Subject[dq] OT: Amici Forever practically in my backyard...
FromJacqui Smith
DateMon, 16 Jan 2006 19:22:40 +1300
--=====================_179687447==.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

It has just come to my attention that my favourite opera band, Amici 
Forever, are having a concert in Auckland.... at the Villa Maria 
vineyard  which is less than a km from chez Smith....

Said concert is on SUNDAY 12th February 2006
Tickets cost $90 which is not cheap for an outdoor event... however I'm 
keen.... anyone else?

Ticketek web page: http://premier.ticketek.co.nz/shows/show.aspx?sh=AMICI2006

Amici Forever website: http://www.amiciforever.com/

Jacqui
(apologies to those who receive multiple copies of this email)


--=====================_179687447==.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<html>
<body>
It has just come to my attention that my favourite opera band, Amici
Forever, are having a concert in Auckland.... at the Villa Maria
vineyard&nbsp; which is less than a km from chez Smith.... <br><br>
Said concert is on <font size=2><b>SUNDAY 12th February 2006<br>
</b></font>Tickets cost $90 which is not cheap for an outdoor event...
however I'm keen.... anyone else?<br><br>
Ticketek web page:
<a href="http://premier.ticketek.co.nz/shows/show.aspx?sh=AMICI2006" eudora="autourl">
http://premier.ticketek.co.nz/shows/show.aspx?sh=AMICI2006<br><br>
</a>Amici Forever website:
<a href="http://www.amiciforever.com/" eudora="autourl">
http://www.amiciforever.com/<br><br>
</a>Jacqui<br>
(apologies to those who receive multiple copies of this email)<br><br>
</body>
</html>

--=====================_179687447==.ALT--


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

Subject[dq] How have crappages changed table-top?
FromWilliam Dymock
DateMon, 16 Jan 2006 20:09:19 +1300
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C61AD8.BC2446F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

RE: [dq] Conception Table?Wot the title says. How have CRPGs and MMORGs
changed table-top?

William


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.18/230 - Release Date: 14/01/2006

------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C61AD8.BC2446F0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>RE: [dq] Conception Table?</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1479" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D032290107-16012006>Wot=20
the title says. How have CRPGs and MMORGs changed =
table-top?</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D032290107-16012006></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D032290107-16012006>William</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><FONT face=3DTahoma =
size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C61AD8.BC2446F0--


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

SubjectRe: [dq] How have crappages changed table-top?
Fromraro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz
DateMon, 16 Jan 2006 22:28:18 +1300
Quoting William Dymock <dworkin@ihug.co.nz>:

Don't know. What's a CRPG?


Jim


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

SubjectRe: [dq] Big nasty and broken spells.
FromJacqui Smith
DateMon, 16 Jan 2006 23:45:45 +1300
--=====================_195476115==.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

At 13:01 13/01/06, you wrote:
>So now we have had the holidays and stopped talking about the finer
>points of the weather table are we able to get back to fixing the broken
>spells of Necrosis, Hellfire, Whirlwind Vortex and (maybe but probably
>not) dragonflames?

I concur that the principle problem with these spells is their multiple 
target nature, and suggested a compromise akin to the D&D spell "chain 
lightning" wherein the primary target would resist for half, and secondary 
targets take half damage, resist for none.... as follows, quoting directly 
from the D20 SRDs:

"This spell creates an electrical discharge that begins as a single stroke 
commencing from your fingertips. Unlike lightning bolt, chain lightning 
strikes one object or creature initially, then arcs to other targets.
The bolt deals 1d6 points of electricity damage per caster level (maximum 
20d6) to the primary target. After it strikes, lightning can arc to a 
number of secondary targets equal to your caster level (maximum 20). The 
secondary bolts each strike one target and deal half as much damage as the 
primary one did (rounded down).
Each target can attempt a Reflex saving throw for half damage. You choose 
secondary targets as you like, but they must all be within 30 feet of the 
primary target, and no target can be struck more than once. You can choose 
to affect fewer secondary targets than the maximum."

