This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=____1143734105960_(4j4.,8LSZ
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


My prefered vote is for #4.

My second preference is for #3.

You can tell i am working for an Australian client.

I wish to light the fuse for the Rune working party, and not give any extensions. they either deliver a working version {playtest ok} for the June release or there is no version in the next rule book.

We have had enough 'rune is in abeyance' and that hasnt worked. 

Ian,
from Noaukchott, Mauritania where it is in the low 40s. Next week will be a tad warm, as i head into the interior.


> 
> From: Chris Caulfield <chriscaulf@gmail.com>
> Date: 2006/03/30 Thu AM 11:44:21 GMT+12:00
> To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> Subject: Re: [dq] Which Rune version for rulebook Recap
> 
> I'll vote for option 4 as well.
> 
> I believe that while 2.1.4 has been in playtest for some time 2.1.5 doesn't
> fix it and the changes added to 2.1.5 needs discussion and ratification by
> the gods before it can go into playtest.
> 
> Since 2.1.5 is already planned to be superceded by a radical version
> 3.0which will also need discussion and ratification by the gods before
> it can
> go into playtest there is little point having something in the rulebook
> other than a placeholder which perhaps indicates *'If anyone is looking to
> generate a Rune Mage then refer to the DQ wiki site for the latest
> version(s)'. *
> 
> Cheers - Chris
> 
> 
> On 3/30/06, Stephen Martin <stephenm@castle.pointclark.net> wrote:
> >
> > I vote 4. as I don't believe that we have any version that is rules ready.
> >
> > 1.? was played for many years, has known issues, but has no support from
> > current players and GMs.
> >
> > 2.1.4 needs significant attention from an editor (much of which is done in
> > 2.1.5) and has a few
> > issues (some of which are resolved in 2.1.5).
> >
> > 2.1.5 needs some more attention from editors and introduces changes and
> > additions which need
> > discussion/refinement.
> >
> > 3.0 is at the concept stage.
> >
> > The Rune working group is done with version 2.x and is focused on Rune
> > 3.  That's fine but I think
> > it is overly optimistic to expect a working version within 1 month, even 3
> > or 4 months could be
> > pushing it.
> >
> >
> > I think the majority of GMs and players want a playable version of Rune in
> > the rulebook.
> >
> > If we want to achieve this and publish a rulebook for the next guild
> > meeting then I think it will
> > need to be version 2.1.6 (ver .5 edited & contentious bits resolved or
> > removed), and Rune 3 should
> > be targeted for the next rulebook in 1-2 years time.
> >
> > Or we can comit to Rune 3 and not produce a new rulebook until Rune 3 is
> > ready.
> >
> > Or option 4. Leave it as a blank page and assume that our players and GMs
> > are capable of printing
> > the latest version of Rune each time it is released.
> >
> > Cheers, Stephen.
> >
> > Martin Dickson said:
> > > On 3/30/06, Chris Caulfield <chriscaulf@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Question: Why isn't having the present 'playtest' version 2.1.4 an
> > option?
> > >>
> > >
> > > Particularly since 2.1.5 is NOT simply a redacted / converted to English
> > version of 2.1.4 as
> > > originally stated / advertised but contains a number of contentious
> > additions.
> > >
> > > - Martin
> >
> >
> > -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
> >
> 
> 

------=____1143734105960_(4j4.,8LSZ
Content-Type: text/html;
	name="reply"
Content-Disposition: inline;
	filename="reply"

<div>I'll vote for option&nbsp;4 as well.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>I believe that while 2.1.4 has been in playtest for some time 2.1.5 doesn't fix it and the changes added to 2.1.5 needs discussion and ratification by the gods before it can go into playtest.&nbsp; </div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Since 2.1.5 is already planned to be superceded by a radical version 3.0 which will also need&nbsp;discussion and ratification by the gods before it can go into playtest there is little point having something in the rulebook other than a placeholder which perhaps indicates 
<u><strong>'If anyone is looking to generate a Rune Mage then refer to the DQ wiki site for the latest version(s)'.&nbsp;</strong></u>&nbsp;<br>&nbsp;</div>
<div>Cheers - Chris</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div><span class="gmail_quote">On 3/30/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Stephen Martin</b> &lt;<a href="mailto:stephenm@castle.pointclark.net">stephenm@castle.pointclark.net</a>&gt; wrote:</span>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">I vote 4. as I don't believe that we have any version that is rules ready.<br><br>1.? was played for many years, has known issues, but has no support from current players and GMs.
<br><br>2.1.4 needs significant attention from an editor (much of which is done in 2.1.5) and has a few<br>issues (some of which are resolved in 2.1.5).<br><br>2.1.5 needs some more attention from editors and introduces changes and additions which need
<br>discussion/refinement.<br><br>3.0 is at the concept stage.<br><br>The Rune working group is done with version 2.x and is focused on Rune 3.&nbsp;&nbsp;That's fine but I think<br>it is overly optimistic to expect a working version within 1 month, even 3 or 4 months could be
<br>pushing it.<br><br><br>I think the majority of GMs and players want a playable version of Rune in the rulebook.<br><br>If we want to achieve this and publish a rulebook for the next guild meeting then I think it will<br>
need to be version 2.1.6 (ver .5 edited &amp; contentious bits resolved or removed), and Rune 3 should<br>be targeted for the next rulebook in 1-2 years time.<br><br>Or we can comit to Rune 3 and not produce a new rulebook until Rune 3 is ready.
<br><br>Or option 4. Leave it as a blank page and assume that our players and GMs are capable of printing<br>the latest version of Rune each time it is released.<br><br>Cheers, Stephen.<br><br>Martin Dickson said:<br>&gt; On 3/30/06, Chris Caulfield &lt;
<a href="mailto:chriscaulf@gmail.com">chriscaulf@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br>&gt;&gt;<br>&gt;&gt; Question: Why isn't having the present 'playtest' version 2.1.4 an option?<br>&gt;&gt;<br>&gt;<br>&gt; Particularly since 2.1.5
 is NOT simply a redacted / converted to English version of 2.1.4 as<br>&gt; originally stated / advertised but contains a number of contentious additions.<br>&gt;<br>&gt; - Martin<br><br><br>-- to unsubscribe notify mailto:
<a href="mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz">dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz</a> --<br></blockquote></div><br>


