there are occasions when you
> MIGHT use a spell like Harming Entity or Damnum Minatum, but they aren't
> common enough to raise as a counterposition.
>
> From Bernard Hoggins
> nevyn0ad@yahoo.co.uk
> Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com


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

Hellfire becomes castable about Rk 11 or so, castable being defined as not
capable of backfiring frequently enough to make the caster a liability. One
might argue that it really needs to be higher to be castable, but my point here
is that it's unlikely to be castable at any rank lower than this.

At the range modifier of 10+5 feet per rank, the range at that point is 65 feet
or 13 hexes. Most encounters that occur inside structures, the distances rarely
exceed 50 feet. About 40% of adventures in role playing games occur inside
something...A cave, a ruin, a palace, etc.

Encounters that happen outside can be at greater range, BUT...a lot of
encounters are made up of things that have no big ranged attack. So, in that
case, they have to move to engage the party, and that means that they end up in
range, anyway. One might cast spells like Damnum Minatum or Harming Entity if
you like, but you're hardly faced with any conflict over whether it was the
best decision.

Some outside encounters are ambushes, sprung by the party or by the NPCs. In
most cases, everyone is well inside 65 feet, if only so that the tanks can get
close enough to inflict a powerful hurting on the other team.

Encounters where the players simply exchange artillery fire are rare. Mostly, I
would suggest, because it is too boring for the other players who may not be
able to do very much. The ones who have little to offer become disengaged with
the encounter, and just wait for it to end.

Most DMs respond to the pressure from players to entertain. Sessions will most
likely be something that most of the players will be able to contribute to.

Jim.




Quoting Martin Dickson <martin.dickson@gmail.com>:

> On 12/12/05, raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz <raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
> >
> > Yes, there are occasions when you MIGHT use a
> > spell like Harming Entity or Damnum Minatum, but they aren't common enough
> > to
> > raise as a counterposition.
>
>
> Well no, that's not the case, as I have seen it.
>
> 'Course I'm only speaking from personal experience, so it's a data set of
> one, and there are other issues (namely a character who doesn't kill if it
> can be avoided), but the range issue alone has been enough to choose DMin
> over Hellfire on more than a few occassions.
>
> If your experience has been that Hellfire is used at every opportunity then
> our experiences simply vary. It does little to prove a position or
> counterposition either way.
>
> I still agree however that those spells mentioned do need looking at.
>
> Regards,
> Martin
>


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

------=_Part_35082_14622052.1134388790833
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 12/13/05, raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz <raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
>
> Hellfire becomes castable about Rk 11 or so, castable being defined as no=
t
> capable of backfiring frequently enough to make the caster a liability.
> One
> might argue that it really needs to be higher to be castable, but my poin=
t
> here
> is that it's unlikely to be castable at any rank lower than this.


 Agreed -- and by that time the character has sunk nearly 43,000 EP into it
-- which if nothing else further narrows their alternate choices for spells=
,
and I think conveys a feeling of "I should get my money's worth" by using i=
t
even more.

At the range modifier of 10+5 feet per rank, the range at that point is 65
> feet
> or 13 hexes. Most encounters that occur inside structures, the distances
> rarely
> exceed 50 feet. About 40% of adventures in role playing games occur insid=
e
> something...A cave, a ruin, a palace, etc.


While having found the range of HF limiting, I do agree that range is not
the best limiter for these spells -- and its worth noting that of HF, Nec,
and WV, only Hellfire has a shorter than normal range (the other two being
15 + 15).

Better limiters have been suggested in # of targets not being combined with
1/2 resist, etc.

Cheers,
Martin

------=_Part_35082_14622052.1134388790833
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 12/13/05, <b class=3D"gmail_sendername"><a href=3D"mailto:raro002@ec.auc=
kland.ac.nz">raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz</a></b> &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:raro00=
2@ec.auckland.ac.nz">raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz</a>&gt; wrote:<div><span cla=
ss=3D"gmail_quote">
</span><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rg=
b(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Hellfire b=
ecomes castable about Rk 11 or so, castable being defined as not<br>capable=
 of backfiring frequently enough to make the caster a liability. One
<br>might argue that it really needs to be higher to be castable, but my po=
int here<br>is that it's unlikely to be castable at any rank lower than thi=
s.</blockquote><div><br>
&nbsp;Agreed -- and by that time the character has sunk nearly 43,000
EP into it -- which if nothing else further narrows their alternate
choices for spells, and I think conveys a feeling of &quot;I should get my
money's worth&quot; by using it even more.<br>
</div><br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid=
 rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">At the =
range modifier of 10+5 feet per rank, the range at that point is 65 feet<br=
>
or 13 hexes. Most encounters that occur inside structures, the distances ra=
rely<br>exceed 50 feet. About 40% of adventures in role playing games occur=
 inside<br>something...A cave, a ruin, a palace, etc.</blockquote><div>
<br>
While having found the range of HF limiting, I do agree that range is
not the best limiter for these spells -- and its worth noting that of
HF, Nec, and WV, only Hellfire has a shorter than normal range (the
other two being 15 + 15).<br>
<br>
Better limiters have been suggested in # of targets not being combined with=
 1/2 resist, etc.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Martin<br>
<br>
<br>
</div></div><br>

------=_Part_35082_14622052.1134388790833--


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

------=_Part_5606_31886257.1134388971638
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

I have to agree with Bernard here. The xp required and the time taken mean
they deserve something. Just for the record I don't have any characters
capable of learning any of these three spells. But I think people are too
quick to downpower spells. While these spells might be great at rank 20
you've spent 136,500. Thats 9 average adventures. Maybe as low as 7 if
you're doing well. Its also 30 weeks of ranking. Now imagine what else you
could do with that much xp and time. You might be powerful with them in a
combat situation but you've ignored many other things to get that good and
you've also spent many adventures with low ranks, being considerably less
capable than the others who have spent xp a little more frugaly.
Not that I think any of them are overly powerful and I certainly don't want
to see the mind mage college powered down just before one of my characters
finaly learns it but why hasn't anyone brought up TK-rage? That has a base
of 30 plus 5 per rank damage and can literaly clear a battlefield. Also
since it doesn't mention anything about doubles or tripples I'd expect you
can increase the damage like normal. Thats 90 +15 per rank or 390 at rank
20. As to the whole enhance enchantment thing I think you can just see wher=
e
its going from there.

On 12/12/05, Bernard Hoggins <nevyn0ad@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> Also any situation where you base chance is being adversly affected via a
> bane/active resist/weird magical effect.
> Hellfires base chance is a real limiting factor, and at rank 20 it does
> only get to 110ft range and 7 targets, for a large sp and EM cost.
>
> I would note harming entity happens to be a general knowledge spell for
> comparisons here, and assuming an MA of 20(which is less than min for Wic=
can
> college) can be ranked to rank 20(315' range, 85% BC) for 31500ep.
> For the same EP you can rank hellfire to rank 9(55' range, 37% BC).
>
> Given these numbers, if you want a spell you can be sure of in the middle
> of a fight, for some effect, I'd go with harming entity myself, if your h=
ard
> pressed and need to pull a rabbit out of the hat, then kick out hellfires=
.
> Comparing the effect of both spells at rank 20 is not a fair comparison, =
as
> to get hellfire to rank 20 has taken greater effort so should have ! a
> greater reward.
>
> As a side point, fire does have the single target spell which is an
> alternative, Malignent Flames, and as the party from my last game can att=
est
> to, that spell can be a pain, as it comes at high ranks with a minor curs=
e,
> which hits you even if fire armour stops the damage.  Though it would be
> nice if it was a little tougher spell, or a lower EM, but fire has valid
> alternatives for use.
>
> If you really want to address broken spells, try Dragon flames with it's
> hundred odd potential targets, D+3/rank damage, and doubles and triples w=
ith
> do double or triple, unlike hellfires allready limited double and triple
> damage(+1/rank and +2/rank damage respectivly rather than double or tripl=
e)
> so a Rank 20 D-Flames is D+60 resist for half before any additions, and
> under an enhance enchant can reach D+120, then add doubles or triples, an=
d
> this over half a battle field.
> Or Agony, with it's resist and be s! lowed over an entire battlefield
> while an E&E gets 7 targets if they don't resist at rank 20 with slow.
>
> Not to say Hellfire and Necrosis aren't powerfull spells, but they do
> require a very large investment in time and ep to get them there, and the=
re
> are far more devastating spells out there than a 7 target spell.
> Hellfire having a general knowledge spell which applies considerable
> defence against it.
>
> *raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz* wrote:
>
> I knew someone would post a situation where you MIGHT cast Harming Entity
> in preference to Hellfire. When Hellfire becomes castable, the range is a=
s
> much as you practically have a use for. Yes, there are occasions when you
> MIGHT use a spell like Harming Entity or Damnum Minatum, but they aren't
> common enough to raise as a counterposition.
>
>
>
> From Bernard Hoggins
> nevyn0ad@yahoo.co.uk
>
> Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.co=
m
>

------=_Part_5606_31886257.1134388971638
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

<p>I have to agree with Bernard here. The xp required and the time taken me=
an they deserve something. Just for the record I don't have any characters =
capable of learning any of these three spells. But I think people are too q=
uick to downpower spells. While these spells might be great at rank 20 you'=
ve spent 136,500. Thats 9 average adventures. Maybe as low as 7 if you're d=
oing well. Its also 30 weeks of ranking. Now imagine what else you could do=
 with that much xp and time. You might be powerful with them in a combat si=
tuation but you've ignored many other things to get that good and you've al=
so spent many adventures with low ranks, being considerably less capable th=
an the others who have spent xp a little more frugaly.
</p>
<div>Not that I think any of them are overly powerful and I certainly don't=
 want to see the mind mage college powered down just before one of my chara=
cters finaly learns it but why hasn't anyone brought up TK-rage? That has a=
 base of 30 plus 5 per rank damage and can literaly clear a battlefield. Al=
so since it doesn't mention anything about doubles or tripples I'd expect y=
ou can increase the damage like normal. Thats 90 +15 per rank or 390 at ran=
k 20. As to the whole enhance enchantment thing I think you can just see wh=
ere its going from there.
</div>
<div><span class=3D"gmail_quote"></span>&nbsp;</div>
<div><span class=3D"gmail_quote">On 12/12/05, <b class=3D"gmail_sendername"=
>Bernard Hoggins</b> &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:nevyn0ad@yahoo.co.uk">nevyn0ad@y=
ahoo.co.uk</a>&gt; wrote:</span></div>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0=
px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">
<div>Also any situation where you base chance is being adversly affected vi=
a a bane/active resist/weird magical effect.</div>
<div>Hellfires base chance is a real limiting factor, and at rank 20 it doe=
s only get to 110ft range and 7 targets, for a large sp and EM cost.<br>&nb=
sp;</div>
<div>I would note harming entity happens to be a general knowledge spell fo=
r comparisons here, and assuming an MA of 20(which is less than min for Wic=
can college) can be ranked to rank 20(315' range, 85% BC) for 31500ep.
</div>
<div>For the same EP you can rank hellfire to rank 9(55' range, 37% BC).</d=
iv>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Given these numbers, if you want a spell you can be sure of in the mid=
dle of a fight, for some effect, I'd go with harming entity myself, if your=
 hard pressed and need to pull a rabbit out of the hat, then kick out hellf=
ires.&nbsp; Comparing the effect of both spells at rank 20 is not a fair co=
mparison, as to get hellfire to rank 20 has taken greater effort so should =
have ! a greater reward.
</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>As a side point, fire does have the single target spell which is an al=
ternative, Malignent Flames, and as the party from my last game can attest =
to, that spell can be a pain, as it comes at high ranks with a minor curse,=
 which hits you even if fire armour stops the damage.&nbsp; Though it would=
 be nice if it was a little tougher spell, or a lower EM, but fire has vali=
d alternatives for use.
</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>If you really want to address broken spells, try Dragon flames with it=
's hundred odd potential targets, D+3/rank damage, and doubles and triples =
with do double or triple, unlike hellfires allready limited double and trip=
le damage(+1/rank and +2/rank damage respectivly rather than double or trip=
le) so a Rank 20 D-Flames is D+60 resist for half before any additions, and=
 under an enhance enchant can reach D+120, then add doubles or triples, and=
 this over half a battle field.
</div>
<div>Or Agony, with it's resist and be s! lowed over an entire battlefield =
while an E&amp;E gets 7 targets if they don't resist at rank 20 with slow.<=
/div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Not to say Hellfire and Necrosis aren't powerfull spells, but they do =
require a very large investment in time and ep to get them there, and there=
 are far more devastating spells out there than a 7 target spell.</div>

<div>Hellfire having a general knowledge spell which applies considerable d=
efence against it.</div><span class=3D"q">
<div><br><b><i><a onclick=3D"return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" =
href=3D"mailto:raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz" target=3D"_blank">raro002@ec.auck=
land.ac.nz</a></i></b> wrote:</div></span><span class=3D"q">
<blockquote style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #101=
0ff 2px solid">I knew someone would post a situation where you MIGHT cast H=
arming Entity in preference to Hellfire. When Hellfire becomes castable, th=
e range is as much as you practically have a use for. Yes, there are occasi=
ons when you MIGHT use a spell like Harming Entity or Damnum Minatum, but t=
hey aren't common enough to raise as a counterposition.
</blockquote><br><br></span>From Bernard Hoggins<br><a onclick=3D"return to=
p.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href=3D"mailto:nevyn0ad@yahoo.co.uk" t=
arget=3D"_blank">nevyn0ad@yahoo.co.uk</a>=20
<p>Send instant messages to your online friends <a onclick=3D"return top.js=
.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href=3D"http://au.messenger.yahoo.com/" ta=
rget=3D"_blank">http://au.messenger.yahoo.com</a> </p></blockquote><br>

------=_Part_5606_31886257.1134388971638--


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

------=_Part_5638_18979869.1134389246408
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

I know I'm new about this but just to confirm something I once heard. If a
spell is changed after you've ranked it you can respend that time and xp
right?

On 12/13/05, Martin Dickson <martin.dickson@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 12/13/05, raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz <raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
> >
> > Hellfire becomes castable about Rk 11 or so, castable being defined as
> > not
> > capable of backfiring frequently enough to make the caster a liability.
> > One
> > might argue that it really needs to be higher to be castable, but my
> > point here
> > is that it's unlikely to be castable at any rank lower than this.
>
>
>  Agreed -- and by that time the character has sunk nearly 43,000 EP into
> it -- which if nothing else further narrows their alternate choices for
> spells, and I think conveys a feeling of "I should get my money's worth" =
by
> using it even more.
>
>
> At the range modifier of 10+5 feet per rank, the range at that point is 6=
5
> > feet
> > or 13 hexes. Most encounters that occur inside structures, the distance=
s
> > rarely
> > exceed 50 feet. About 40% of adventures in role playing games occur
> > inside
> > something...A cave, a ruin, a palace, etc.
>
>
> While having found the range of HF limiting, I do agree that range is not
> the best limiter for these spells -- and its worth noting that of HF, Nec=
,
> and WV, only Hellfire has a shorter than normal range (the other two bein=
g
> 15 + 15).
>
> Better limiters have been suggested in # of targets not being combined
> with 1/2 resist, etc.
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
>
>
>
>

------=_Part_5638_18979869.1134389246408
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

I know I'm new about this but just to confirm something I once heard. If a =
spell is changed after you've ranked it you can respend that time and xp ri=
ght? <br><br>
<div><span class=3D"gmail_quote">On 12/13/05, <b class=3D"gmail_sendername"=
>Martin Dickson</b> &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:martin.dickson@gmail.com">martin.=
dickson@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:</span>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0=
px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">On 12/13/05, <b class=3D"gmail_s=
endername"><a onclick=3D"return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href=
=3D"mailto:raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz" target=3D"_blank">
raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz</a></b> &lt;<a onclick=3D"return top.js.OpenExtLi=
nk(window,event,this)" href=3D"mailto:raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz" target=3D"=
_blank">raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz</a>&gt; wrote:=20
<div><span class=3D"gmail_quote"></span>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0=
pt 0pt 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid">Hellfire becomes cas=
table about Rk 11 or so, castable being defined as not<br>capable of backfi=
ring frequently enough to make the caster a liability. One=20
<br>might argue that it really needs to be higher to be castable, but my po=
int here<br>is that it's unlikely to be castable at any rank lower than thi=
s.</blockquote>
<div><br>&nbsp;Agreed -- and by that time the character has sunk nearly 43,=
000 EP into it -- which if nothing else further narrows their alternate cho=
ices for spells, and I think conveys a feeling of &quot;I should get my mon=
ey's worth&quot; by using it even more.
<br>&nbsp;</div><br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0=
pt 0pt 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid">At the range modifie=
r of 10+5 feet per rank, the range at that point is 65 feet<br>or 13 hexes.=
 Most encounters that occur inside structures, the distances rarely
<br>exceed 50 feet. About 40% of adventures in role playing games occur ins=
ide<br>something...A cave, a ruin, a palace, etc.</blockquote>
<div><br>While having found the range of HF limiting, I do agree that range=
 is not the best limiter for these spells -- and its worth noting that of H=
F, Nec, and WV, only Hellfire has a shorter than normal range (the other tw=
o being 15 + 15).
<br><br>Better limiters have been suggested in # of targets not being combi=
ned with 1/2 resist, etc.<br><br>Cheers,<br>Martin<br><br><br>&nbsp;</div><=
/div><br></blockquote></div><br>

------=_Part_5638_18979869.1134389246408--


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

Quoting RPer 4eva <msnoverflow@gmail.com>:

> I have to agree with Bernard here. The xp required and the time taken mean
> they deserve something. Just for the record I don't have any characters
> capable of learning any of these three spells. But I think people are too
> quick to downpower spells. While these spells might be great at rank 20
> you've spent 136,500. Thats 9 average adventures. Maybe as low as 7 if
> you're doing well. Its also 30 weeks of ranking. Now imagine what else you
> could do with that much xp and time. You might be powerful with them in a
> combat situation but you've ignored many other things to get that good and
> you've also spent many adventures with low ranks, being considerably less
> capable than the others who have spent xp a little more frugaly.

Wonderful points.

Completely irrelevant, however. What the spells cost in xp is not relevant to
this discussion. There might be some discussion on it in the future, but at the
moment, the focus is purely on how interesting it is to play characters with
these spells.

> Not that I think any of them are overly powerful and I certainly don't want
> to see the mind mage college powered down just before one of my characters
> finaly learns it but why hasn't anyone brought up TK-rage?

It is a good idea to veer away from talking about the value to affected players.
It just muddies the waters, and people offer points of view that have less to
do with creating a more engaging game, and more about protecting their
characters from a needed but unwanted revision.

That has a base
> of 30 plus 5 per rank damage and can literaly clear a battlefield. Also
> since it doesn't mention anything about doubles or tripples I'd expect you
> can increase the damage like normal. Thats 90 +15 per rank or 390 at rank
> 20. As to the whole enhance enchantment thing I think you can just see where
> its going from there.

If you have a Mind Special counterspell, you have at least +30 to your
resistance to this spell, possibly much more. And, last time I looked, if you
resisted it, you took no damage. HF, Necrosis and WV all do damage even if you
resist, and they do it to the point where you are dead, even if you resist vs a
triple effect. With these spells, you can wipe out whole parties, which has
long been a concern, although not in this particular discussion.