Change that into DQese, changing lighting to flames (or whirlwinds or... 
whatever it is necros do) and reducing the number of secondary targets, and 
I think you might well have a decent sort of write-up which maintains the 
basic flavour of the existing spells while removing the worst of the 
excesses. One advantage is that the need to select a primary target and 
make sure other targets are in the area means that the player is not doing 
the same thing round after round...

It's also worthwhile noting the numbers involved - a PC would not be facing 
an NPC with chain lightning until around 11th or 12th level - by which 
point an average PC would have say 70 to 80 hit points - and would be 
unlucky to go down, even as the primary target of the spell, even assuming 
they failed the saving throw, and had no elemental resistance spells up. DQ 
characters normally just don't get that kind of endurance and fatigue, and 
the only elemental resistance one can get is versus fire.

Part of the problem is applying critical successes to these spells and the 
multiplication of damage that can result - while multiple damage is not 
such a problem with the relatively low damage bolt spells, here I'd suggest 
adding no more than an extra 1/rank on a double effect, and 2/rank on a 
triple - significant, while not all out deadly.

However, I still maintain that the spells Agony and Windstorm are in many 
ways at least as broken... or why are there so many PCs around with 
specific anti-Agony effects? Hmm?

Jacqui

(who has given up on reading most of this thread since most of it seems to 
be irrelevant to the subject - so please excuse me if my points have 
already been covered) 
--=====================_195476115==.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<html>
<body>
At 13:01 13/01/06, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">So now we have had the holidays
and stopped talking about the finer<br>
points of the weather table are we able to get back to fixing the
broken<br>
spells of Necrosis, Hellfire, Whirlwind Vortex and (maybe but
probably<br>
not) dragonflames?</blockquote><br>
I concur that the principle problem with these spells is their multiple
target nature, and suggested a compromise akin to the D&amp;D spell
&quot;chain lightning&quot; wherein the primary target would resist for
half, and secondary targets take half damage, resist for none.... as
follows, quoting directly from the D20 SRDs:<br><br>
&quot;This spell creates an electrical discharge that begins as a single
stroke commencing from your fingertips. Unlike <i>lightning bolt</i>,
<i>chain lightning </i>strikes one object or creature initially, then
arcs to other targets.<br>
The bolt deals 1d6 points of electricity damage per caster level (maximum
20d6) to the primary target. After it strikes, lightning can arc to a
number of secondary targets equal to your caster level (maximum 20). The
secondary bolts each strike one target and deal half as much damage as
the primary one did (rounded down).<br>
Each target can attempt a Reflex saving throw for half damage. You choose
secondary targets as you like, but they must all be within 30 feet of the
primary target, and no target can be struck more than once. You can
choose to affect fewer secondary targets than the maximum.&quot;
<br><br>
Change that into DQese, changing lighting to flames (or whirlwinds or...
whatever it is necros do) and reducing the number of secondary targets,
and I think you might well have a decent sort of write-up which maintains
the basic flavour of the existing spells while removing the worst of the
excesses. One advantage is that the need to select a primary target and
make sure other targets are in the area means that the player is not
doing the same thing round after round... <br><br>
It's also worthwhile noting the numbers involved - a PC would not be
facing an NPC with chain lightning until around 11th or 12th level - by
which point an average PC would have say 70 to 80 hit points - and would
be unlucky to go down, even as the primary target of the spell, even
assuming they failed the saving throw, and had no elemental resistance
spells up. DQ characters normally just don't get that kind of endurance
and fatigue, and the only elemental resistance one can get is versus
fire.<br><br>
Part of the problem is applying critical successes to these spells and
the multiplication of damage that can result - while multiple damage is
not such a problem with the relatively low damage bolt spells, here I'd
suggest adding no more than an extra 1/rank on a double effect, and
2/rank on a triple - significant, while not all out deadly. <br><br>
However, I still maintain that the spells Agony and Windstorm are in many
ways at least as broken... or why are there so many PCs around with
specific anti-Agony effects? Hmm?<br><br>
Jacqui<br><br>
(who has given up on reading most of this thread since most of it seems
to be irrelevant to the subject - so please excuse me if my points have
already been covered)</body>
</html>

--=====================_195476115==.ALT--


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