------=____1143734105960_(4j4.,8LSZ--


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

Rants are unproductive but so is dismissing anyone out of hand. Jim regularly makes good sense and whilst i do not agree all the time, i agree enough and understand more.

Ian

> 
> From: Jonathan Bean - TME <Jonathan@tme.co.nz>
> Date: 2006/03/29 Wed PM 01:06:09 GMT+12:00
> To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> Subject: Re: [dq] Jim and how many fingers?
> 
> Ok heres a question for people?
> 
> How many fingers would you cut off your hand to stop Jim ranting at people?
> 
> I would give up 2 fingers :-)
> Anyone else?
> 
> Jono
> 
> 
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>


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

Jim has good points and great ideas when he is not being offensive and abusive.

Like some others in our community, his good ideas are lost because his delivery sets his audience
against him before we have a chance to read the message.

I don't believe that anyone is dismissing him out of hand, just asking for a reduction in white
noise.

Cheers, Stephen.

> Rants are unproductive but so is dismissing anyone out of hand. Jim regularly makes good sense
> and whilst i do not agree all the time, i agree enough and understand more.
>
> Ian
>
>>
>> From: Jonathan Bean - TME <Jonathan@tme.co.nz>
>> Date: 2006/03/29 Wed PM 01:06:09 GMT+12:00
>> To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
>> Subject: Re: [dq] Jim and how many fingers?
>>
>> Ok heres a question for people?
>>
>> How many fingers would you cut off your hand to stop Jim ranting at people?
>>
>> I would give up 2 fingers :-)
>> Anyone else?
>>
>> Jono
>>
>>
>> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>>
>
>
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --


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

I am passing this on from Terry Spencer.  He says:

Rune Version

I agree with all the discussion supporting a version
of Rune being published in the rule book. To not
publish something is to only hamper the community.

My preference of published version, in order of
preference;
•	The version used by rune mage players for the last
10 years.
•	The version that has appeared in previous rule
books.
•	Version 2.1.4. cleaned up

I believe Martin has raised a very important point,
version 2.1.5 is *not* a cleaned up version of 2.1.4.
Amongst other changes 2.1.5 contain new spells, let
not publish v0.1 of anything.

Terry

PS: Jono, how many coffee does it cost to have a
powerful buff spell named after my character?

-- 
-------------------------------
Andrew Luxton-Reilly
Department of Computer Science
University of Auckland
Email: andrew@cs.auckland.ac.nz
Phone: +649-373-7599 x 85654


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

------=_Part_6309_1098699.1143751688029
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

My preference is for #4.

Fall-back preference is to include version 2.1.4

- Martin

------=_Part_6309_1098699.1143751688029
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

My preference is for #4.<br><br>Fall-back preference is to include version =
2.1.4<br><br>- Martin<br><br>

------=_Part_6309_1098699.1143751688029--


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

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0016_01C654A2.1E08B4C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


My preference is for # 3

Kind regards,

Jono

From Errol's voting options:

1) No vote -  an indication that you don't care, and are happy to let other
decide what to do.
2) Rune 1.1 into the new rulebook as the current Rune version in current
play (as a set of rules).- with a strong warning that GMs probably won't let
you play this version etc and probably a link to Wiki
3) Rune 2.1.5 into the new rulebook as the current 'play test version'. -
with link to Wiki page to get latest version and update on status of
playtest.
4) A holder page without Rune details saying look at the wiki for the
current 'play test version' of Rune and update on status of playtest.

  -----Original Message-----
  From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]On Behalf Of
Martin Dickson
  Sent: Friday, 31 March 2006 8:48 a.m.
  To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
  Subject: Re: [dq] Which Rune version for rulebook Recap


  My preference is for #4.