There are fewer problems with HF than the others, but not everyone can be
protected by Fire Armour.


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

Quoting Martin Dickson <martin.dickson@gmail.com>:

> On 12/13/05, raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz <raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
> >
> > Hellfire becomes castable about Rk 11 or so,
>
>  Agreed -- and by that time the character has sunk nearly 43,000 EP into it
> -- which if nothing else further narrows their alternate choices for spells,
> and I think conveys a feeling of "I should get my money's worth" by using it
> even more.

If the spell is to be nerfed, then it will have a new Exp.Mult., I suppose.
Maybe even a better base chance.

I'm unconvinced that you would use the spell more because you have paid so much
for it. I think that you use the spell because any other alternative is a less
certain strategy. It maybe that having such a large Exp.Mult. has deprived
characters of other opportunities for diverse advancement.

HF is the only spell in the Wiccan college to do damage at all, and wiccans get
a doozy. Air mages have a wide range of differing attack types with a variety
of secondary effects. Even so, air mages who have WV almost always cast nothing
else. Necros, with the exception of Dramus, exist is two states. They are
either looking for Necrosis, or they have it. They have a lot of different
spells that do different flavours of the same kind of damage, pretty much.
Well, except for Spectral Warrior. Still, they mostly cast Necrosis. Seidar
opens with Spectral Warrior, and then follows up with volleys of Necrosis after
Necrosis after Necrosis.

Something should be done on the grounds of public health and safety.


>
> At the range modifier of 10+5 feet per rank, the range at that point is 65
> > feet
> > or 13 hexes. Most encounters that occur inside structures, the distances
> > rarely
> > exceed 50 feet. About 40% of adventures in role playing games occur inside
> > something...A cave, a ruin, a palace, etc.
>
>
> While having found the range of HF limiting, I do agree that range is not
> the best limiter for these spells -- and its worth noting that of HF, Nec,
> and WV, only Hellfire has a shorter than normal range (the other two being
> 15 + 15).
>
> Better limiters have been suggested in # of targets not being combined with
> 1/2 resist, etc.
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>


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

------=_Part_8784_10275553.1134405095392
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 12/13/05, raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz <raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
>
> Quoting RPer 4eva <msnoverflow@gmail.com>:
>
> > I have to agree with Bernard here. The xp required and the time taken
> mean
> > they deserve something. Just for the record I don't have any characters
> > capable of learning any of these three spells. But I think people are
> too
> > quick to downpower spells. While these spells might be great at rank 20
> > you've spent 136,500. Thats 9 average adventures. Maybe as low as 7 if
> > you're doing well. Its also 30 weeks of ranking. Now imagine what else
> you
> > could do with that much xp and time. You might be powerful with them in
> a
> > combat situation but you've ignored many other things to get that good
> and
> > you've also spent many adventures with low ranks, being considerably
> less
> > capable than the others who have spent xp a little more frugaly.
>
> Wonderful points.
>
> Completely irrelevant, however. What the spells cost in xp is not relevan=
t
> to
> this discussion. There might be some discussion on it in the future, but
> at the
> moment, the focus is purely on how interesting it is to play characters
> with
> these spells.


Prehaps you are failing to see it from all sides. If we remove spells
because some players don't have fun where does it end? Also I'm assuming th=
e
people with the spell find it fun to use. No one would deliberatly deprive
both themselves and those around them of fun. While you may condemn my
points to irrelevance I would have to say anyone spending that much time an=
d
xp and that many adventures does not think that they or their effort is
irrelevant and I don't either.

> Not that I think any of them are overly powerful and I certainly don't
> want
> > to see the mind mage college powered down just before one of my
> characters
> > finaly learns it but why hasn't anyone brought up TK-rage?
>
> It is a good idea to veer away from talking about the value to affected
> players.
> It just muddies the waters, and people offer points of view that have les=
s
> to
> do with creating a more engaging game, and more about protecting their
> characters from a needed but unwanted revision.


Weren't you just talking about peoples point of view? You can't have it bot=
h
ways. Either you accept everyones opinion as valid or no ones. And the
people who both are trying to have fun and put lots of work in might
arguably have a more relevant point of view than someone who just doesn't
like the fact another person is better at combat than they are. How long
until we start whining because someone heals better than we do? Or that
there assasin is too stealthy and kills people from behind without us
getting to bash them. Or what about the fact that someone plays a more
charismatic person than our character and so we can't be party leader? If
you change the rules every time someone is unhappy then where does it end. =
I
don't like elves. Anyone want to remove them from the system? I don't think
so.

Also the fact a revision is unwanted doesn't mean its needed. It just makes
it controversial. In fact a bad revision will be very unwanted by the peopl=
e
it effects and this doesn't make there opinion any less valid than yours.

That has a base
> > of 30 plus 5 per rank damage and can literaly clear a battlefield. Also
> > since it doesn't mention anything about doubles or tripples I'd expect
> you
> > can increase the damage like normal. Thats 90 +15 per rank or 390 at
> rank
> > 20. As to the whole enhance enchantment thing I think you can just see
> where
> > its going from there.
>
> If you have a Mind Special counterspell, you have at least +30 to your
> resistance to this spell, possibly much more. And, last time I looked, if
> you
> resisted it, you took no damage. HF, Necrosis and WV all do damage even i=
f
> you
> resist, and they do it to the point where you are dead, even if you resis=
t
> vs a
> triple effect. With these spells, you can wipe out whole parties, which
> has
> long been a concern, although not in this particular discussion.


Counterspells? Where did that come from. Firstly how often does your
opponent have your counterspell up baring in mind you probably have 5 mages
in your party. And secondly who in there right mind would choose TK-rage as
there first choice one on one? Surely you're using it against multiple
opponents and if you only kill one of them in the first casting its hardly =
a
wasted spell. The counterspell if anywhere is likely to be cast on your
companions and allies so they survive. My point about this spell is its
quite capable of taking out large numbers of bad guys in a much much larger
area.

There are fewer problems with HF than the others, but not everyone can be
> protected by Fire Armour.
>
>
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>

------=_Part_8784_10275553.1134405095392
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

<br><br>
<div><span class=3D"gmail_quote">On 12/13/05, <b class=3D"gmail_sendername"=
><a href=3D"mailto:raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz">raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz</a>=
</b> &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz">raro002@ec.auckland.a=
c.nz
</a>&gt; wrote:</span>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0=
px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">Quoting RPer 4eva &lt;<a href=3D=
"mailto:msnoverflow@gmail.com">msnoverflow@gmail.com</a>&gt;:<br><br>&gt; I=
 have to agree with Bernard here. The xp required and the time taken mean
<br>&gt; they deserve something. Just for the record I don't have any chara=
cters<br>&gt; capable of learning any of these three spells. But I think pe=
ople are too<br>&gt; quick to downpower spells. While these spells might be=
 great at rank 20
<br>&gt; you've spent 136,500. Thats 9 average adventures. Maybe as low as =
7 if<br>&gt; you're doing well. Its also 30 weeks of ranking. Now imagine w=
hat else you<br>&gt; could do with that much xp and time. You might be powe=
rful with them in a
<br>&gt; combat situation but you've ignored many other things to get that =
good and<br>&gt; you've also spent many adventures with low ranks, being co=
nsiderably less<br>&gt; capable than the others who have spent xp a little =
more frugaly.
<br><br>Wonderful points.<br><br>Completely irrelevant, however. What the s=
pells cost in xp is not relevant to<br>this discussion. There might be some=
 discussion on it in the future, but at the<br>moment, the focus is purely =
on how interesting it is to play characters with
<br>these spells.</blockquote>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Prehaps you are failing to see it from all sides. If we remove spells =
because some players don't have fun where does it end? Also I'm assuming th=
e people with the spell find it fun to use. No one would deliberatly depriv=
e both themselves and those around them of fun. While you may condemn my po=
ints to irrelevance I would have to say anyone spending that much time and =
xp and that many adventures does not think that they or their effort is irr=
elevant and I don't either.
</div><br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0=
px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">&gt; Not that I think any of the=
m are overly powerful and I certainly don't want<br>&gt; to see the mind ma=
ge college powered down just before one of my characters
<br>&gt; finaly learns it but why hasn't anyone brought up TK-rage?<br><br>=
It is a good idea to veer away from talking about the value to affected pla=
yers.<br>It just muddies the waters, and people offer points of view that h=
ave less to
<br>do with creating a more engaging game, and more about protecting their<=
br>characters from a needed but unwanted revision.</blockquote>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Weren't you just talking about peoples point of view? You can't have i=
t both ways. Either you accept everyones opinion as valid or no ones. And t=
he people who both are trying to have fun and put lots of work in might arg=
uably have a more relevant point of view than someone who just doesn't like=
 the fact another person is better at combat than they are. How long until =
we start whining because someone heals better than we do? Or that there ass=
asin is too stealthy and kills people from behind without us getting to bas=
h them. Or what about the fact that someone plays a more charismatic person=
 than our character and so we can't be party leader? If you change the rule=
s every time someone is unhappy then where does it end. I don't like elves.=
 Anyone want to remove them from the system? I don't think so.=20
</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Also the fact a revision is unwanted doesn't mean its needed. It just =
makes it controversial. In fact a bad revision will be very unwanted by the=
 people it effects and this doesn't make there opinion any less valid than =
yours.
</div><br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0=
px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">That has a base<br>&gt; of 30 pl=
us 5 per rank damage and can literaly clear a battlefield. Also<br>&gt; sin=
ce it doesn't mention anything about doubles or tripples I'd expect you
<br>&gt; can increase the damage like normal. Thats 90 +15 per rank or 390 =
at rank<br>&gt; 20. As to the whole enhance enchantment thing I think you c=
an just see where<br>&gt; its going from there.<br><br>If you have a Mind S=
pecial counterspell, you have at least +30 to your
<br>resistance to this spell, possibly much more. And, last time I looked, =
if you<br>resisted it, you took no damage. HF, Necrosis and WV all do damag=
e even if you<br>resist, and they do it to the point where you are dead, ev=
en if you resist vs a
<br>triple effect. With these spells, you can wipe out whole parties, which=
 has<br>long been a concern, although not in this particular discussion.</b=
lockquote>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Counterspells? Where did that come from. Firstly how often does your o=
pponent have your counterspell up baring in mind you probably have 5 mages =
in your party. And secondly who in there right mind would choose TK-rage as=
 there first choice one on one? Surely you're using it against multiple opp=
onents and if you only kill one of them in the first casting its hardly a w=
asted spell. The counterspell if anywhere is likely to be cast on your comp=
anions and allies so they survive. My point about this spell is its quite c=
apable of taking out large numbers of bad guys in a much much larger area.
</div><br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0=
px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">There are fewer problems with HF=
 than the others, but not everyone can be<br>protected by Fire Armour.<br>
<br><br>-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.=
org.nz">dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz</a> --<br></blockquote></div><br>

------=_Part_8784_10275553.1134405095392--


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

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C5FFAE.939253C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

The other insidious thing that these spells do is cut down the Options
for a party as a whole.
 
I have adventured with Amber a few times recently and she has Rank 20
Wiccan Hellfire.
 
In combat the sole job of the party was to keep her alive and unfettered
so she could finish the combat.
(TDP was also suposed to cast damage enhance as well early on)
 
Any number of time GM's have rebounded the spell upon us and done
strange things all of which basically proved that we as a party could
not in anyway take the damage we could dish out.
Also no fighter can deal out similar levels of damage (no matter how
much Exp they sink into it) - not even sabrina - so the whole rest of
the party became meat shields trying to keep the hell-firer in operation
making how good the rest of us were not so relevant. You get mages
stepping into combat just to give Amber another pulse to cast another
spell - an usually kill all those engaging you.
 
The only things that slowed Amber down was the range but this caught up
with he in only a few fights and loosing all her fagiue.
 
Another measure of if a magics is too tough at the high end game is to
look at the top end characters and see if they have picked defenses
against those spells.
My personal experience is they go out of thier way to try and protect
themselves vs Hellfire/Necrosis/Vortex, there seem to be a lot of
permenant protections or reductions in fire damage at high level and I
have seen armours/ritual that help vs necro damage spells, also items
and effects that change resist for half to resist for quarter ot none.
 
Final note the Extreme party hunting Rashick last session they had the
most deaths on the adventure when multiple Rank 20 Hellfires were
dropped on them. 3 people (I think) died in short sucession.

------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C5FFAE.939253C0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<TITLE>Message</TITLE>

<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2769" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D970031117-12122005><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>The=20
other insidious thing that these spells do is cut down the Options for a =
party=20
as a whole.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D970031117-12122005><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D970031117-12122005><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>I have=20
adventured with Amber a few times recently and she has Rank 20 Wiccan=20
Hellfire.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D970031117-12122005><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D970031117-12122005><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>In=20
combat the sole job of the party was to keep her alive and unfettered so =
she=20
could finish the combat.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D970031117-12122005><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>(TDP=20
was also suposed to cast damage enhance as well early =
on)</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D970031117-12122005><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D970031117-12122005><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>Any=20
number of time GM's have rebounded the spell upon us and done strange =
things all=20
of which basically proved that we as a party could not in anyway take =
the damage=20
we could dish out.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D970031117-12122005><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>Also=20
no fighter can deal out similar levels of damage (no matter how much Exp =
they=20
sink into it) - not even sabrina - so the whole rest of the party became =
meat=20
shields trying to keep the hell-firer in operation making how good the =
rest of=20
us were not so relevant. You get mages stepping into combat just to give =
Amber=20
another pulse to cast another spell - an usually kill all those engaging =

you.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D970031117-12122005><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D970031117-12122005><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>The=20
only things that slowed Amber down was the range but this caught up with =
he in=20
only a few fights and loosing all her fagiue.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D970031117-12122005><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D970031117-12122005><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Another measure of if a magics is too tough at the high end =
game is to=20
look at the top end characters and see if they have picked defenses =
against=20
those spells.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D970031117-12122005><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>My=20
personal experience is they go out of thier way to try and protect =
themselves vs=20
Hellfire/Necrosis/Vortex, there seem to be a lot of permenant =
protections or=20
reductions in fire damage at high level and I have seen armours/ritual =
that help=20
vs necro damage spells, also items and effects that change resist for =
half to=20
resist for quarter ot none.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D970031117-12122005><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D970031117-12122005><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>Final=20
note the Extreme party hunting Rashick last session they had the most =
deaths on=20
the adventure when multiple Rank 20 Hellfires were dropped on them. 3 =
people (I=20
think) died in short sucession.</FONT></SPAN></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C5FFAE.939253C0--


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

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C5FF51.8D956437
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Just to be thorough. Could someone (thanks, Errol) tidy up MG to always
or never be hyphenated in the rule book revision. So that this issue
never happens again. No need to vote.
=20
Andrew

	-----Original Message-----
	From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz] On
Behalf Of Martin Dickson
	Sent: Monday, 12 December 2005 8:43 p.m.
	To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
	Subject: Re: [dq] Main-gauche defence
=09
=09
	On 12/12/05, Errol Cavit <ecavit@tollnz.co.nz> wrote:=20
=09

		A prepared Main Gauche also provides some defence;
however defence is only applied=20
		against Melee attacks, and no defence is gained at Rank
0."


	Excellent, thank you. Also explains why I didn't find it
initially -- "Main gauche" is sometimes hyphenated in DQ and sometimes
not.
=09

		An extra sentence on the shield table would be good I
think.=20


	Good plan.
=09
	Cheers,
	Martin
=09



------_=_NextPart_001_01C5FF51.8D956437
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Message</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1522" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D473312119-12122005><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>Just=20
to be thorough. Could someone (thanks, Errol) tidy up MG to always or =
never be=20
hyphenated in the rule book revision. So that this issue never happens =
again. No=20
need to vote.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D473312119-12122005><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D473312119-12122005><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Andrew</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV></DIV>
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader lang=3Den-us dir=3Dltr =
align=3Dleft><FONT=20
  face=3DTahoma size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>=20
  dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz] <B>On Behalf Of=20
  </B>Martin Dickson<BR><B>Sent:</B> Monday, 12 December 2005 8:43=20
  p.m.<BR><B>To:</B> dq@dq.sf.org.nz<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [dq] =
Main-gauche=20
  defence<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>On 12/12/05, <B =
class=3Dgmail_sendername>Errol=20
  Cavit</B> &lt;<A =
href=3D"mailto:ecavit@tollnz.co.nz">ecavit@tollnz.co.nz</A>&gt;=20
  wrote:
  <DIV><SPAN class=3Dgmail_quote></SPAN>
  <BLOCKQUOTE class=3Dgmail_quote=20
  style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: =
rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid">
    <P><FONT size=3D2>A prepared Main Gauche also</FONT> <FONT =
size=3D2>provides=20
    some defence; however defence is only applied</FONT> <BR><FONT=20
    size=3D2>against Melee attacks, and no defence is gained</FONT> =
<FONT=20
    size=3D2>at Rank 0."</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE>
  <DIV><BR>Excellent, thank you. Also explains why I didn't find it =
initially --=20
  "Main gauche" is sometimes hyphenated in DQ and sometimes =
not.<BR></DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE class=3Dgmail_quote=20
  style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: =
rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid">
    <P><FONT size=3D2>An extra sentence on the shield table would be =
good I=20
    think.</FONT> </P></BLOCKQUOTE>
  <DIV><BR>Good=20
plan.<BR><BR>Cheers,<BR>Martin<BR></DIV></DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></H=
TML>
=00
------_=_NextPart_001_01C5FF51.8D956437--


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

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_01C5FF52.D3942B12
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

Added to http://www.dragonquest.org.nz/dqwiki/index.php/2006_Minor_Fixes
<http://www.dragonquest.org.nz/dqwiki/index.php/2006_Minor_Fixes>  5 minutes
ago...
 
I'd like to take this opportunity to encourage people to put things like
this on that page as they stumble across them.
 
Cheers
Errol
 
PS I found it because I am lazy and 'gauche' was the shortest useful search
term I thought of...

-----Original Message-----
From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]On Behalf Of
Andrew Withy (DSL AK)
Sent: Tuesday, 13 December 2005 08:24
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Subject: Re: [dq] Main-gauche defence


Just to be thorough. Could someone (thanks, Errol) tidy up MG to always or
never be hyphenated in the rule book revision. So that this issue never
happens again. No need to vote.
 
Andrew

-----Original Message-----
From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz] On Behalf Of
Martin Dickson
Sent: Monday, 12 December 2005 8:43 p.m.
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Subject: Re: [dq] Main-gauche defence


On 12/12/05, Errol Cavit < ecavit@tollnz.co.nz <mailto:ecavit@tollnz.co.nz>
> wrote: 


A prepared Main Gauche also provides some defence; however defence is only
applied 
against Melee attacks, and no defence is gained at Rank 0."


Excellent, thank you. Also explains why I didn't find it initially -- "Main
gauche" is sometimes hyphenated in DQ and sometimes not.


An extra sentence on the shield table would be good I think. 


Good plan.

Cheers,
Martin




------_=_NextPart_001_01C5FF52.D3942B12
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>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<TITLE>Message</TITLE>

<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1106" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D100272719-12122005><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>Added=20
to <A=20
href=3D"http://www.dragonquest.org.nz/dqwiki/index.php/2006_Minor_Fixes"=
>http://www.dragonquest.org.nz/dqwiki/index.php/2006_Minor_Fixes</A>&nbs=
p;5=20
minutes ago...</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D100272719-12122005><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff=20
size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D100272719-12122005><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>I'd=20
like to take this opportunity to encourage people to put things like =
this on=20
that page as they stumble across them.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D100272719-12122005><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff=20
size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D100272719-12122005><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff=20
size=3D2>Cheers</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D100272719-12122005><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff=20
size=3D2>Errol</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D100272719-12122005><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff=20
size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D100272719-12122005><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>PS I=20
found it because I am lazy and 'gauche' was the shortest useful search =
term I=20
thought of...</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px =
solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> =
dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz=20
  [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Andrew Withy (DSL=20
  AK)<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, 13 December 2005 08:24<BR><B>To:</B>=20
  dq@dq.sf.org.nz<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [dq] Main-gauche=20
  defence<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV><SPAN class=3D473312119-12122005><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff size=3D2>Just=20
  to be thorough. Could someone (thanks, Errol) tidy up MG to always or =
never be=20
  hyphenated in the rule book revision. So that this issue never =
happens again.=20
  No need to vote.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
  <DIV><SPAN class=3D473312119-12122005><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff=20
  size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><SPAN class=3D473312119-12122005><FONT face=3DArial =
color=3D#0000ff=20
  size=3D2>Andrew</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
    <DIV></DIV>
    <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader lang=3Den-us dir=3Dltr =
align=3Dleft><FONT=20
    face=3DTahoma size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>=20
    dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz] <B>On Behalf =
Of=20
    </B>Martin Dickson<BR><B>Sent:</B> Monday, 12 December 2005 8:43=20
    p.m.<BR><B>To:</B> dq@dq.sf.org.nz<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [dq] =
Main-gauche=20
    defence<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>On 12/12/05, <B =
class=3Dgmail_sendername>Errol=20
    Cavit</B> &lt;<A=20
    href=3D"mailto:ecavit@tollnz.co.nz">ecavit@tollnz.co.nz</A>&gt; =
wrote:=20
    <DIV><SPAN class=3Dgmail_quote></SPAN>
    <BLOCKQUOTE class=3Dgmail_quote=20
    style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: =
rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid">
      <P><FONT size=3D2>A prepared Main Gauche also</FONT> <FONT =
size=3D2>provides=20
      some defence; however defence is only applied</FONT> <BR><FONT=20
      size=3D2>against Melee attacks, and no defence is gained</FONT> =
<FONT=20
      size=3D2>at Rank 0."</FONT></P></BLOCKQUOTE>
    <DIV><BR>Excellent, thank you. Also explains why I didn't find it =
initially=20
    -- "Main gauche" is sometimes hyphenated in DQ and sometimes =
not.<BR></DIV>
    <BLOCKQUOTE class=3Dgmail_quote=20
    style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: =
rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid">
      <P><FONT size=3D2>An extra sentence on the shield table would be =
good I=20
      think.</FONT> </P></BLOCKQUOTE>
    <DIV><BR>Good=20
plan.<BR><BR>Cheers,<BR>Martin<BR></DIV></DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQU=
OTE></BODY></HTML>

------_=_NextPart_001_01C5FF52.D3942B12--


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

------=_Part_43632_5584882.1134416585363
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 12/13/05, raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz <raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
>
>
> Quoting Martin Dickson <martin.dickson@gmail.com>:
>
> > > Hellfire becomes castable about Rk 11 or so,
> >
> >  Agreed -- and by that time the character has sunk nearly 43,000 EP int=
o
> it
> > -- which if nothing else further narrows their alternate choices for
> spells,


It maybe that having such a large Exp.Mult. has deprived
> characters of other opportunities for diverse advancement.


It does appear to be an aspect of the "one trick pony" style -- as you say
these spells can become then only one correct choice, but in addition they
can become the only choice -- particularly if picked up by characters
earlier in their career.

As you've pointed out these spells are dangerous to the caster at low rank,
which make it desirable to get them to a high-ish usable rank as quickly as
possible, at which point they have sucked up considerable EP which could
have been used on some breadth.

------=_Part_43632_5584882.1134416585363
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 12/13/05, <b class=3D"gmail_sendername"><a href=3D"mailto:raro002@ec.auc=
kland.ac.nz">raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz</a></b> &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:raro00=
2@ec.auckland.ac.nz">raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz</a>&gt; wrote:<div><span cla=
ss=3D"gmail_quote">
</span><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rg=
b(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>Quotin=
g Martin Dickson &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:martin.dickson@gmail.com">martin.dic=
kson@gmail.com
</a>&gt;:<br><br>&gt; &gt; Hellfire becomes castable about Rk 11 or so,<br>=
&gt;<br>&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;Agreed -- and by that time the character has sunk n=
early 43,000 EP into it<br>&gt; -- which if nothing else further narrows th=
eir alternate choices for spells,&nbsp;
</blockquote><br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1p=
x solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">=
 It maybe that having such a large Exp.Mult. has deprived<br>characters of =
other opportunities for diverse advancement.
</blockquote><div><br>It does appear to be an aspect of the &quot;one trick=
 pony&quot; style -- as you say these spells can become then only one corre=
ct choice, but in addition they can become the only choice -- particularly =
if picked up by characters earlier in their career.
<br><br>As you've pointed out these spells are dangerous to the caster at l=
ow rank, which make it desirable to get them to a high-ish usable rank as q=
uickly as possible, at which point they have sucked up considerable EP whic=
h could have been used on some breadth.
<br></div></div><br>

------=_Part_43632_5584882.1134416585363--


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

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C5FFC1.5784F730
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Yes I have adventured with Amber and our combats went that sort of way, I
guess being a big Strong Giant I didn't mind too much - she's soo cute!!

 

Incidentally I do not know of any other characters with high ranks in these
spells - not that they don't exist, but either they are not too common or I
have lead a sheltered life.

 

(this next bit carries some bias) I think the problem is more of a relative
one - i.e. what are the other damage spells in the game and how do they
compare.  Not arguing that every collage gets Hell fire however, Celestial
has White Fire - 1% BC, save or die, 500ep, 50,000 silvers to buy.  I do not
know of any celestial that has ranked this spell, I have it at rk 6.  I have
used it (bravely) about 10 times on adventure, the only time it has ever
worked is against a peasant dieing of the plague who did not resist because
I told him I was going to cure him.

 

This spell is a serious waste of space in comparison to HF WV N etc - it
should be a 200em general in comparison.  So I agree that there are issues
with the 3 spells under examination however perhaps a larger exercise of
considering the balance of all damage spells in the various collages could
be undertaken with the categories suggested used to evaluate.  

 

I'm not arguing that all the collages should be the same, please don't take
this that way but I do think that just as there are some spells at the
extreme high end of the continuum there are also some balanced badly at the
extreme low end.  Personally I think TK Rage is about right, high ep, multi
target (including the party), high damage, but with a good chance of saving
against it.  Because it is multi target your gona get someone.  Similarly if
White fire was single target save for some damage it would be about right.

 

My 2 cents

H

   

 

Hamish Brown

Director

 

Zenergy

Whole People Co-operating in a Sustainable world

119 Mt Eden Rd,

Auckland

www.zenergyglobal.com 

 

  _____  

From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz] On Behalf Of Phil
Judd
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005 6:29 AM
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Subject: Re: [dq] Options with: Necrosis, Whirlwind Vortex and Hellfire?

 

The other insidious thing that these spells do is cut down the Options for a
party as a whole.

 

I have adventured with Amber a few times recently and she has Rank 20 Wiccan
Hellfire.

 

In combat the sole job of the party was to keep her alive and unfettered so
she could finish the combat.

(TDP was also suposed to cast damage enhance as well early on)

 

Any number of time GM's have rebounded the spell upon us and done strange
things all of which basically proved that we as a party could not in anyway
take the damage we could dish out.

Also no fighter can deal out similar levels of damage (no matter how much
Exp they sink into it) - not even sabrina - so the whole rest of the party
became meat shields trying to keep the hell-firer in operation making how
good the rest of us were not so relevant. You get mages stepping into combat
just to give Amber another pulse to cast another spell - an usually kill all
those engaging you.

 

The only things that slowed Amber down was the range but this caught up with
he in only a few fights and loosing all her fagiue.

 

Another measure of if a magics is too tough at the high end game is to look
at the top end characters and see if they have picked defenses against those
spells.

My personal experience is they go out of thier way to try and protect
themselves vs Hellfire/Necrosis/Vortex, there seem to be a lot of permenant
protections or reductions in fire damage at high level and I have seen
armours/ritual that help vs necro damage spells, also items and effects that
change resist for half to resist for quarter ot none.

 

Final note the Extreme party hunting Rashick last session they had the most
deaths on the adventure when multiple Rank 20 Hellfires were dropped on
them. 3 people (I think) died in short sucession.


------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C5FFC1.5784F730
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html xmlns:v=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" =
xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" =
xmlns:w=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" =
xmlns:st1=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" =
xmlns=3D"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">

<head>
<meta http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">
<meta name=3DGenerator content=3D"Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style>
<![endif]-->
<title>Message</title>
<o:SmartTagType =
namespaceuri=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
 name=3D"City"/>
<o:SmartTagType =
namespaceuri=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
 name=3D"place"/>
<o:SmartTagType =
namespaceuri=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
 name=3D"Street"/>
<o:SmartTagType =
namespaceuri=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
 name=3D"address"/>
<!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
 /* Font Definitions */
 @font-face
	{font-family:Tahoma;
	panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:"Book Antiqua";
	panose-1:2 4 6 2 5 3 5 3 3 4;}
 /* Style Definitions */
 p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
	{margin:0in;
	margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	font-size:12.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
	{color:blue;
	text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
	{color:purple;
	text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAutoSig, li.MsoAutoSig, div.MsoAutoSig
	{margin:0in;
	margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	font-size:12.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.EmailStyle17
	{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
	font-family:Arial;
	color:navy;}
@page Section1
	{size:8.5in 11.0in;
	margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
	{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>

</head>

<body lang=3DEN-US link=3Dblue vlink=3Dpurple>

<div class=3DSection1>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Yes I have adventured with Amber =
and our
combats went that sort of way, I guess being a big Strong Giant I =
didn&#8217;t
mind too much &#8211; she&#8217;s soo =
cute!!<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Incidentally I do not know of any =
other
characters with high ranks in these spells &#8211; not that they =
don&#8217;t
exist, but either they are not too common or I have lead a sheltered =
life.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>(this next bit carries some bias) I =
think
the problem is more of a relative one &#8211; i.e. what are the other =
damage
spells in the game and how do they compare.&nbsp; Not arguing that every
collage gets Hell fire however, Celestial has White Fire &#8211; 1% BC, =
save or
die, 500ep, 50,000 silvers to buy.&nbsp; I do not know of any celestial =
that
has ranked this spell, I have it at rk 6.&nbsp; I have used it (bravely) =
about
10 times on adventure, the only time it has ever worked is against a =
peasant
dieing of the plague who did not resist because I told him I was going =
to cure
him.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>This spell is a serious waste of =
space in
comparison to HF WV N etc &#8211; it should be a 200em general in =
comparison.&nbsp;
So I agree that there are issues with the 3 spells under examination =
however
perhaps a larger exercise of considering the balance of all damage =
spells in
the various collages could be undertaken with the categories suggested =
used to
evaluate.&nbsp; <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>I&#8217;m not arguing that all the
collages should be the same, please don&#8217;t take this that way but I =
do
think that just as there are some spells at the extreme high end of the
continuum there are also some balanced badly at the extreme low =
end.&nbsp;
Personally I think TK Rage is about right, high ep, multi target =
(including the
party), high damage, but with a good chance of saving against it.&nbsp; =
Because
it is multi target your gona get someone.&nbsp; Similarly if White fire =
was
single target save for some damage it would be about =
right.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>My 2 =
cents<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>H<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>&nbsp;&nbsp; =
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoAutoSig><font size=3D3 color=3Dblue face=3D"Book =
Antiqua"><span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Book Antiqua";color:blue'>Hamish =
Brown<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoAutoSig><font size=3D3 color=3Dblue face=3D"Book =
Antiqua"><span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Book =
Antiqua";color:blue'>Director<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoAutoSig><font size=3D3 color=3Dblue face=3D"Book =
Antiqua"><span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Book =
Antiqua";color:blue'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoAutoSig><font size=3D4 color=3Dblue face=3D"Book =
Antiqua"><span
style=3D'font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Book =
Antiqua";color:blue'>Zenergy<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoAutoSig><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3D"Book =
Antiqua"><span
style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Book Antiqua";color:blue'>Whole =
People
Co-operating in a Sustainable world<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoAutoSig><st1:Street w:st=3D"on"><st1:address =
w:st=3D"on"><font size=3D2
  color=3Dblack face=3D"Book Antiqua"><span =
style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:
  "Book Antiqua";color:black'>119 Mt Eden =
Rd</span></font></st1:address></st1:Street><font
size=3D2 color=3Dblack face=3D"Book Antiqua"><span =
style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Book Antiqua";color:black'>,<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoAutoSig><st1:City w:st=3D"on"><st1:place w:st=3D"on"><font =
size=3D2
  color=3Dblack face=3D"Book Antiqua"><span =
style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:
  "Book =
Antiqua";color:black'>Auckland</span></font></st1:place></st1:City><font
size=3D2 color=3Dblack face=3D"Book Antiqua"><span =
style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Book Antiqua";color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoAutoSig><font size=3D2 color=3Dblack face=3D"Book =
Antiqua"><span
style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Book =
Antiqua";color:black'>www.zenergyglobal.com
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

</div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dnavy face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

<div>

<div class=3DMsoNormal align=3Dcenter style=3D'text-align:center'><font =
size=3D3
face=3D"Times New Roman"><span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt'>

<hr size=3D2 width=3D"100%" align=3Dcenter tabindex=3D-1>

</span></font></div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><b><font size=3D2 face=3DTahoma><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Tahoma;font-weight:bold'>From:</span></font></b><font =
size=3D2
face=3DTahoma><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>
dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz] <b><span =
style=3D'font-weight:
bold'>On Behalf Of </span></b>Phil Judd<br>
<b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Tuesday, December =
13, 2005
6:29 AM<br>
<b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> dq@dq.sf.org.nz<br>
<b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> Re: [dq] Options =
with:
Necrosis, Whirlwind Vortex and Hellfire?</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>The other insidious thing that =
these
spells do is cut down the Options for a party as a =
whole.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>I have adventured with Amber a few =
times
recently and she has Rank 20 Wiccan =
Hellfire.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>In combat the sole job of the party =
was to
keep her alive and unfettered so she could finish the =
combat.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>(TDP was also suposed to cast =
damage
enhance as well early on)</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>Any number of time GM's have =
rebounded the
spell upon us and done strange things all of which basically proved that =
we as
a party could not in anyway take the damage we could dish =
out.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>Also no fighter can deal out =
similar
levels of damage (no matter how much Exp they sink into it) - not even =
sabrina
- so the whole rest of the party became meat shields trying to keep the
hell-firer in operation making how good the rest of us were not so =
relevant.
You get mages stepping into combat just to give Amber another pulse to =
cast
another spell - an usually kill all those engaging =
you.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>The only things that slowed Amber =
down was
the range but this caught up with he in only a few fights and loosing =
all her
fagiue.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>Another measure of if a magics is =
too
tough at the high end game is to look at the top end characters and see =
if they
have picked defenses against those spells.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>My personal experience is they go =
out of
thier way to try and protect themselves vs Hellfire/Necrosis/Vortex, =
there seem
to be a lot of permenant protections or reductions in fire damage at =
high level
and I have seen armours/ritual that help vs necro damage spells, also =
items and
effects that change resist for half to resist for quarter ot =
none.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>Final note the Extreme party =
hunting
Rashick last session they had the most deaths on the adventure when =
multiple
Rank 20 Hellfires were dropped on them. 3 people (I think) died in short
sucession.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

</div>

</body>

</html>

------=_NextPart_000_0006_01C5FFC1.5784F730--


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

At 23:08 12/12/05, you wrote:
>If you really want to address broken spells, try Dragon flames with it's 
>hundred odd potential targets, D+3/rank damage, and doubles and triples 
>with do double or triple, unlike hellfires allready limited double and 
>triple damage(+1/rank and +2/rank damage respectivly rather than double or 
>triple) so a Rank 20 D-Flames is D+60 resist for half before any 
>additions, and under an enhance enchant can reach D+120, then add doubles 
>or triples, and this over half a battle field.
>Or Agony, with it's resist and be s! lowed over an entire battlefield 
>while an E&E gets 7 targets if they don't resist at rank 20 with slow.
>
>Not to say Hellfire and Necrosis aren't powerfull spells, but they do 
>require a very large investment in time and ep to get them there, and 
>there are far more devastating spells out there than a 7 target spell.
>Hellfire having a general knowledge spell which applies considerable 
>defence against it.

And therein is the problem... it's not so much the spells themselves, it's 
the lack of "official" defences, and the general "wimpiness" of DQ 
in-combat healing. It's the whole balance question...

In a certain other system many of us know well there are:
1) spells which protect against the various elements - fire armour is good 
versus hellfire - and/or reduce the damage dealt. I think each of the 
colleges in questions should have a GK spell which protects against the 
nasty effects of their "element". If it so happens that the problem spell 
needs some flavour tweaking to match a reasonable damage type - that's an 
easy edit. Incidentally - it seems to me that a "necrosis-type" spells that 
affects undead more that the living would be interesting - a "disruption" 
that severely attacks the necromantic energies that hold undead together, 
with lesser effects on people. And a necromantic protection spell would 
presumably beef PCs against draining - not a bad thing, would be a good 
reason to have a necro along.
Wicca, Rune and Namer would benefit from more generalised spells (probably 
SK) that reduce damage of anyone particular type, chosen by the caster at 
casting.
2) abilities like "evasion" which if you have it, allow you to resist for 
no damage if you successfully resist. This could work as a feature for the 
Bardic "Dance of Swords" spell - providing a reason to cast that spell as 
opposed to others that give more defence.
3) healing spells, which really HEAL... in combat. We would be better off 
beefing up those in-combat healing spells we have, rather than nerfing the 
attack spells. Mass healing spells would be great. If it makes sense to do 
so, put them in the uncolleged magics, and require healer ranks to learn them.

(ducks to avoid the in-coming)
Jacqui

And yes, you are right... in my opinion the single most broken spell in the 
game is Agony.


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

> 3) healing spells, which really HEAL... in combat. We would 
> be better off 
> beefing up those in-combat healing spells we have, rather 
> than nerfing the 
> attack spells. Mass healing spells would be great. If it 
> makes sense to do 
> so, put them in the uncolleged magics, and require healer 
> ranks to learn them.

So let me get this straight, in order to fix three spells that are over
the top, you propose beefing up the healing abilities in game to make
the other spells more redundant? 

If we fix the top three spells all the other spells become useful,
allowing choices in combat, something you yourself complained about when
we were last in a combat. 

Mandos
/s


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

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0056_01C5FFCB.CE398FD0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Martin said:
It does appear to be an aspect of the "one trick pony" style -- as you say
these spells can become then only one correct choice, but in addition they
can become the only choice -- particularly if picked up by characters
earlier in their career.

I think indroducing a 5 hex minimum range helps fix this.

Jonathan


  -----Original Message-----
  From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]On Behalf Of
Martin Dickson
  Sent: Tuesday, 13 December 2005 7:43 a.m.
  To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
  Subject: Re: [dq] Options with: Necrosis, Whirlwind Vortex and Hellfire?


  On 12/13/05, raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz <raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz> wrote:

    Quoting Martin Dickson <martin.dickson@gmail.com >:

    > > Hellfire becomes castable about Rk 11 or so,
    >
    >  Agreed -- and by that time the character has sunk nearly 43,000 EP
into it
    > -- which if nothing else further narrows their alternate choices for
spells,


    It maybe that having such a large Exp.Mult. has deprived
    characters of other opportunities for diverse advancement.

  It does appear to be an aspect of the "one trick pony" style -- as you say
these spells can become then only one correct choice, but in addition they
can become the only choice -- particularly if picked up by characters
earlier in their career.

  As you've pointed out these spells are dangerous to the caster at low
rank, which make it desirable to get them to a high-ish usable rank as
quickly as possible, at which point they have sucked up considerable EP
which could have been used on some breadth.



------=_NextPart_000_0056_01C5FFCB.CE398FD0
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>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1522" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D723025821-12122005>Martin=20
said:</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT><SPAN class=3D723025821-12122005>It does appear to be an =
aspect of the=20
"one trick pony" style -- as you say these spells can become then only =
one=20
correct choice, but in addition they can become the only choice -- =
particularly=20
if picked up by characters earlier in their career. </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT><SPAN class=3D723025821-12122005></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D723025821-12122005>I=20
think indroducing a 5 hex minimum range helps fix =
this.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D723025821-12122005></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D723025821-12122005>Jonathan</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D723025821-12122005></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D723025821-12122005></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
  <DIV class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr align=3Dleft><FONT =
face=3DTahoma=20
  size=3D2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> =
dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz=20
  [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]<B>On Behalf Of </B>Martin=20
  Dickson<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, 13 December 2005 7:43 =
a.m.<BR><B>To:</B>=20
  dq@dq.sf.org.nz<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [dq] Options with: Necrosis, =
Whirlwind=20
  Vortex and Hellfire?<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>On 12/13/05, <B=20
  class=3Dgmail_sendername><A=20
  =
href=3D"mailto:raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz">raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz</A></=
B>=20
  &lt;<A=20
  =
href=3D"mailto:raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz">raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz</A>&g=
t;=20
  wrote:
  <DIV><SPAN class=3Dgmail_quote></SPAN>
  <BLOCKQUOTE class=3Dgmail_quote=20
  style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: =
rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid"><BR>Quoting=20
    Martin Dickson &lt;<A=20
    href=3D"mailto:martin.dickson@gmail.com">martin.dickson@gmail.com=20
    </A>&gt;:<BR><BR>&gt; &gt; Hellfire becomes castable about Rk 11 or=20
    so,<BR>&gt;<BR>&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;Agreed -- and by that time the =
character has=20
    sunk nearly 43,000 EP into it<BR>&gt; -- which if nothing else =
further=20
    narrows their alternate choices for spells,&nbsp; </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
  <BLOCKQUOTE class=3Dgmail_quote=20
  style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: =
rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid">It=20
    maybe that having such a large Exp.Mult. has deprived<BR>characters =
of other=20
    opportunities for diverse advancement. </BLOCKQUOTE>
  <DIV><BR>It does appear to be an aspect of the "one trick pony" style =
-- as=20
  you say these spells can become then only one correct choice, but in =
addition=20
  they can become the only choice -- particularly if picked up by =
characters=20
  earlier in their career. <BR><BR>As you've pointed out these spells =
are=20
  dangerous to the caster at low rank, which make it desirable to get =
them to a=20
  high-ish usable rank as quickly as possible, at which point they have =
sucked=20
  up considerable EP which could have been used on some breadth.=20
  <BR></DIV></DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0056_01C5FFCB.CE398FD0--


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

> I think indroducing a 5 hex minimum range helps fix this.

I doubt that will change anything, While not disparaging Wiccans I have
rerely seen any of them keen to get as close as 25ft to anything
dangerous :-) 

All the minimum range will do is add a little bit of complexity to where
the character stands on the hex map, a good idea but it doesn't resolve
the actual issue. 

Mandos
/s


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

Quoting RPer 4eva <msnoverflow@gmail.com>:

> Prehaps you are failing to see it from all sides. If we remove spells
> because some players don't have fun where does it end? Also I'm assuming the
> people with the spell find it fun to use. No one would deliberatly deprive
> both themselves and those around them of fun. While you may condemn my
> points to irrelevance I would have to say anyone spending that much time and
> xp and that many adventures does not think that they or their effort is
> irrelevant and I don't either.

But, the discussion raised is that once you have them, you don't cast anything
else. That is the topic raised. So, this point, in response to the topic raised
is irrelevant, however much you might like to raise it. I don't condemn  you
points to that. I am simply reporting a fact.

>
> > Not that I think any of them are overly powerful and I certainly don't
> > want
> > > to see the mind mage college powered down just before one of my
> > characters
> > > finaly learns it but why hasn't anyone brought up TK-rage?
> >
> > It is a good idea to veer away from talking about the value to affected
> > players.
> > It just muddies the waters, and people offer points of view that have less
> > to
> > do with creating a more engaging game, and more about protecting their
> > characters from a needed but unwanted revision.
>
>
> Weren't you just talking about peoples point of view? You can't have it both
> ways. Either you accept everyones opinion as valid or no ones.

I have no problem saying that I don't accept everyone's opinion as valid, and
that there are opinions that I accept as valid. There's a flaw in this
thinking?

And the
> people who both are trying to have fun and put lots of work in might
> arguably have a more relevant point of view than someone who just doesn't
> like the fact another person is better at combat than they are. How long
> until we start whining because someone heals better than we do? Or that
> there assasin is too stealthy and kills people from behind without us
> getting to bash them. Or what about the fact that someone plays a more
> charismatic person than our character and so we can't be party leader? If
> you change the rules every time someone is unhappy then where does it end. I
> don't like elves. Anyone want to remove them from the system? I don't think
> so.

I bloody do. I have argued about getting rid of the pointy-eared buggers for
years, but no one is keen to take me up on it.

I think you have confused what is being talked about here. It is not that the
spells aren't tough enough. It is that they are too tough, and don't provide
any sense of dramatic conflict because there are very few occasions on which
you might cast anything else in combat.

The example of a character with a lot to do in a fight is the classic E&E mage.
The lead with Quicken, but then their choices get wider. They might follow with
a Slow on the enemy, or an Enhance, or a Sleep, depending on the situation.
Their choice of spell is something that is driven from the nature of the
combat.

On the other hand, a player whose character has one of the big three, Seidarr,
for example, might lead with Spectral Warrior. But, then he casts Necrosis.
Then, Necrosis. O, and if there's anything still standing on the battle field,
he might cast Necrosis again.

As for time and effort, this is a game. If developing a character is in anyway
like work, then you should immediately stop playing and find something fun to
do with your time. So what if the rule changes, and what you wanted is no
longer available? Either badger a DM into running a game that gets you what you
want or find something new within the constraints offered by the system.

Role playing games are not strategy games. As characters progress through the
game, they will pick up abilities and/or items that break the standard rules.
Not always in the players favour, either. Establishing a point of difference
between characters is as much a part of the game as any other rule structure,
if it is an unwritten part of the game.

> Also the fact a revision is unwanted doesn't mean its needed. It just makes
> it controversial. In fact a bad revision will be very unwanted by the people
> it effects and this doesn't make there opinion any less valid than yours.

I'm pretty expert on this kind of thing, actually.

The point I'm making is that if an objection to a revision is purely because it
would impact one's character in a negative way, even though it was a revision
that would make the game better, then of course that opinion is less valid.
This is an 'interested' opinion. Professional opinion makers like judges recuse
themselves from process when they feel that they have an 'interest' in a
particular case, and for pretty much the same reason. An 'interested' opinion
must weigh less than the opinion of someone objectively measuring, in this
case, the value to the game.
>
> That has a base
> > > of 30 plus 5 per rank damage and can literaly clear a battlefield. Also
> > > since it doesn't mention anything about doubles or tripples I'd expect
> > you
> > > can increase the damage like normal. Thats 90 +15 per rank or 390 at
> > rank
> > > 20. As to the whole enhance enchantment thing I think you can just see
> > where
> > > its going from there.
> >
> > If you have a Mind Special counterspell, you have at least +30 to your
> > resistance to this spell, possibly much more. And, last time I looked, if
> > you
> > resisted it, you took no damage. HF, Necrosis and WV all do damage even if
> > you
> > resist, and they do it to the point where you are dead, even if you resist
> > vs a
> > triple effect. With these spells, you can wipe out whole parties, which
> > has
> > long been a concern, although not in this particular discussion.
>
>
> Counterspells? Where did that come from. Firstly how often does your
> opponent have your counterspell up baring in mind you probably have 5 mages
> in your party. And secondly who in there right mind would choose TK-rage as
> there first choice one on one? Surely you're using it against multiple
> opponents and if you only kill one of them in the first casting its hardly a
> wasted spell. The counterspell if anywhere is likely to be cast on your
> companions and allies so they survive. My point about this spell is its
> quite capable of taking out large numbers of bad guys in a much much larger
> area.

This has wondered into another area, not the one raised by the original post.

Not to put too fine a point on it, TK Rage, for all that the damage is
appalling, has never been a spell that wipes out entire parties. And, I've been
on adventures where there were a brace of vampires at opposite ends of a long
corridor playing ping pong with the entire party.

Hellfire, Necrosis and Whirlwind Vortex can kill the entire party on the first
roll of the dice, regardless of whether or not they save. Assume rank 20 with
these spells, and the damage is D10+40. Tripled, that's a range of 123 - 210
points of damage. Even if they all succesfully resist, and minimum damage is
rolled, that's still 61 points of damage. Very few pcs can take 61 points of
damage and still be above 0 EN.

Hellfire has fewer problems because of the ablative effect of Fire Armour, but
it's not an ideal solution.


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

I don't believe that it is hyphenated, simply two words.


Quoting "Andrew Withy (DSL AK)" <AndrewW@datacom.co.nz>:

> Just to be thorough. Could someone (thanks, Errol) tidy up MG to always
> or never be hyphenated in the rule book revision. So that this issue
> never happens again. No need to vote.
>
> Andrew
>
> 	-----Original Message-----
> 	From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz] On
> Behalf Of Martin Dickson
> 	Sent: Monday, 12 December 2005 8:43 p.m.
> 	To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> 	Subject: Re: [dq] Main-gauche defence
>
>
> 	On 12/12/05, Errol Cavit <ecavit@tollnz.co.nz> wrote:
>
>
> 		A prepared Main Gauche also provides some defence;
> however defence is only applied
> 		against Melee attacks, and no defence is gained at Rank
> 0."
>
>
> 	Excellent, thank you. Also explains why I didn't find it
> initially -- "Main gauche" is sometimes hyphenated in DQ and sometimes
> not.
>
>
> 		An extra sentence on the shield table would be good I
> think.
>
>
> 	Good plan.
>
> 	Cheers,
> 	Martin
>
>
>
>


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

It allows GMs to introduce environments where range is an issue - such as
citys, buildings in general, dungeons, tunnels, etc
It also means that the mage would ahve to have two spells one for range and
one for closer.
It also means that melee people would know that closing with the enemry
would be an option for the brave (not an option at the moment).

Jonathan

-----Original Message-----
From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]On Behalf Of
Mandos Mitchinson
Sent: Tuesday, 13 December 2005 9:09 a.m.
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Subject: Re: [dq] Options with: Necrosis, Whirlwind Vortex and Hellfire?


> I think indroducing a 5 hex minimum range helps fix this.

I doubt that will change anything, While not disparaging Wiccans I have
rerely seen any of them keen to get as close as 25ft to anything
dangerous :-)

All the minimum range will do is add a little bit of complexity to where
the character stands on the hex map, a good idea but it doesn't resolve
the actual issue.

Mandos
/s


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

Hi all,

Please sign your posts so you can help others follow the what is being said.
Also when quoting others please say so at the top with their name and then
what they said.
And lastly please take 1 min to remove un-used sections of the old email.

Thank you in advance from all teh slow readers here (me).

Jonathan


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

Plus additional armourer changes are required.

First the Armourer changes:
There is no mention of of how Silvering and Truesilvering adjusts the
cost to the Armourer of the Armour they are making (or repairing).

I have a memory of this being discussed and resolved to be that the
silvering and truesilvering costs are added to the final calculated
cost, ie. the formula is:
  80% x Base Cost × (Effective Rank + 1) + (True)Silvering cost (if
any) silver pennies.

Thus for consistency the Weaponsmith change should be to bring the
text in line with the equation not the other way round.

My main reason is the innate value of the weapon:
Using the old formula a Rk 10 +2 Dmg Dagger would cost:
Normal - 104 sp, Silvered - 204 sp, Gilded - 1,304 sp and Truesilvered
- 1,904 sp
and a Rk 10 +2 dmg Hand and a half Sword would cost:
Normal - 884 sp, Silvered - 1,734 sp, Gilded - 11,084 and Truesilvered
- 16,184 sp

whereas with the proposed new calculation:
a Rk 10 +2 Dmg Dagger would cost:
Normal - 104 sp, Silvered - 1040 sp, Gilded - 12,480 sp and
Truesilvered - 18,720 sp
and a Rk 10 +2 dmg Hand and a half Sword would cost:
Normal - 884 sp, Silvered - 8840 sp, Gilded - 106,080 and Truesilvered
- 159,120 sp

Just far too much.

I repeat:

The Weaponsmith change should be to bring the text in line with the
equation not the other way round.

TTFN, Struan


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

Quoting Mandos Mitchinson <MandosM@adhb.govt.nz>:

> > I think indroducing a 5 hex minimum range helps fix this.
>
> I doubt that will change anything, While not disparaging Wiccans I have
> rerely seen any of them keen to get as close as 25ft to anything
> dangerous :-)

I have delicate artist hands...
>
> All the minimum range will do is add a little bit of complexity to where
> the character stands on the hex map, a good idea but it doesn't resolve
> the actual issue.

Yes. I would say it will mean a bit arsing around in the beginning of a combat
for a few sessions, until everyone gets into the habit of putting the blast
mage at the back somewhere.

Jim


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

> It allows GMs to introduce environments where range is an 
> issue - such as citys, buildings in general, dungeons, 
> tunnels, etc It also means that the mage would ahve to have 
> two spells one for range and one for closer. It also means 
> that melee people would know that closing with the enemry 
> would be an option for the brave (not an option at the moment).

I agree it would add a bit more thought to the movement options but it
doesn't actualy fix the overall problems that the spells really cause.
Adding minimum ranges to spells could be a good idea, but the spells
also need to be nerfed slightly in addition to that. 

Mandos
/s


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

Ok what of the +5 to the Dice Roll for the BC for spells per target over 1?
This would reduce doubles and tripples (for damage) and offer a choice to
the player for the cast option. A plus on BC dice will lead to more BF also.

Jonathan

-----Original Message-----
From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]On Behalf Of
Mandos Mitchinson
Sent: Tuesday, 13 December 2005 9:44 a.m.
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Subject: Re: [dq] Options with: Necrosis, Whirlwind Vortex and Hellfire?


> It allows GMs to introduce environments where range is an
> issue - such as citys, buildings in general, dungeons,
> tunnels, etc It also means that the mage would ahve to have
> two spells one for range and one for closer. It also means
> that melee people would know that closing with the enemry
> would be an option for the brave (not an option at the moment).

I agree it would add a bit more thought to the movement options but it
doesn't actualy fix the overall problems that the spells really cause.
Adding minimum ranges to spells could be a good idea, but the spells
also need to be nerfed slightly in addition to that.

Mandos
/s


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

Ok so to sum up:

We do see a problem with these spells. Are we willing to fix them?

A simple straw poll on "willingness to fix" please

Jono Yes


Jonathan


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

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_01C5FF67.51F6035E
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

Note that changes won't be in the Rulebook until March 2007 at the earliest.

Cheers
Errol

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Bean - TME [mailto:Jonathan@tme.co.nz]
> Sent: Tuesday, 13 December 2005 11:46
> To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> Subject: [dq] To Sum Up: Necrosis, Whirlwind Vortex and Hellfire?
> 
> 
> Ok so to sum up:
> 
> We do see a problem with these spells. Are we willing to fix them?
> 
> A simple straw poll on "willingness to fix" please
> 
> Jono Yes
> 
> 
> Jonathan
> 
> 
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
> 

------_=_NextPart_001_01C5FF67.51F6035E
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2658.2">
<TITLE>RE: [dq] To Sum Up: Necrosis, Whirlwind Vortex and Hellfire?</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>

<P><FONT SIZE=2>Note that changes won't be in the Rulebook until March 2007 at the earliest.</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=2>Cheers</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Errol</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; -----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; From: Jonathan Bean - TME [<A HREF="mailto:Jonathan@tme.co.nz">mailto:Jonathan@tme.co.nz</A>]</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; Sent: Tuesday, 13 December 2005 11:46</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; Subject: [dq] To Sum Up: Necrosis, Whirlwind Vortex and Hellfire?</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; Ok so to sum up:</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; We do see a problem with these spells. Are we willing to fix them?</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; A simple straw poll on &quot;willingness to fix&quot; please</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; Jono Yes</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; Jonathan</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; -- to unsubscribe notify <A HREF="mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz">mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz</A> --</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; </FONT>
</P>

</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C5FF67.51F6035E--


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

The rules change at the speed of the DMs to accept them, not the speed of the
bureaucracy to process them, Errol. They might not be written down, but if the
rule is accepted, then maybe people will just have to write a note in the
margin of their rule books. I'm sure that they can manage.

Jim.

Quoting Errol Cavit <ecavit@tollnz.co.nz>:

> Note that changes won't be in the Rulebook until March 2007 at the earliest.
>
> Cheers
> Errol
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jonathan Bean - TME [mailto:Jonathan@tme.co.nz]
> > Sent: Tuesday, 13 December 2005 11:46
> > To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> > Subject: [dq] To Sum Up: Necrosis, Whirlwind Vortex and Hellfire?
> >
> >
> > Ok so to sum up:
> >
> > We do see a problem with these spells. Are we willing to fix them?
> >
> > A simple straw poll on "willingness to fix" please
> >
> > Jono Yes
> >
> >
> > Jonathan
> >
> >
> > -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
> >
>


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

> Ok what of the +5 to the Dice Roll for the BC for spells per 
> target over 1? This would reduce doubles and tripples (for 
> damage) and offer a choice to the player for the cast option. 
> A plus on BC dice will lead to more BF also.

I like the idea's personally, but I don't think it is a good idea to add
them to DQ. Despite the fact that I am a big fan of anything that
increases backfire chances :) 

Mandos
/s


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

> We do see a problem with these spells. Are we willing to fix them?

Yup!

Mandos
/s


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

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_01C5FF6C.07808F06
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

Which is why I said 'in the Rulebook'.
A bunch of implications about some people perhaps using changes 'early' etc
follow.

The limitation is actually not so much the ability to distribute rule
changes (although this is obviously a factor), but there is apparently an
issue with a constant stream of rules changes coming into play and confusing
people. I wasn't around when this was an issue so can't really comment.

Some rule changes can only be sensibly implemented at a consistent time
across GMs (e.g. Greater Enchantment.) There can also be issues when people
want to re-spend EP due to rules changes.

Cheers
Errol

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]On Behalf Of
> raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz
> Sent: Tuesday, 13 December 2005 11:10
> To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> Subject: Re: [dq] To Sum Up: Necrosis, Whirlwind Vortex and Hellfire?
> 
> 
> The rules change at the speed of the DMs to accept them, not 
> the speed of the
> bureaucracy to process them, Errol. They might not be written 
> down, but if the
> rule is accepted, then maybe people will just have to write a 
> note in the
> margin of their rule books. I'm sure that they can manage.
> 
> Jim.
> 
> Quoting Errol Cavit <ecavit@tollnz.co.nz>:
> 
> > Note that changes won't be in the Rulebook until March 2007 
> at the earliest.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Errol
> >

------_=_NextPart_001_01C5FF6C.07808F06
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 =
5.5.2658.2">
<TITLE>RE: [dq] To Sum Up: Necrosis, Whirlwind Vortex and =
Hellfire?</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Which is why I said 'in the Rulebook'.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>A bunch of implications about some people perhaps =
using changes 'early' etc follow.</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>The limitation is actually not so much the ability to =
distribute rule changes (although this is obviously a factor), but =
there is apparently an issue with a constant stream of rules changes =
coming into play and confusing people. I wasn't around when this was an =
issue so can't really comment.</FONT></P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Some rule changes can only be sensibly implemented at =
a consistent time across GMs (e.g. Greater Enchantment.) There can also =
be issues when people want to re-spend EP due to rules =
changes.</FONT></P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Cheers</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Errol</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; -----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [<A =
HREF=3D"mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz">mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz</A>]O=
n Behalf Of</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; Sent: Tuesday, 13 December 2005 11:10</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; Subject: Re: [dq] To Sum Up: Necrosis, =
Whirlwind Vortex and Hellfire?</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; The rules change at the speed of the DMs to =
accept them, not </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; the speed of the</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; bureaucracy to process them, Errol. They might =
not be written </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; down, but if the</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; rule is accepted, then maybe people will just =
have to write a </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; note in the</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; margin of their rule books. I'm sure that they =
can manage.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; Jim.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; Quoting Errol Cavit =
&lt;ecavit@tollnz.co.nz&gt;:</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt; Note that changes won't be in the Rulebook =
until March 2007 </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; at the earliest.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt; Cheers</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt; Errol</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; &gt;</FONT>
</P>

</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C5FF6C.07808F06--


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

Just a note it would be good to know who is actually affected by this
directly. 

I am aware of 

Amber
Saydar
Blaze 
Brightflare
Flamis?
Mortimer 
Father Rowan
Doroin

Are there any other characters? 

Mandos
/s


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

> The rules change at the speed of the DMs to accept them, not 
> the speed of the bureaucracy to process them, Errol. They 
> might not be written down, but if the rule is accepted, then 
> maybe people will just have to write a note in the margin of 
> their rule books. I'm sure that they can manage.

Jim, while you were away a guideline was put in that Rules that change
can be used by GM's but became official with the release of a rule book.


It makes no real difference other than to help some people know where
they stand and to ensure regular rulebooks come out :-)

I think this is what Errol is referring to. 

Mandos
/s


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

Mandos asked:
Just a note it would be good to know who is actually affected by this
directly. 

I am aware of 

Amber
Saydar
Blaze 
Brightflare
Flamis?
Mortimer 
Father Rowan
Doroin

Lath



Jonathan Bean


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

At 09:32 13/12/05, you wrote:
>So let me get this straight, in order to fix three spells that are over
>the top, you propose beefing up the healing abilities in game to make
>the other spells more redundant?

Actually I think we might want to consider a range of options. Beefing the 
healing spells is only one of them.

>If we fix the top three spells all the other spells become useful,
>allowing choices in combat, something you yourself complained about when
>we were last in a combat.

Er... not one of my PCs has Hellfire... Though Flamis is thinking about it, 
as an alternative to DFlames. There are so very many circumstances were 
DFlames is just not a practical option.

Frankly, I'm fine with single-target = high-damage, multi-target = 
low-damage options....

Jacqui


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

------=_Part_3030_6476654.1134427621363
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 12/13/05, raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz <raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
>
> I don't believe that it is hyphenated, simply two words.


Yep, that does seem to be the preferred form (and makes the most sense give=
n
its origin).

Though one can find hypenated examples... and even "maingauche" as a single
word... at least out in the big www.

------=_Part_3030_6476654.1134427621363
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 12/13/05, <b class=3D"gmail_sendername"><a href=3D"mailto:raro002@ec.auc=
kland.ac.nz">raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz</a></b> &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:raro00=
2@ec.auckland.ac.nz">raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz</a>&gt; wrote:<div><span cla=
ss=3D"gmail_quote">
</span><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rg=
b(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">I don't be=
lieve that it is hyphenated, simply two words.</blockquote><div><br>Yep, th=
at does seem to be the preferred form (and makes the most sense given its o=
rigin).
<br><br>Though one can find hypenated examples... and even &quot;maingauche=
&quot; as a single word... at least out in the big www.<br></div></div><br>

------=_Part_3030_6476654.1134427621363--


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

------=_Part_3235_29454372.1134428162208
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 12/13/05, Mandos Mitchinson <MandosM@adhb.govt.nz> wrote:
>
>
> Just a note it would be good to know who is actually affected by this
> directly.
>
> I am aware of
>
> Mortimer


[player hat on]

<big shrug> No objection here... provided that if we're nerfing a 650 EM
spell there'll be compensatory effects...

[GM hat]
...something that's going to problematic for all of the effected characters
if this is not an official cross-GM change.

Cheers,
Martin

------=_Part_3235_29454372.1134428162208
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 12/13/05, <b class=3D"gmail_sendername">Mandos Mitchinson</b> &lt;<a hre=
f=3D"mailto:MandosM@adhb.govt.nz">MandosM@adhb.govt.nz</a>&gt; wrote:<div><=
span class=3D"gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; p=
adding-left: 1ex;">
<br>Just a note it would be good to know who is actually affected by this<b=
r>directly.<br><br>I am aware of<br><br>Mortimer</blockquote><div><br>[play=
er hat on]<br><br>&lt;big shrug&gt; No objection here... provided that if w=
e're nerfing a 650 EM spell there'll be compensatory effects...
<br><br>[GM hat]<br>...something that's going to problematic for all of the=
 effected characters if this is not an official cross-GM change.<br><br>Che=
ers,<br>Martin<br></div><br></div><br>

------=_Part_3235_29454372.1134428162208--


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

------=_Part_3515_24681534.1134429007509
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 12/13/05, raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz <raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
>
>
> Hellfire, Necrosis and Whirlwind Vortex can kill the entire party on the
> first
> roll of the dice, regardless of whether or not they save. Assume rank 20
> with
> these spells, and the damage is D10+40. Tripled, that's a range of 123 -
> 210
> points of damage. Even if they all succesfully resist, and minimum damage
> is
> rolled, that's still 61 points of damage. Very few pcs can take 61 points
> of
> damage and still be above 0 EN.
>
> Hellfire has fewer problems because of the ablative effect of Fire Armour=
,
> but
> it's not an ideal solution.


Hellfire (both Fire and Witchcraft) also had its doubles and triples
downgraded during the Fire College rewrite some years back.  It gets +1 /Rk
on doubles and +2/Rk on triples, so the max "tripled" Rk 20 damage is D10 +
(20 x (2 + 2)) =3D 90.  Still quite a lot... but not as much as it used to
get...

Necrosis has not had its doubles and triples altered, so can reach (D10 + 1
+ 40) =3D 51 x 3 =3D 153 max.

Whirlwind vortex (only) does D-4 +1/Rk if resisted, and while the Mage migh=
t
triple damage, they're more likely to go for the -20 Resist, since if the
target fails to resist they're as dead as cold turkey.

Cheers,
Martin

------=_Part_3515_24681534.1134429007509
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 12/13/05, <b class=3D"gmail_sendername"><a href=3D"mailto:raro002@ec.auc=
kland.ac.nz">raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz</a></b> &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:raro00=
2@ec.auckland.ac.nz">raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz</a>&gt; wrote:<div><span cla=
ss=3D"gmail_quote">
</span><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rg=
b(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>Hellfi=
re, Necrosis and Whirlwind Vortex can kill the entire party on the first<br=
>
roll of the dice, regardless of whether or not they save. Assume rank 20 wi=
th<br>these spells, and the damage is D10+40. Tripled, that's a range of 12=
3 - 210<br>points of damage. Even if they all succesfully resist, and minim=
um damage is
<br>rolled, that's still 61 points of damage. Very few pcs can take 61 poin=
ts of<br>damage and still be above 0 EN.<br><br>Hellfire has fewer problems=
 because of the ablative effect of Fire Armour, but<br>it's not an ideal so=
lution.
</blockquote><div><br>Hellfire (both Fire and Witchcraft) also had its doub=
les and triples downgraded during the Fire College rewrite some years back.=
&nbsp; It gets +1 /Rk on doubles and +2/Rk on triples, so the max &quot;tri=
pled&quot; Rk 20 damage is D10 + (20 x (2 + 2)) =3D 90.&nbsp; Still quite a=
 lot... but not as much as it used to get...
<br><br>Necrosis has not had its doubles and triples altered, so can reach =
(D10 + 1 + 40) =3D 51 x 3 =3D 153 max.<br><br>Whirlwind vortex (only) does =
D-4 +1/Rk if resisted, and while the Mage might triple damage, they're more=
 likely to go for the -20 Resist, since if the target fails to resist they'=
re as dead as cold turkey.
<br><br>Cheers,<br>Martin<br></div></div><br>

------=_Part_3515_24681534.1134429007509--


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

Please note that I have a character with one of these spells highly 
ranked.  My opinion is therefore obviously biased in this respect and 
you probably should ignore it completely :)  I am only really commenting 
at all because it is close to Christmas and I have very little to do at 
work.

There are a couple of problems that I see with these spells.

1.  GMs cannot use these spells against parties.
- If these spells are used against players then the party will die.  The 
game would not be any fun.  Now of course a GM can do anything they 
like.  They can make a huge rock could fall from the sky and kill the 
entire party.   However, there are games where it is really hard to see 
why the bad guys would *not* have these spells and use them.  If the 
spells are not used, then it attacks your suspension of disbelief.  If 
the spells are used, then the game is very short :)

If we rationalise why the bad guys never use these spells (e.g. we could 
say that they are a special kind of spell that non-players simply don't 
have for some spurious reason), then this problem goes away.  Currently, 
it seems to be a bit of a cop out that GMs don't use these spells.

However, the biggest problem IMO is:

2.  If a character ranks one of these spells, then it significantly 
changes the gameplay for them *and* for anyone that adventures with them.
- As soon as you have the spell ranked, then there is *almost* never a 
time when you don't cast it in combat.  Combat becomes prepare X, cast 
X, rinse and repeat.  This makes combat somewhat less interesting for 
the caster, but also has a big impact on the other players in the game. 
  Everyone else simply becomes support/blockers for the character with 
the big nuke.  This is not always enjoyable for the other people in the 
party.

In some games, and with some parties, this is not really an issue.  For 
example, playing in the recent attack on Rashak, the use of a 
multi-target, save for half, big damage spell was not a problem at all. 
  Then again, the group included someone that could heal the entire 
party for 70 points per pulse, someone that had 8 melee attacks per 
pulse each hitting for around 20 points, someone that could drain the 
entire willpower of any single target in 2 pulses (whether they resisted 
or not), people that could ignore spec grevs and so on.  In an extreme 
level game, the spells under discussion don't really cause a problem 
(The bad guys could even use these spells, and did which was nice to 
see.  The party didn't get wiped when we were hit with 8 Rk 20 Hellfires 
in a single action).

IMO the real problems arise in the medium to high games where the spells 
are highly ranked, castable and nobody else has abilities (or defenses) 
that even come close.

In general, I think that the game would probably be better if these 
spells were "fixed".  IMO, any spell in the book that results in "save 
and die" to multiple targets should be "fixed".  This clearly includes 
Dragonflames.  I would like to suggest that if people move ahead to 
"fix" these spells, then any spell that affects multiple target, does 
big damage and is resist for half damage be included in the discussion.

Personally, I doubt that fixing these spells will have very much impact 
on most games (it would change a small handful of characters and the 
games that those characters play on). If we leave the spells as they are 
(which is an option that I am comfortable with), then it might be useful 
to put a warning in the players guide along the lines of:

WARNING:  Ranking these spells will have a *major* impact on your 
character and the kinds of games that you can play.  Please discuss the 
ranking of these spells with a GM before you continue!  You may be asked 
not to play on some games!

Ciao,
Andrew


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

------=_Part_3551_12770575.1134429159306
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 12/13/05, Jacqui Smith <flamis@ihug.co.nz> wrote:
>
>
> Frankly, I'm fine with single-target =3D high-damage, multi-target =3D
> low-damage options....


And perhaps even multi-target + high damage but other restrictions /
problems.  Dragonflames being a good example -- as you said there are times
that it isn't a good option, despite its damage and generally because of it=
s
broad targeting.

Cheers,
Martin

------=_Part_3551_12770575.1134429159306
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 12/13/05, <b class=3D"gmail_sendername">Jacqui Smith</b> &lt;<a href=3D"=
mailto:flamis@ihug.co.nz">flamis@ihug.co.nz</a>&gt; wrote:<div><span class=
=3D"gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-l=
eft: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left:=
 1ex;">
<br>Frankly, I'm fine with single-target =3D high-damage, multi-target =3D<=
br>low-damage options....</blockquote><div><br>And perhaps even multi-targe=
t + high damage but other restrictions / problems.&nbsp; Dragonflames being=
 a good example -- as you said there are times that it isn't a good option,=
 despite its damage and generally because of its broad targeting.
<br><br>Cheers,<br>Martin<br></div></div>

------=_Part_3551_12770575.1134429159306--


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

> Please note that I have a character with one of these spells highly 
> ranked.  My opinion is therefore obviously biased in this respect and 
> you probably should ignore it completely :)  I am only really 
> commenting at all because it is close to Christmas and I have very 
> little to do at work.

Excellent summation of the problem. 

Mandos
/s


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

> > Please note that I have a character with one of these spells highly
> > ranked.  My opinion is therefore obviously biased in this 
> respect and 
> > you probably should ignore it completely :)  I am only really 
> > commenting at all because it is close to Christmas and I have very 
> > little to do at work.
> 
> Excellent summation of the problem. 

This is of course commenting on the long actual summation that I
cropped, not on the bias, or lack of christmas time work :-)

Mandos
/s


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

Jacqui said:

>Lots of stuff ...
>
>3) healing spells, which really HEAL... in combat. We would be better off
>beefing up those in-combat healing spells we have, rather than nerfing the
>attack spells. Mass healing spells would be great. If it makes sense to do
>so, put them in the uncolleged magics, and require healer ranks to learn
them.

I tend to agree. Healing in DQ is very poor. Cele mages is a small amount.
Water mages is in a bottle, Earth mages take to long, healer skill is poor.
I would like healer to have some in combat use.

Jonathan


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

 > Mandos asked:
> Just a note it would be good to know who is actually affected by this
> directly. 
 > 
> I am aware of 
> 
> Amber
> Saydar
> Blaze 
> Brightflare
> Flamis?
> Mortimer 
> Father Rowan
> Doroin
> 
> Lath

Shizane
Sooty?
 Saurus

 
Helen


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

> >3) healing spells, which really HEAL... in combat. We would 
> be better 
> >off beefing up those in-combat healing spells we have, rather than 
> >nerfing the attack spells. Mass healing spells would be great. If it 
> >makes sense to do so, put them in the uncolleged magics, and require 
> >healer ranks to learn
> them.
> 
> I tend to agree. Healing in DQ is very poor. Cele mages is a 
> small amount. Water mages is in a bottle, Earth mages take to 
> long, healer skill is poor. I would like healer to have some 
> in combat use.

I completely disagree, at the moment there is enough healing around that
it is (without thowing the very spells we are looking at fixing)
virtually impossible to kill a party member. 

Players being injured, taking hits to defend other characters while
already being injured, etc adds to the dramatic tension in a fight. If
you add even more to the healing you reduce and remove that tension. At
the ludicrous levels of games it might be reasonable to add more but
that should be done to individual characters who want to play on the
ultra high games, not to the game in general. 

Mandos
/s


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

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_01C5FF75.0E8D1C34
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mandos Mitchinson [mailto:MandosM@adhb.govt.nz]
> Sent: Tuesday, 13 December 2005 12:35
> To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> Subject: Re: [dq] Options with: Necrosis, Whirlwind Vortex 
> and Hellfire?
> 
> 
> > >3) healing spells, which really HEAL... in combat. We would 
> > be better 
> > >off beefing up those in-combat healing spells we have, rather than 
> > >nerfing the attack spells. Mass healing spells would be 
> great. If it 
> > >makes sense to do so, put them in the uncolleged magics, 
> and require 
> > >healer ranks to learn
> > them.
> > 
> > I tend to agree. Healing in DQ is very poor. Cele mages is a 
> > small amount. Water mages is in a bottle, Earth mages take to 
> > long, healer skill is poor. I would like healer to have some 
> > in combat use.
> 
> I completely disagree, at the moment there is enough healing 
> around that
> it is (without thowing the very spells we are looking at fixing)
> virtually impossible to kill a party member. 
> 
> Players being injured, taking hits to defend other characters while
> already being injured, etc adds to the dramatic tension in a fight. If
> you add even more to the healing you reduce and remove that 
> tension. At
> the ludicrous levels of games it might be reasonable to add more but
> that should be done to individual characters who want to play on the
> ultra high games, not to the game in general. 
> 

I agree with Mandos on this.

Cheers
Errol

------_=_NextPart_001_01C5FF75.0E8D1C34
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2658.2">
<TITLE>RE: [dq] Options with: Necrosis, Whirlwind Vortex and Hellfire?</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<BR>
<BR>

<P><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; -----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; From: Mandos Mitchinson [<A HREF="mailto:MandosM@adhb.govt.nz">mailto:MandosM@adhb.govt.nz</A>]</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; Sent: Tuesday, 13 December 2005 12:35</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; Subject: Re: [dq] Options with: Necrosis, Whirlwind Vortex </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; and Hellfire?</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; &gt; &gt;3) healing spells, which really HEAL... in combat. We would </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; &gt; be better </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; &gt; &gt;off beefing up those in-combat healing spells we have, rather than </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; &gt; &gt;nerfing the attack spells. Mass healing spells would be </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; great. If it </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; &gt; &gt;makes sense to do so, put them in the uncolleged magics, </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; and require </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; &gt; &gt;healer ranks to learn</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; &gt; them.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; &gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; &gt; I tend to agree. Healing in DQ is very poor. Cele mages is a </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; &gt; small amount. Water mages is in a bottle, Earth mages take to </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; &gt; long, healer skill is poor. I would like healer to have some </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; &gt; in combat use.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; I completely disagree, at the moment there is enough healing </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; around that</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; it is (without thowing the very spells we are looking at fixing)</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; virtually impossible to kill a party member. </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; Players being injured, taking hits to defend other characters while</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; already being injured, etc adds to the dramatic tension in a fight. If</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; you add even more to the healing you reduce and remove that </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; tension. At</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; the ludicrous levels of games it might be reasonable to add more but</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; that should be done to individual characters who want to play on the</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; ultra high games, not to the game in general. </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>&gt; </FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=2>I agree with Mandos on this.</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=2>Cheers</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Errol</FONT>
</P>

</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C5FF75.0E8D1C34--


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

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_01C5FF76.6739712E
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



> -----Original Message-----
> From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]On Behalf =
Of
> Struan Judd
> Sent: Tuesday, 13 December 2005 10:41
> To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> Subject: [dq] The Weaponsmith changes are wrong
>=20
>=20
> Plus additional armourer changes are required.
>=20
> First the Armourer changes:
> There is no mention of of how Silvering and Truesilvering adjusts the
> cost to the Armourer of the Armour they are making (or repairing).
>=20

It's a note on the Armour chart:

1. Silvered Armour has the same protection -
cost is + 30,000 sp. Permits magic at -10%
to Base Chance.
2. True-silvered Armour has the same protection
- cost is + 180,000 sp. Permits magic
at no modification to Base Chance.

> I have a memory of this being discussed=20

There were discussions abour Armourer in December 2003 and March 2004 =
and
possibly other times.

> and resolved to be that the
> silvering and truesilvering costs are added to the final calculated
> cost, ie. the formula is:
>   80% x Base Cost =D7 (Effective Rank + 1) + (True)Silvering cost (if
> any) silver pennies.
>=20


Care to point to an actual resolution? It seems unlikely that we missed =
one
since we started using the Wiki to collect them after the 2004 =
Rulebook.


> Thus for consistency the Weaponsmith change should be to bring the
> text in line with the equation not the other way round.


Our normal logic would be to have a cost of 80% of the price, yes, and =
this
should probably be in the skill proper. I'll think about the rest of =
your
post (and work through some examples) when I'm not at work.

Cheers
Errol


>=20
> My main reason is the innate value of the weapon:
> Using the old formula a Rk 10 +2 Dmg Dagger would cost:
> Normal - 104 sp, Silvered - 204 sp, Gilded - 1,304 sp and =
Truesilvered
> - 1,904 sp
> and a Rk 10 +2 dmg Hand and a half Sword would cost:
> Normal - 884 sp, Silvered - 1,734 sp, Gilded - 11,084 and =
Truesilvered
> - 16,184 sp
>=20
> whereas with the proposed new calculation:
> a Rk 10 +2 Dmg Dagger would cost:
> Normal - 104 sp, Silvered - 1040 sp, Gilded - 12,480 sp and
> Truesilvered - 18,720 sp
> and a Rk 10 +2 dmg Hand and a half Sword would cost:
> Normal - 884 sp, Silvered - 8840 sp, Gilded - 106,080 and =
Truesilvered
> - 159,120 sp
>=20
> Just far too much.
>=20
> I repeat:
>=20
> The Weaponsmith change should be to bring the text in line with the
> equation not the other way round.
>=20
> TTFN, Struan
>=20
>=20
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>=20

------_=_NextPart_001_01C5FF76.6739712E
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 =
5.5.2658.2">
<TITLE>RE: [dq] The Weaponsmith changes are wrong</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<BR>
<BR>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; -----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [<A =
HREF=3D"mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz">mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz</A>]O=
n Behalf Of</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; Struan Judd</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; Sent: Tuesday, 13 December 2005 10:41</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; Subject: [dq] The Weaponsmith changes are =
wrong</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; Plus additional armourer changes are =
required.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; First the Armourer changes:</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; There is no mention of of how Silvering and =
Truesilvering adjusts the</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; cost to the Armourer of the Armour they are =
making (or repairing).</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; </FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>It's a note on the Armour chart:</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>1. Silvered Armour has the same protection -</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>cost is + 30,000 sp. Permits magic at -10%</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>to Base Chance.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>2. True-silvered Armour has the same =
protection</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>- cost is + 180,000 sp. Permits magic</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>at no modification to Base Chance.</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; I have a memory of this being discussed </FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>There were discussions abour Armourer in December =
2003 and March 2004 and possibly other times.</FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; and resolved to be that the</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; silvering and truesilvering costs are added to =
the final calculated</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; cost, ie. the formula is:</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt;&nbsp;&nbsp; 80% x Base Cost =D7 (Effective Rank =
+ 1) + (True)Silvering cost (if</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; any) silver pennies.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; </FONT>
</P>
<BR>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Care to point to an actual resolution? It seems =
unlikely that we missed one since we started using the Wiki to collect =
them after the 2004 Rulebook.</FONT></P>
<BR>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; Thus for consistency the Weaponsmith change =
should be to bring the</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; text in line with the equation not the other =
way round.</FONT>
</P>
<BR>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Our normal logic would be to have a cost of 80% of =
the price, yes, and this should probably be in the skill proper. I'll =
think about the rest of your post (and work through some examples) when =
I'm not at work.</FONT></P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Cheers</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Errol</FONT>
</P>
<BR>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; My main reason is the innate value of the =
weapon:</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; Using the old formula a Rk 10 +2 Dmg Dagger =
would cost:</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; Normal - 104 sp, Silvered - 204 sp, Gilded - =
1,304 sp and Truesilvered</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; - 1,904 sp</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; and a Rk 10 +2 dmg Hand and a half Sword would =
cost:</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; Normal - 884 sp, Silvered - 1,734 sp, Gilded - =
11,084 and Truesilvered</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; - 16,184 sp</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; whereas with the proposed new =
calculation:</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; a Rk 10 +2 Dmg Dagger would cost:</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; Normal - 104 sp, Silvered - 1040 sp, Gilded - =
12,480 sp and</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; Truesilvered - 18,720 sp</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; and a Rk 10 +2 dmg Hand and a half Sword would =
cost:</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; Normal - 884 sp, Silvered - 8840 sp, Gilded - =
106,080 and Truesilvered</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; - 159,120 sp</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; Just far too much.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; I repeat:</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; The Weaponsmith change should be to bring the =
text in line with the</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; equation not the other way round.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; TTFN, Struan</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; -- 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>&gt; </FONT>
</P>

</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C5FF76.6739712E--


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

------=_Part_1289_16888900.1134432228555
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 12/13/05, Errol Cavit <ecavit@tollnz.co.nz> wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Struan Judd
> > Plus additional armourer changes are required.
> >
> > First the Armourer changes:
> > There is no mention of of how Silvering and Truesilvering adjusts the
> > cost to the Armourer of the Armour they are making (or repairing).
> >
>
> It's a note on the Armour chart:
>
> 1. Silvered Armour has the same protection -
> cost is + 30,000 sp. Permits magic at -10%
> to Base Chance.
> 2. True-silvered Armour has the same protection
> - cost is + 180,000 sp. Permits magic
> at no modification to Base Chance.

Yes, but for weapons it's in the Weaponsmith skill. Consistency is the aim =
here.

> > I have a memory of this being discussed
>
> There were discussions abour Armourer in December 2003 and March 2004 and
> possibly other times.
>
> > and resolved to be that the
> > silvering and truesilvering costs are added to the final calculated
> > cost, ie. the formula is:
> >   80% x Base Cost =D7 (Effective Rank + 1) + (True)Silvering cost (if
> > any) silver pennies.
> >
> Care to point to an actual resolution? It seems unlikely that we missed o=
ne
> since we started using the Wiki to collect them after the 2004 Rulebook.

Unfortunately I can't, mainly cause I'm fairly sure it predates the
Wiki big time.

> > Thus for consistency the Weaponsmith change should be to bring the
> > text in line with the equation not the other way round.
>
>
> Our normal logic would be to have a cost of 80% of the price, yes, and th=
is
> should probably be in the skill proper. I'll think about the rest of your
> post (and work through some examples) when I'm not at work.

I've attached my working's Excel document so you can see where (and
how) I got my figures

TTFN, Struan.

------=_Part_1289_16888900.1134432228555
Content-Type: application/vnd.ms-excel; name="Weapon costs.xls"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Weapon costs.xls"
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------=_Part_1289_16888900.1134432228555--


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

Mandos said:

>I completely disagree, at the moment there is enough healing around that
>it is (without thowing the very spells we are looking at fixing)
>virtually impossible to kill a party member.

I dont want to kill a party but I do want to some form of control on the
tention within the game. They are unkillable at the moment because of the
dependance on Potions.

>Players being injured, taking hits to defend other characters while
>already being injured, etc adds to the dramatic tension in a fight.
>If you add even more to the healing you reduce and remove that tension.

I feel it would replace rather than add.

>At the ludicrous levels of games it might be reasonable to add more but
>that should be done to individual characters who want to play on the
>ultra high games, not to the game in general.

In general I do not like to see game balance at any level just come down to
depending on GMs giving out stuff for individual characters. I am unkeen on
seeing the currantcy in the game move to more of: Exp, Time, Access to GM.

I would like to see the playing field level even if it is slopping. Access
to a GM should not be one of the factors IMDO.

Many things are wrong with DQ as far as balance goes:

Fighter Vrs Mages Damage per pulse.
Some spells effects are too large (See problem spells).
Lack of healing has lead to people poping potions.
Ranger/Bow users as a arch-hero type is not a real option.
Lack of room for growth with pure fighters becuase of the extended 20 year
game.
Assassian/Thief skills do not support party activities - so are not used as
anti-party enjoyment.

Capped stats (EN and Ft) offer only limited scope for successfull scaling
and do not keep up with damage.
Lack of Damage reduction items mean characters fall over with ease and some
even rank it.
Lack of Earth and E&E TMR spell.
Lack of enjoyable melee options for 'melee based' characters, means often
the real option is to just protect the mages.

-----------------------
As far as healing goes ask your self this:
When was the last time you saw an earth mage heal another party member?
What is the healing a cele mage does?
How much does a rank 8 healer heal in combat?

Most people do not know because the these options are not used widely,
mainly because the healing potions. As a GM I hate healing potions as their
is no way to affect them if I wish to try to create tention. I can stripe a
Cele or Earth mage of Ft if needed, but I dont get to as the healing/gut
busters come out. I think the lack of healing in teh game has had the
oppisit effect and means people pop healing potions instead, and that sux.

I would prefure to see characters taking actions to heal others than to heve
people dependant on potions.

Jonathan Bean


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

Ahhh, I may have mislead some people.

I do not think upping healing and not reducing damage spells.
I think reduce the problem spells and up healing.
I think healing is a seperate issue and I was wrong/foolish to combine it,
and lead with a qutoe from Jackie's post.

Jonathan Bean


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

> Many things are wrong with DQ as far as balance goes:
> 
> Fighter Vrs Mages Damage per pulse.

Without the big spells this is much more balanced. 

> Some spells effects are too large (See problem spells).

Concour. 

> Lack of healing has lead to people poping potions.

I guess I would like to see what you propose. I think that healing
should take time and I want it to continue to do so. Adventures are
often time critical and time taken to healing again adds to the tension.


> Ranger/Bow users as a arch-hero type is not a real option.

Kin and Gerald seem ok with it....Ok I agree. 

> Lack of room for growth with pure fighters becuase of the 
> extended 20 year game. 

In someways I agree and in others I think it is a player choice. The Gm
assisting a player role up a character should be making the player aware
of the limitation. 

> Assassian/Thief skills do not support party activities - so are not
used as anti-party enjoyment.

Concour. 

> Capped stats (EN and Ft) offer only limited scope for 
> successfull scaling and do not keep up with damage. 

I disagree. I think that removing stat caps will introduce a whole world
of other problems that we don't need while not actually solving any
problems.

> Lack of Damage reduction items mean characters fall over with ease 
> and some even rank it. 

Too much damamge mean characters fall over to easily. This is a function
of the spells we are looking to fix.

> Lack of enjoyable melee options for 'melee based' characters, 
> means often the real option is to just protect the mages.

While I have seen very few players not enjoy wading up and hitting
things I agree more combat options would be good. 

> As far as healing goes ask your self this:
> When was the last time you saw an earth mage heal another 
> party member? What is the healing a cele mage does? How much 
> does a rank 8 healer heal in combat?

I think that Healing shouldn't really be a combat thing. In combat quick
and dirty patches should be applied prior to bugging out to a safe
location to heal. 

I would like to see the options you are talking about but I think
Empathy is bad enough and anything that does more than that is not a
good thing. 

> As a GM I hate healing potions as their is no way to affect them if I 
> wish to try to create tention. 

What do you mean here, could you elcidate?

> I can stripe a Cele or Earth 
> mage of Ft if needed, but I dont get to as the healing/gut 
> busters come out. I think the lack of healing in teh game has 
> had the oppisit effect and means people pop healing potions 
> instead, and that sux.

I think the restoratives are a problem in their own right. Like the loss
of FT caps it removes a major limitation on the mages. If they don't run
out of fatigue why do we bother having a fatigue cost for spells?

> I would prefure to see characters taking actions to heal 
> others than to heve people dependant on potions.

I think someone feeding a potion to someone is someone taking actions to
heal. A large percentage of potion usage is people feeding other people
potions in desperate situations. I like this in a game. 

Mandos
/s


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

Mandos Said:
>I guess I would like to see what you propose. I think that healing
>should take time and I want it to continue to do so.

It takes one action to ready a potion and another to drink it, at no Ft
cost.

>Adventures are often time critical and time taken to healing again adds to
the tension.
At the moment healing from some class's takes to long so is a none-option.
Neads to be faster to make it a option some of the time, rather than none of
the time.

>> Capped stats (EN and Ft) offer only limited scope for
>> successfull scaling and do not keep up with damage.

>I disagree. I think that removing stat caps will introduce a whole world
>of other problems that we don't need while not actually solving any
problems.

I would be in favour of pure none casting melee people being able to buy EN
at a cost of +25000 per point after the first 5 points. It would stop
naturaly at some point (that teh player decides).

>> As far as healing goes ask your self this:
>> When was the last time you saw an earth mage heal another
>> party member? What is the healing a cele mage does? How much
>> does a rank 8 healer heal in combat?

>I think that Healing shouldn't really be a combat thing.

I do think that healer should have a healing skill in combat at range or
touch based on the healers choice. At the moment they have no real option. I
think that healing in combat should be an option for a strong character arch
type in the game.

>In combat quick and dirty patches should be applied prior to bugging out to
a safe location to heal.
>I would like to see the options you are talking about but I think Empathy
is bad enough and anything
>that does more than that is not a good thing.

Again this steps on character arch types.

>> As a GM I hate healing potions as their is no way to affect them if I
wish to try to create tention.
>What do you mean here, could you elcidate?

Healing potions are not controlled within the game and are a run away
problem. Two actions and they fix people. No real skill or character arch
type needed.

>> I would prefure to see characters taking actions to heal
>> others than to heve people dependant on potions.

>I think someone feeding a potion to someone is someone taking actions to
>heal. A large percentage of potion usage is people feeding other people
>potions in desperate situations. I like this in a game.

Again anyone can do it - no investment from a character into playing an
arch-type who is a healer (becuase thats not a current option), and no
control for the GM.


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

Quoting Martin Dickson <martin.dickson@gmail.com>:

> On 12/13/05, raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz <raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Hellfire, Necrosis and Whirlwind Vortex can kill the entire party on the
> > first
> > roll of the dice, regardless of whether or not they save. Assume rank 20
> > with
> > these spells, and the damage is D10+40. Tripled, that's a range of 123 -
> > 210
> > points of damage. Even if they all succesfully resist, and minimum damage
> > is
> > rolled, that's still 61 points of damage. Very few pcs can take 61 points
> > of
> > damage and still be above 0 EN.
> >
> > Hellfire has fewer problems because of the ablative effect of Fire Armour,
> > but
> > it's not an ideal solution.
>
>
> Hellfire (both Fire and Witchcraft) also had its doubles and triples
> downgraded during the Fire College rewrite some years back.  It gets +1 /Rk
> on doubles and +2/Rk on triples, so the max "tripled" Rk 20 damage is D10 +
> (20 x (2 + 2)) = 90.  Still quite a lot... but not as much as it used to
> get...
>
> Necrosis has not had its doubles and triples altered, so can reach (D10 + 1
> + 40) = 51 x 3 = 153 max.
>
> Whirlwind vortex (only) does D-4 +1/Rk if resisted, and while the Mage might
> triple damage, they're more likely to go for the -20 Resist, since if the
> target fails to resist they're as dead as cold turkey.

I would not predict that, unless the target were something with more FT than
God.
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>


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

I think this is worth considering.
If we were to eliminate guild healing potions and introduce more in-combat healing
spells/abilities would this be beneficial to the game?

Specifically I am thinking:
Celestial Healing - Give it a range (5' + 5/r)
Earth Healing - remove the non-standard (5 minute) cast time and leave it range touch or maybe 10'.
Healer - Rank 2 or 3 ability - heals D + Rank damage (or maybe D (minimum Rank)).

Waters of Healing will still be available, as would gut busters.
And of course Mind Mages reign supreme.

My only concern would be about party composition, would it end up being mandatory to go out with a
'healing' mage of one flavour or another.  And if it did, does Celestial, Earth, Mind, Water(ish)
and Healer skill cover enough PCs.  How many parties go out without one of these at the moment.

Cheers, Stephen.

Jonathan Bean - TME said:
> Ahhh, I may have mislead some people.
>
> I do not think upping healing and not reducing damage spells.
> I think reduce the problem spells and up healing.
> I think healing is a seperate issue and I was wrong/foolish to combine it, and lead with a qutoe
> from Jackie's post.
>
> Jonathan Bean
>
>
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --


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

Quoting Mandos Mitchinson <MandosM@adhb.govt.nz>:

> > Capped stats (EN and Ft) offer only limited scope for
> > successfull scaling and do not keep up with damage.
>
> I disagree. I think that removing stat caps will introduce a whole world
> of other problems that we don't need while not actually solving any
> problems.

I don't agree with uncapping EN, but FT should not be capped. A character with
20 games under their belt might have 41 FT, if they had devoted a point to it
every game. It would reflect how generally tough they were, how good they were
at coming out of stun, how much extra they could do than beginning characters,
etc.

At the moment, there is a two or three point difference between experienced and
inexperienced characters at either end of the spectrum.
>
> > Lack of Damage reduction items mean characters fall over with ease
> > and some even rank it.
>
> Too much damamge mean characters fall over to easily. This is a function
> of the spells we are looking to fix.

The game engine is pretty poked, too. It's not simply spells. I would bet that
Sabrina does more damage to her opponents EN than she does to their FT.

Jim


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

> >I guess I would like to see what you propose. I think that healing 
> >should take time and I want it to continue to do so.
> 
> It takes one action to ready a potion and another to drink 
> it, at no Ft cost.

For appximatly 1 blows worth of damage and it cannot fix spec grev
damage. Generally takes 3-4 potions to get someone all the way up again
and that's 6-8 actions. I don't really have a problem with the 10pt
potions although I am glad we got rid of the 20's. Restoratives I have
an issue with. 

> At the moment healing from some class's takes to long so is a 
> none-option. Neads to be faster to make it a option some of 
> the time, rather than none of the time.

Outside of the combat sequence I have seen Earth and Celestial healing
used. 

Mandos has a thought halfway through typing....What if potions only
cured endurance. Spells and Healers would be needed to restore fatigue.

> I would be in favour of pure none casting melee people being 
> able to buy EN at a cost of +25000 per point after the first 
> 5 points. It would stop naturaly at some point (that teh 
> player decides).

And then a few sessions after getting 40 endurance they become a
mage......what happens then? On this is it possible to ever revert to
being a non-mage?

> I do think that healer should have a healing skill in combat 
> at range or touch based on the healers choice. At the moment 
> they have no real option. I think that healing in combat 
> should be an option for a strong character arch type in the game.

While I am not opposed to this I would have to ask why? Currently only
yourself and Phaeton appear to be trying for this achetype and both seem
to have managed it. I think this is a great character type for a MUD or
a PC game but I don't think it is needed or adds anything to DQ. 
Mandos
/s


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

> I don't agree with uncapping EN, but FT should not be capped. 
> A character with 20 games under their belt might have 41 FT, 
> if they had devoted a point to it every game. It would 
> reflect how generally tough they were, how good they were at 
> coming out of stun, how much extra they could do than 
> beginning characters, etc.

If it was soley a case of the aspects you mention I might agree, but it
gives additional spell casting fatigue as well and this I think is bad. 

One of the game imbalances at the moment is the fighter/mage one and if
mages don't run out of fatigue then it gives them an imeasurable
advantage over being a fighter.

Mandos
/s


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

------=_Part_6224_25085753.1134440544777
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 12/13/05, raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz <raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
>
> Quoting Martin Dickson <martin.dickson@gmail.com>:
>
> > Whirlwind vortex (only) does D-4 +1/Rk if resisted, and while the Mage
> might
> > triple damage, they're more likely to go for the -20 Resist, since if
> the
> > target fails to resist they're as dead as cold turkey.
>
> I would not predict that, unless the target were something with more FT
> than
> God.


Yep, you'e probably right --  I didn't think through the numbers properly.
At triple (D-4 + 1/Rk) =3D 63 minimum, you'd probably be better to go for t=
he
damage and forget the -20 resist.

63 non-resistable damage will strip pretty much anythings FT and is enough
to flatten many enemies outright.

Cheers,
Martin

------=_Part_6224_25085753.1134440544777
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 12/13/05, <b class=3D"gmail_sendername"><a href=3D"mailto:raro002@ec.auc=
kland.ac.nz">raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz</a></b> &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:raro00=
2@ec.auckland.ac.nz">raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz</a>&gt; wrote:<div><span cla=
ss=3D"gmail_quote">
</span><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rg=
b(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Quoting Ma=
rtin Dickson &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:martin.dickson@gmail.com">martin.dickson=
@gmail.com
</a>&gt;:<br><br>&gt; Whirlwind vortex (only) does D-4 +1/Rk if resisted, a=
nd while the Mage might<br>&gt; triple damage, they're more likely to go fo=
r the -20 Resist, since if the<br>&gt; target fails to resist they're as de=
ad as cold turkey.
<br><br>I would not predict that, unless the target were something with mor=
e FT than<br>God.</blockquote><div><br>Yep, you'e probably right --&nbsp; I=
 didn't think through the numbers properly.&nbsp; At triple (D-4 + 1/Rk) =
=3D 63 minimum, you'd probably be better to go for the damage and forget th=
e -20 resist.
<br><br>63 non-resistable damage will strip pretty much anythings FT and is=
 enough to flatten many enemies outright.<br><br>Cheers,<br>Martin<br></div=
></div><br>

------=_Part_6224_25085753.1134440544777--


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

Quoting Mandos Mitchinson <MandosM@adhb.govt.nz>:


> For appximatly 1 blows worth of damage and it cannot fix spec grev
> damage. Generally takes 3-4 potions to get someone all the way up again
> and that's 6-8 actions. I don't really have a problem with the 10pt
> potions although I am glad we got rid of the 20's. Restoratives I have
> an issue with.

Healing potions are not played as designed, or indeed as the rules say they
work. Unless things have changed, a healing potion cures D10-5 + Healer Rank
damage to EN only. A rank 8 healing potion will thus cure D10+3 EN damage, and
not cure Spec.Grev. damage or repair FT.

10 and 20 pt healing potions exist purely because they're easy to administer.
Personally, seeing as it's a form of admin performed by the player, I don't
mind if they have to work it out.

> Outside of the combat sequence I have seen Earth and Celestial healing
> used.

I've seen Celestial healing used in combat. I've seen it used by a particularly
vile Dark mage we all know and ... well, we all know, to get an empathy off on
someone that he was torturing.
>
> Mandos has a thought halfway through typing....What if potions only
> cured endurance. Spells and Healers would be needed to restore fatigue.

That would be a return to the original system, and indeed to the rule set we
apparently ascribe to.
>
> > I would be in favour of pure none casting melee people being
> > able to buy EN at a cost of +25000 per point after the first
> > 5 points. It would stop naturaly at some point (that teh
> > player decides).
>
> And then a few sessions after getting 40 endurance they become a
> mage......what happens then? On this is it possible to ever revert to
> being a non-mage?

I don't think that FT should be uncapped because of profession. It should just
be uncapped. Some years ago, I and some others took the FT caps of a number of
people to see what effect that had on the game. I would like to know what the
effect is on the game, now.


>
> > I do think that healer should have a healing skill in combat
> > at range or touch based on the healers choice. At the moment
> > they have no real option. I think that healing in combat
> > should be an option for a strong character arch type in the game.
>
> While I am not opposed to this I would have to ask why? Currently only
> yourself and Phaeton appear to be trying for this achetype and both seem
> to have managed it. I think this is a great character type for a MUD or
> a PC game but I don't think it is needed or adds anything to DQ.

Just because they have pursued separate development doesn't mean that it's any
thing to do with computer games. Where do you think the idea came from in
online games, anyway? It was from real time games . In any case, it's an
unnecessary reference.

I don't see that it healing in combat does anything good or bad. It makes Mind
mages useful, and they're on the pathetic side, if you ask me. They have a
range of abilities that would get you strung up as a spy as soon as someone
could look up the word 'telepathy' in a lexicon. And, their Exp. Mult.s are
appallingly high, although I see that things have gone someway to be a bit more
sane.

I don't mind players healing in combat with spells, and I have no objection to
players acquiring exceptional healing abilities. In this, I agree with George.
If a player wants to pursue this course, then more power to them. I am not sure
that I want to invoke it as a general rule. I don't think that the game needs
it.

Jim


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

------=_Part_16225_29191748.1134440687267
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

Technicaly isn't anyone with a character in one of these colleges effected?
They may not have the spell at high ranks yet but you're messing with the
college of there character. Certain spells while not the only reason they
chose the college may have been a part of the process that led them to that
college.

On 12/13/05, Mandos Mitchinson <MandosM@adhb.govt.nz> wrote:
>
>
> Just a note it would be good to know who is actually affected by this
> directly.
>
> I am aware of
>
> Amber
> Saydar
> Blaze
> Brightflare
> Flamis?
> Mortimer
> Father Rowan
> Doroin
>
> Are there any other characters?
>
> Mandos
> /s
>
>
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>

------=_Part_16225_29191748.1134440687267
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

Technicaly isn't anyone with a character in one of these colleges effected?=
 They may not have the spell at high ranks yet but you're messing with the =
college of there character. Certain spells while not the only reason they c=
hose the college may have been a part of the process that led them to that =
college.
<br><br>
<div><span class=3D"gmail_quote">On 12/13/05, <b class=3D"gmail_sendername"=
>Mandos Mitchinson</b> &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:MandosM@adhb.govt.nz">MandosM@=
adhb.govt.nz</a>&gt; wrote:</span>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0=
px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid"><br>Just a note it would be good=
 to know who is actually affected by this<br>directly.<br><br>I am aware of
<br><br>Amber<br>Saydar<br>Blaze<br>Brightflare<br>Flamis?<br>Mortimer<br>F=
ather Rowan<br>Doroin<br><br>Are there any other characters?<br><br>Mandos<=
br>/s<br><br><br>-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:dq-reque=
st@dq.sf.org.nz">
dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz</a> --<br></blockquote></div><br>

------=_Part_16225_29191748.1134440687267--


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

------=_Part_16293_11401129.1134440825720
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

Biased is one way of looking at it but at the same time I think it gives
your opinion a certain validity as opposed to someone who doesn't play that
college and hasn't put the time and effort into aquiring and training in
these spells. This is important to remember. Going back to my earlier
example of not liking elves, I don't play one and wouldn't seriously expect
to change the rules about them if a question did come up about them. I migh=
t
be more interesting in my flatmates opinions since 2 of them do play elves.

On 12/13/05, Mandos Mitchinson <MandosM@adhb.govt.nz> wrote:
>
> > Please note that I have a character with one of these spells highly
> > ranked.  My opinion is therefore obviously biased in this respect and
> > you probably should ignore it completely :)  I am only really
> > commenting at all because it is close to Christmas and I have very
> > little to do at work.
>
> Excellent summation of the problem.
>
> Mandos
> /s
>
>
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>

------=_Part_16293_11401129.1134440825720
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

Biased is one way of looking at it but at the same time I think it gives yo=
ur opinion a certain validity as opposed to someone who doesn't play that c=
ollege and hasn't put the time and effort into aquiring and training in the=
se spells. This is important to remember. Going back to my earlier example =
of not liking elves, I don't play one and wouldn't seriously expect to chan=
ge the rules about them if a question did come up about them. I might be mo=
re interesting in my flatmates opinions since 2 of them do play elves.
<br><br>
<div><span class=3D"gmail_quote">On 12/13/05, <b class=3D"gmail_sendername"=
>Mandos Mitchinson</b> &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:MandosM@adhb.govt.nz">MandosM@=
adhb.govt.nz</a>&gt; wrote:</span>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0=
px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">&gt; Please note that I have a c=
haracter with one of these spells highly<br>&gt; ranked.&nbsp;&nbsp;My opin=
ion is therefore obviously biased in this respect and
<br>&gt; you probably should ignore it completely :)&nbsp;&nbsp;I am only r=
eally<br>&gt; commenting at all because it is close to Christmas and I have=
 very<br>&gt; little to do at work.<br><br>Excellent summation of the probl=
em.<br>
<br>Mandos<br>/s<br><br><br>-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:<a href=3D"mail=
to:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz">dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz</a> --<br></blockquote>=
</div><br>

------=_Part_16293_11401129.1134440825720--


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

> Technicaly isn't anyone with a character in one of these colleges
effected?
> They may not have the spell at high ranks yet but you're messing with
the
> college of there character. Certain spells while not the only reason
they
> chose the college may have been a part of the process that led them to
that
> college. 

Yep but they are inderectly affected. Ie no impact on the character
right now. I was interested in those who are directly affected hence the
phrasing "who is actually affected by this directly."

For the complete list of other affected people I can use the Character
lists to get all players of those collages and the list of GM's. 

Mandos
/s


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

Quoting Mandos Mitchinson <MandosM@adhb.govt.nz>:

> > I don't agree with uncapping EN, but FT should not be capped.
> > A character with 20 games under their belt might have 41 FT,
> > if they had devoted a point to it every game. It would
> > reflect how generally tough they were, how good they were at
> > coming out of stun, how much extra they could do than
> > beginning characters, etc.
>
> If it was soley a case of the aspects you mention I might agree, but it
> gives additional spell casting fatigue as well and this I think is bad.

I'm aware of that. A high level caster should be able to cast more spells than a
starting caster. They're tougher than a starting character in a general sense.
>
> One of the game imbalances at the moment is the fighter/mage one and if
> mages don't run out of fatigue then it gives them an imeasurable
> advantage over being a fighter.
>

Fighters don't usually FT dedicated casters out. They EN them out. Whenever I've
been hit in combat, they didn't do bugger all of anything to my FT, they stuck
holes in my EN big enough to see through. I have always had casting FT
available when someone half decent with a weapon got through killing me. It's
not much bloody use when you're dead, though.

I suggest it's not an issue of game balance. It grows slowly, and even with
characters like Morgan or some of the others, it has not been what keeps them
alive. It's their other abilities that do that. It has a minor, but across the
board, gradual effect on development which seem to me is about right.

Jim


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

Quoting RPer 4eva <msnoverflow@gmail.com>:

> Technicaly isn't anyone with a character in one of these colleges effected?
> They may not have the spell at high ranks yet but you're messing with the
> college of there character. Certain spells while not the only reason they
> chose the college may have been a part of the process that led them to that
> college.

Um...So what?

Jim


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

Some random person said:
> While I am not opposed to this I would have to ask why? Currently only
> yourself and Phaeton appear to be trying for this achetype and both seem
> to have managed it. I think this is a great character type for a MUD or
> a PC game but I don't think it is needed or adds anything to DQ.

Ok lets leave it to Peter, Susan and Edmund then and leave Lucy outside the
Wardrobe.

Jonathan


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

------=_Part_16421_6889098.1134441728968
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

I like the idea of healers being abale to combat heal. Currently all they
can do in pulse time is cure poison. If they could heal a little endurance
in pulse time this would be great. I don't think anyone is suggesting they
should heal spec grevs in pulse time or use most of there other abilities,
but actual healing of minor injuries gives them more options and takes
people out of the line up and take turns hitting each other till one side
goes down mentality.

On 12/13/05, Mandos Mitchinson <MandosM@adhb.govt.nz> wrote:
>
> > I don't agree with uncapping EN, but FT should not be capped.
> > A character with 20 games under their belt might have 41 FT,
> > if they had devoted a point to it every game. It would
> > reflect how generally tough they were, how good they were at
> > coming out of stun, how much extra they could do than
> > beginning characters, etc.
>
> If it was soley a case of the aspects you mention I might agree, but it
> gives additional spell casting fatigue as well and this I think is bad.
>
> One of the game imbalances at the moment is the fighter/mage one and if
> mages don't run out of fatigue then it gives them an imeasurable
> advantage over being a fighter.
>
> Mandos
> /s
>
>
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>

------=_Part_16421_6889098.1134441728968
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

I like the idea of healers being abale to combat heal. Currently all they c=
an do in pulse time is cure poison. If they could heal a little endurance i=
n pulse time this would be great. I don't think anyone is suggesting they s=
hould heal spec grevs in pulse time or use most of there other abilities, b=
ut actual healing of minor injuries gives them more options and takes peopl=
e out of the line up and take turns hitting each other till one side goes d=
own mentality.
<br><br>
<div><span class=3D"gmail_quote">On 12/13/05, <b class=3D"gmail_sendername"=
>Mandos Mitchinson</b> &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:MandosM@adhb.govt.nz">MandosM@=
adhb.govt.nz</a>&gt; wrote:</span>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0=
px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">&gt; I don't agree with uncappin=
g EN, but FT should not be capped.<br>&gt; A character with 20 games under =
their belt might have 41 FT,
<br>&gt; if they had devoted a point to it every game. It would<br>&gt; ref=
lect how generally tough they were, how good they were at<br>&gt; coming ou=
t of stun, how much extra they could do than<br>&gt; beginning characters, =
etc.
<br><br>If it was soley a case of the aspects you mention I might agree, bu=
t it<br>gives additional spell casting fatigue as well and this I think is =
bad.<br><br>One of the game imbalances at the moment is the fighter/mage on=
e and if
<br>mages don't run out of fatigue then it gives them an imeasurable<br>adv=
antage over being a fighter.<br><br>Mandos<br>/s<br><br><br>-- to unsubscri=
be notify mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz">dq-request@dq.s=
f.org.nz
</a> --<br></blockquote></div><br>

------=_Part_16421_6889098.1134441728968--


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

Quoting RPer 4eva <msnoverflow@gmail.com>:

> Biased is one way of looking at it but at the same time I think it gives
> your opinion a certain validity as opposed to someone who doesn't play that
> college and hasn't put the time and effort into aquiring and training in
> these spells. This is important to remember. Going back to my earlier
> example of not liking elves, I don't play one and wouldn't seriously expect
> to change the rules about them if a question did come up about them. I might
> be more interesting in my flatmates opinions since 2 of them do play elves.

Andrew was just tring to deflect any accusation of bias, otherwise he wouldn't
have mentioned it. In any case, he is one of the people who complained to me
about this problem some time ago. I have never known him to argue except
objectively. Well, on such things as the board, anyway.

The issue is that someone who argues from the perpsective of an interested
character is not doing the game any service, they are simply finding a way to
increase that character's security. Inside the game, that is a laudable
activity. A player should be trying to keep their character alive, because,
well, that's what people do.

At a meta-game level, that interest frequently works against what is best for
the game. I find it hard to warrant an objection to a revision that goes along
the lines of 'but I've paid x amount of xp for this ability'. The policy has
always been to refund time, money and xp if a revision occurred and a player
didn't like it. Again, if such a thing bothers them that much, they shouldn't
be playing rpgs.

In such cases, I recommend a lie down and a nice cup of tea.


Jim


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

------=_Part_16501_7030351.1134442038966
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

How does it cut down options for the party? You still have all the options
you had before. If you /CHOOSE/ to just act as protection thats not a
limiting of options anymore than choosing any other option is. You still
have the ability to do everything you did before. I don't care how many
times you choose an option it doesn't limit your choices. Now arguably the
party leader could order you to perform a certon action in combat such as
that of protection. But this is not a spell limiting your choices. This is
your party leader telling you what to do.



>  The other insidious thing that these spells do is cut down the Options
> for a party as a whole.
>
>
>
> I have adventured with Amber a few times recently and she has Rank 20
> Wiccan Hellfire.
>
>
>
> In combat the sole job of the party was to keep her alive and unfettered
> so she could finish the combat.
>
> (TDP was also suposed to cast damage enhance as well early on)
>
>
>
> Any number of time GM's have rebounded the spell upon us and done strange
> things all of which basically proved that we as a party could not in anyw=
ay
> take the damage we could dish out.
>
> Also no fighter can deal out similar levels of damage (no matter how much
> Exp they sink into it) - not even sabrina - so the whole rest of the part=
y
> became meat shields trying to keep the hell-firer in operation making how
> good the rest of us were not so relevant. You get mages stepping into com=
bat
> just to give Amber another pulse to cast another spell - an usually kill =
all
> those engaging you.
>
>
>
> The only things that slowed Amber down was the range but this caught up
> with he in only a few fights and loosing all her fagiue.
>
>
>
> Another measure of if a magics is too tough at the high end game is to
> look at the top end characters and see if they have picked defenses again=
st
> those spells.
>
> My personal experience is they go out of thier way to try and protect
> themselves vs Hellfire/Necrosis/Vortex, there seem to be a lot of permena=
nt
> protections or reductions in fire damage at high level and I have seen
> armours/ritual that help vs necro damage spells, also items and effects t=
hat
> change resist for half to resist for quarter ot none.
>
>
>
> Final note the Extreme party hunting Rashick last session they had the
> most deaths on the adventure when multiple Rank 20 Hellfires were dropped=
 on
> them. 3 people (I think) died in short sucession.
>

------=_Part_16501_7030351.1134442038966
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

<div>&nbsp;</div>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>How does it cut down options for the party? You still have all the optio=
ns you had before. If you /CHOOSE/ to just act as protection thats not a li=
miting of options anymore than choosing any other option is. You still have=
 the ability to do everything you did before. I don't care how many times y=
ou choose an option it doesn't limit your choices. Now arguably the party l=
eader could order you to perform a certon action in combat such as that of =
protection. But this is not a spell limiting your choices. This is your par=
ty leader telling you what to do.
</p>
<div><br>&nbsp;</div>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0=
px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">
<div>
<div>
<p><font face=3D"Arial" color=3D"blue" size=3D"2"><span style=3D"FONT-SIZE:=
 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">The other insidious thing that thes=
e spells do is cut down the Options for a party as a whole.</span></font></=
p></div>

<div>
<p><font face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D"3"><span style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 12pt=
">&nbsp;</span></font></p></div>
<div>
<p><font face=3D"Arial" color=3D"blue" size=3D"2"><span style=3D"FONT-SIZE:=
 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">I have adventured with Amber a few =
times recently and she has Rank 20 Wiccan Hellfire.</span></font></p></div>
<div>
<p><font face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D"3"><span style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 12pt=
">&nbsp;</span></font></p></div>
<div>
<p><font face=3D"Arial" color=3D"blue" size=3D"2"><span style=3D"FONT-SIZE:=
 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">In combat the sole job of the party=
 was to keep her alive and unfettered so she could finish the combat.</span=
></font>
</p></div>
<div>
<p><font face=3D"Arial" color=3D"blue" size=3D"2"><span style=3D"FONT-SIZE:=
 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">(TDP was also suposed to cast damag=
e enhance as well early on)</span></font></p></div>
<div>
<p><font face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D"3"><span style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 12pt=
">&nbsp;</span></font></p></div>
<div>
<p><font face=3D"Arial" color=3D"blue" size=3D"2"><span style=3D"FONT-SIZE:=
 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Any number of time GM's have reboun=
ded the spell upon us and done strange things all of which basically proved=
 that we as a party could not in anyway take the damage we could dish out.
</span></font></p></div>
<div>
<p><font face=3D"Arial" color=3D"blue" size=3D"2"><span style=3D"FONT-SIZE:=
 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Also no fighter can deal out simila=
r levels of damage (no matter how much Exp they sink into it) - not even sa=
brina - so the whole rest of the party became meat shields trying to keep t=
he hell-firer in operation making how good the rest of us were not so relev=
ant. You get mages stepping into combat just to give Amber another pulse to=
 cast another spell - an usually kill all those engaging you.
</span></font></p></div>
<div>
<p><font face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D"3"><span style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 12pt=
">&nbsp;</span></font></p></div>
<div>
<p><font face=3D"Arial" color=3D"blue" size=3D"2"><span style=3D"FONT-SIZE:=
 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">The only things that slowed Amber d=
own was the range but this caught up with he in only a few fights and loosi=
ng all her fagiue.
</span></font></p></div>
<div>
<p><font face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D"3"><span style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 12pt=
">&nbsp;</span></font></p></div>
<div>
<p><font face=3D"Arial" color=3D"blue" size=3D"2"><span style=3D"FONT-SIZE:=
 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Another measure of if a magics is t=
oo tough at the high end game is to look at the top end characters and see =
if they have picked defenses against those spells.
</span></font></p></div>
<div>
<p><font face=3D"Arial" color=3D"blue" size=3D"2"><span style=3D"FONT-SIZE:=
 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">My personal experience is they go o=
ut of thier way to try and protect themselves vs Hellfire/Necrosis/Vortex, =
there seem to be a lot of permenant protections or reductions in fire damag=
e at high level and I have seen armours/ritual that help vs necro damage sp=
ells, also items and effects that change resist for half to resist for quar=
ter ot none.
</span></font></p></div>
<div>
<p><font face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D"3"><span style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 12pt=
">&nbsp;</span></font></p></div>
<div>
<p><font face=3D"Arial" color=3D"blue" size=3D"2"><span style=3D"FONT-SIZE:=
 10pt; COLOR: blue; FONT-FAMILY: Arial">Final note the Extreme party huntin=
g Rashick last session they had the most deaths on the adventure when multi=
ple Rank 20 Hellfires were dropped on them. 3 people (I think) died in shor=
t sucession.
</span></font></p></div></div></blockquote><br>

------=_Part_16501_7030351.1134442038966--


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

------=_Part_16649_26053804.1134442782167
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

Got to say I love this idea. Even with a cripplingly high EM I'd probably
take it for my healer. It would be nice to see a few more options for those
characters who aren't born killers. Sure I understand they joined the guild
with presumably some knowledge of what that meant but its still nice to hav=
e
options for those characters who really aren't in it for the killing. Area
effect healing would be amusing when due to miscalculation you heal the
enemy more than the party.

3) healing spells, which really HEAL... in combat. We would be better off
> beefing up those in-combat healing spells we have, rather than nerfing th=
e
> attack spells. Mass healing spells would be great. If it makes sense to d=
o
> so, put them in the uncolleged magics, and require healer ranks to learn
> them.
>
> (ducks to avoid the in-coming)
> Jacqui
>
> And yes, you are right... in my opinion the single most broken spell in
> the
> game is Agony.
>
>
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>

------=_Part_16649_26053804.1134442782167
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

<div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Got to say I love this idea. Even with a cripplingly high EM I'd proba=
bly take it for my healer. It would be nice to see a few more options for t=
hose characters who aren't born killers. Sure I understand they joined the =
guild with presumably some knowledge of what that meant but its still nice =
to have options for those characters who really aren't in it for the killin=
g. Area effect healing would be amusing when due to miscalculation you heal=
 the enemy more than the party.
</div><br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0=
px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">3) healing spells, which really =
HEAL... in combat. We would be better off<br>beefing up those in-combat hea=
ling spells we have, rather than nerfing the
<br>attack spells. Mass healing spells would be great. If it makes sense to=
 do<br>so, put them in the uncolleged magics, and require healer ranks to l=
earn them.<br><br>(ducks to avoid the in-coming)<br>Jacqui<br><br>And yes, =
you are right... in my opinion the single most broken spell in the
<br>game is Agony.<br><br><br>-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:<a href=3D"ma=
ilto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz">dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz</a> --<br></blockquot=
e></div><br>

------=_Part_16649_26053804.1134442782167--


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

Quoting RPer 4eva <msnoverflow@gmail.com>:

> How does it cut down options for the party? You still have all the options
> you had before. If you /CHOOSE/ to just act as protection thats not a
> limiting of options anymore than choosing any other option is. You still
> have the ability to do everything you did before. I don't care how many
> times you choose an option it doesn't limit your choices. Now arguably the
> party leader could order you to perform a certon action in combat such as
> that of protection. But this is not a spell limiting your choices. This is
> your party leader telling you what to do.

Okay. They do have the choice not to protect the caster. But, in that case, they
would probably be behaving in a way that is likely to get their character
killed faster or permanently. Decision the player makes which are contrary to
the normal expectation of a rational person are, of course, possible. As the
needle on the sanity dial approaches the red line, though, you have to wonder
exactly how much choice that really is.

So, okay, at a propositional level, there is a choice and there are options. At
a pragmatic level, however, the choice is: protect the blast mage and maybe
live or do something else with a higher probability of dying. A player might
have an alternative action, for example one of Fizzgig's dreaded Boomcubes. But
these would be unusual.

Jim


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

I understand this. It's not what I mean.

If a rule needs to be addressed, and it creates a better game, then we could
always print off something to be pasted into the rule book by hand. It's just a
bit of paper, let's not forget that.

Jim

Quoting Mandos Mitchinson <MandosM@adhb.govt.nz>:

> > The rules change at the speed of the DMs to accept them, not
> > the speed of the bureaucracy to process them, Errol. They
> > might not be written down, but if the rule is accepted, then
> > maybe people will just have to write a note in the margin of
> > their rule books. I'm sure that they can manage.
>
> Jim, while you were away a guideline was put in that Rules that change
> can be used by GM's but became official with the release of a rule book.
>
>
> It makes no real difference other than to help some people know where
> they stand and to ensure regular rulebooks come out :-)
>
> I think this is what Errol is referring to.
>
> Mandos
> /s
>
>
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>


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

------=_Part_16861_30523137.1134444087488
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

If GMs are making scenarios where you have to doubt the players sanity when
they do anything other than protect the blast mage maybe you have to
question the DMs skills.

On 12/13/05, raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz <raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
>
> Quoting RPer 4eva <msnoverflow@gmail.com>:
>
> > How does it cut down options for the party? You still have all the
> options
> > you had before. If you /CHOOSE/ to just act as protection thats not a
> > limiting of options anymore than choosing any other option is. You stil=
l
> > have the ability to do everything you did before. I don't care how many
> > times you choose an option it doesn't limit your choices. Now arguably
> the
> > party leader could order you to perform a certon action in combat such
> as
> > that of protection. But this is not a spell limiting your choices. This
> is
> > your party leader telling you what to do.
>
> Okay. They do have the choice not to protect the caster. But, in that
> case, they
> would probably be behaving in a way that is likely to get their character
> killed faster or permanently. Decision the player makes which are contrar=
y
> to
> the normal expectation of a rational person are, of course, possible. As
> the
> needle on the sanity dial approaches the red line, though, you have to
> wonder
> exactly how much choice that really is.
>
> So, okay, at a propositional level, there is a choice and there are
> options. At
> a pragmatic level, however, the choice is: protect the blast mage and
> maybe
> live or do something else with a higher probability of dying. A player
> might
> have an alternative action, for example one of Fizzgig's dreaded
> Boomcubes. But
> these would be unusual.
>
> Jim
>
>
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>

------=_Part_16861_30523137.1134444087488
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

If GMs are making scenarios where you have to doubt the players sanity when=
 they do anything other than protect the blast mage maybe you have to quest=
ion the DMs skills.<br><br>
<div><span class=3D"gmail_quote">On 12/13/05, <b class=3D"gmail_sendername"=
><a href=3D"mailto:raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz">raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz</a>=
</b> &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz">raro002@ec.auckland.a=
c.nz
</a>&gt; wrote:</span>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0=
px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">Quoting RPer 4eva &lt;<a href=3D=
"mailto:msnoverflow@gmail.com">msnoverflow@gmail.com</a>&gt;:<br><br>&gt; H=
ow does it cut down options for the party? You still have all the options
<br>&gt; you had before. If you /CHOOSE/ to just act as protection thats no=
t a<br>&gt; limiting of options anymore than choosing any other option is. =
You still<br>&gt; have the ability to do everything you did before. I don't=
 care how many
<br>&gt; times you choose an option it doesn't limit your choices. Now argu=
ably the<br>&gt; party leader could order you to perform a certon action in=
 combat such as<br>&gt; that of protection. But this is not a spell limitin=
g your choices. This is
<br>&gt; your party leader telling you what to do.<br><br>Okay. They do hav=
e the choice not to protect the caster. But, in that case, they<br>would pr=
obably be behaving in a way that is likely to get their character<br>killed=
 faster or permanently. Decision the player makes which are contrary to
<br>the normal expectation of a rational person are, of course, possible. A=
s the<br>needle on the sanity dial approaches the red line, though, you hav=
e to wonder<br>exactly how much choice that really is.<br><br>So, okay, at =
a propositional level, there is a choice and there are options. At
<br>a pragmatic level, however, the choice is: protect the blast mage and m=
aybe<br>live or do something else with a higher probability of dying. A pla=
yer might<br>have an alternative action, for example one of Fizzgig's dread=
ed Boomcubes. But
<br>these would be unusual.<br><br>Jim<br><br><br>-- to unsubscribe notify =
mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz">dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz</=
a> --<br></blockquote></div><br>

------=_Part_16861_30523137.1134444087488--


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

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_01C5FF95.80565F22
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

Dylan, seriously, sign your posts. "RPer 4eva [msnoverflow@gmail.com]" isn't
at all memorable to associate with someone.
 
Errol

-----Original Message-----
From: RPer 4eva [mailto:msnoverflow@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 13 December 2005 16:21
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Subject: Re: [dq] Options with: Necrosis, Whirlwind Vortex and Hellfire?


If GMs are making scenarios where you have to doubt the players sanity when
they do anything other than protect the blast mage maybe you have to
question the DMs skills.



------_=_NextPart_001_01C5FF95.80565F22
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">


<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1505" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=01432403-13122005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Dylan, 
seriously, sign your posts. "</FONT></SPAN><SPAN class=01432403-13122005><FONT 
face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>RPer 4eva [msnoverflow@gmail.com]" isn't at all 
memorable to associate with someone.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=01432403-13122005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff 
size=2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=01432403-13122005><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff 
size=2>Errol</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE 
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid">
  <DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader><FONT face="Times New Roman" 
  size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> RPer 4eva 
  [mailto:msnoverflow@gmail.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, 13 December 2005 
  16:21<BR><B>To:</B> dq@dq.sf.org.nz<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [dq] Options with: 
  Necrosis, Whirlwind Vortex and Hellfire?<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>If GMs are making 
  scenarios where you have to doubt the players sanity when they do anything 
  other than protect the blast mage maybe you have to question the DMs 
  skills.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------_=_NextPart_001_01C5FF95.80565F22--


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

I say keep things as they are and here's why.

Q: What is the counter-move to zorch spells?

A: Active resistance and for those with it highly ranked active resistance
with an appropiate counterspell. Even a 12WP schmo with a R12 CS has 92 MR
coming off the enemy's cast chance. Backfiring a zorch will ruin your and
the entire gang's day. PCs, mutants that they are have the potential for
higher MR.

The zorch spells have this as their main weakness. As such, active
resistance against a known air, fire, wiccan or necro of power is a viable
option. And active resistance is a lot harder to determine than a prepare
action.

This does however put the onus on GMs to correctly narrate their battles.
Just as PCs must declare their actions so should the GM for their NPCs.

And NPCs can actively resist too. Nothing stopping them.

So I say keep the big damage spells because casting them engenders a certain
amount of risk that you'll target an active resistor.

Complaining that the spells are broken is like complaining that scissors is
over-powered because no-one plays rock.

William
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.13.12/194 - Release Date: 7/12/2005


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

Don't think that's really a sound argument against fixing these spells William. You can actively resist any targeted spell, but that doesn't make them all "balanced". 

-----Original Message-----
From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]On Behalf Of
William Dymock
Sent: Tuesday, 13 December 2005 5:07 p.m.
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Subject: Re: [dq] Options with: Necrosis, Whirlwind Vortex and Hellfire?


I say keep things as they are and here's why.

Q: What is the counter-move to zorch spells?

A: Active resistance and for those with it highly ranked active resistance
with an appropiate counterspell. Even a 12WP schmo with a R12 CS has 92 MR
coming off the enemy's cast chance. Backfiring a zorch will ruin your and
the entire gang's day. PCs, mutants that they are have the potential for
higher MR.

The zorch spells have this as their main weakness. As such, active
resistance against a known air, fire, wiccan or necro of power is a viable
option. And active resistance is a lot harder to determine than a prepare
action.

This does however put the onus on GMs to correctly narrate their battles.
Just as PCs must declare their actions so should the GM for their NPCs.

And NPCs can actively resist too. Nothing stopping them.

So I say keep the big damage spells because casting them engenders a certain
amount of risk that you'll target an active resistor.

Complaining that the spells are broken is like complaining that scissors is
over-powered because no-one plays rock.

William
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.13.12/194 - Release Date: 7/12/2005


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

>From: Errol Cavit <ecavit@tollnz.co.nz>

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]On Behalf Of
> > Stephen Martin

> > Resist for 1/10th is simple math and means that your spells
> > can still chip away at the big bad(s).
>
>Has potential. Small chance of making a real difference by taking their 
>last
>FT as well. Maybe make it minumum 2 damage?

What about just one point of En?
With doubles and triples.

TTFN
Michael

_________________________________________________________________
Need more speed? Get Xtra Broadband @ 
http://jetstream.xtra.co.nz/chm/0,,202853-1000,00.html


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

Mark Simpson

Don't think that's really a sound argument against fixing these spells
William. You can actively resist any targeted spell, but that doesn't make
them all "balanced".

William's reply

The use of inadequate tactics to the situation is it the fault of the system
how? There is more to high level power than just bigger numbers. You need
different tactics. A failure to recognise and implement such tactics should
not be seen as a failure of the system.

The complaint initially was about people with zorch spells only having one
real option in combat.

Active resistance counter-balances zorch spells nicely.
One AR action will effectivly cover your entire group and ruin (potentially
catastrophically) the enemy's two actions. This IMNSHO is a fair trade.
Maybe what is needed is more 'telegraphing' of magical prepare actions. The
rules could be changed so that targets are nominated during spell
preparation and this is an obvious thing. Then targets of spells have a
range of options availiable to them, of which one character Activly
Resisting for the group is one. But maybe not. If you see a known powerful
Air, Wicca, Fire or Necro preparing then a viable option should be to
activly resist and potentially ruin their day by doing so. And of course
with mana sight spells/abilities, recognise tactics, mind reading and good
co-ordination you can beat the enemy to the punch even under the current
rules.

If instead you choose a single target spell the over-all risk isn't as high
and so usually doesn't warrant an active resist action.

Another fix is to remove the rule that states only the best Active
resistance counts. Add them together for increased laughs.
Two people with modded MR of 90 reducing your cast chance by 180 will truly
give you a bad hair day.

And I just like the threat of big damage on both sides in a game.
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.13.12/194 - Release Date: 7/12/2005


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

>As far as healing goes ask your self this:

>When was the last time you saw an earth mage heal another party member?

Serra does it all the time although she has to wait for combat to end.

>What is the healing a cele mage does?

Mimics healer skill but only to rk 4 or 1 + 1 per 2 rks of Ft or En

>How much does a rank 8 healer heal in combat?

None altough can stabalize which removes them form combat or neutralize 
poison.

>Most people do not know because the these options are not used widely,
>mainly because the healing potions. As a GM I hate healing potions as their
>is no way to affect them if I wish to try to create tention. I can stripe a
>Cele or Earth mage of Ft if needed, but I dont get to as the healing/gut
>busters come out. I think the lack of healing in teh game has had the
>oppisit effect and means people pop healing potions instead, and that sux.
>
>I would prefure to see characters taking actions to heal others than to 
>heve
>people dependant on potions.
>
>Jonathan Bean

Idea, give Healers the choice to heal Endurance in 5 seconds at the cost of 
an extra Ft.
Rk 10 = min 6En to max 15 En for 4 Ft

TTFN
Michael

_________________________________________________________________
Find the coolest online games @ http://xtramsn.co.nz/gaming


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

>
> >I completely disagree, at the moment there is enough healing around that
> >it is (without thowing the very spells we are looking at fixing)
> >virtually impossible to kill a party member.
>
>I dont want to kill a party but I do want to some form of control on the
>tention within the game. They are unkillable at the moment because of the
>dependance on Potions.
>

isn't thier a Namer spell that renders potions useless while in the area of 
effect?

TTFN
Michael

_________________________________________________________________
Need a new job? Check out XtraMSN Careers http://xtramsn.co.nz/careers


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