  Fall-back preference is to include version 2.1.4

  - Martin


------=_NextPart_000_0016_01C654A2.1E08B4C0
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 6.00.2800.1528" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D026575620-30032006></SPAN><SPAN =
class=3D026575620-30032006><FONT=20
face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D026575620-30032006><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>My=20
preference is for&nbsp;# 3</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D026575620-30032006><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D026575620-30032006><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>Kind=20
regards,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D026575620-30032006><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D026575620-30032006><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Jono</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D026575620-30032006></SPAN><SPAN =
class=3D026575620-30032006><FONT=20
face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D122501703-29032006></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN =
class=3D122501703-29032006><SPAN=20
class=3D026575620-30032006>From Errol's&nbsp;voting=20
options</SPAN></SPAN></FONT><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D122501703-29032006>:</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff size=3D2><SPAN=20
class=3D122501703-29032006></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff><SPAN =
class=3D122501703-29032006><FONT=20
size=3D2><SPAN class=3D852521103-29032006>1) No vote</SPAN>&nbsp;-&nbsp; =
an=20
indication that you don't care, and are happy to let other decide what =
to=20
do.<BR><SPAN class=3D852521103-29032006>2</SPAN>) Rune 1.1 into the new =
rulebook=20
as the current Rune version in current play (as a set of rules).- with a =
strong=20
warning that GMs probably won't let you play this version etc and =
probably a=20
link to Wiki<BR><SPAN class=3D852521103-29032006>3</SPAN>) Rune 2.1.5 =
into the new=20
rulebook as the current 'play test version'. - with link to Wiki page to =
get=20
latest version and update on status of playtest.<BR><SPAN=20
class=3D852521103-29032006>4</SPAN>) A holder page without Rune details =
saying=20
look at the wiki for the current 'play test version' of Rune and update =
on=20
status of playtest.</FONT></SPAN></FONT></DIV></SPAN><SPAN=20
class=3D026575620-30032006><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff=20
size=3D2></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D026575620-30032006><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px =
solid">
  <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> Friday, 31 March 2006 8:48 a.m.<BR><B>To:</B>=20
  dq@dq.sf.org.nz<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [dq] Which Rune version for =
rulebook=20
  Recap<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>My preference is for #4.<BR><BR>Fall-back =
preference=20
  is to include version 2.1.4<BR><BR>- =
Martin<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0016_01C654A2.1E08B4C0--


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

Hi all,

If you are interested in coming along to a meeting/working group regarding
Rune 3.0 this weekend please email me.

Kind regards,

Jonathan Bean
Business Development Manager
TME -it's all about time
NZ Toll Free 0800 55 33 66
Aust Toll Free 1800 30 51 75
021 173 4060 www.tme.co.nz


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

<html>

<P>My preference is for option 4, with my party vote on including 2.1.4</P>
<P>Actually, if the ownership of thumbs is the driving factor, I'd opt for putting all of them in and letting them fight it out in a suitably darwinian fashion.&nbsp; Sadly, this would put us on the road to our first splatbook and nobody wants that.</P>
<P>More seriously, I'm quite happy to be involved as a GM in upcoming playtests and discussions and I'm pleased about the energy that's going into resolving the Rune issue.&nbsp; I just don't believe that inserting 2.1.5 into the "suggestions" book will add anything more than future apocrypha.</P>
<P>&nbsp;</P>
<P>&nbsp;</P>
<P>ben<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</P>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #5167c6 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class6575620-30032006></SPAN><SPAN class6575620-30032006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class2501703-29032006></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class2501703-29032006><SPAN class6575620-30032006>From Errol's&nbsp;voting options</SPAN></SPAN></FONT><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class2501703-29032006>:</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2><SPAN class2501703-29032006></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff><SPAN class2501703-29032006><FONT size=2><SPAN class…2521103-29032006>1) No vote</SPAN>&nbsp;-&nbsp; an indication that you don't care, and are happy to let other decide what to do.<BR>
<SPAN class…2521103-29032006>2</SPAN>) Rune 1.1 into the new rulebook as the current Rune version in current play (as a set of rules).- with a strong warning that GMs probably won't let you play this version etc and probably a link to Wiki<BR>
<SPAN class…2521103-29032006>3</SPAN>) Rune 2.1.5 into the new rulebook as the current 'play test version'. - with link to Wiki page to get latest version and update on status of playtest.<BR>
<SPAN class…2521103-29032006>4</SPAN>) A holder page without Rune details saying look at the wiki for the current 'play test version' of Rune and update on status of playtest.</FONT></SPAN></FONT></DIV></SPAN><SPAN class6575620-30032006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class6575620-30032006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
</html><BR>


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

My preference is for # 3

Helen


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

Just as a note it appears that options 1 and 2 are not fliers. No-one is
keen to see 1.1 in the rules at all. 

Back to the argument on what does go in. 

Mandos
/s


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

Some people say that 2.1.5 has changed significantly from 2.1.4 and thus
shouldn't be included.

2.1.4 was a draft; we are familiar with it, but is it any more
"polished" or "approved" than 2.1.5?

If 2.1.4 and 2.1.5 are both drafts, then presumably 2.1.5 is overall an
improvement on 2.1.4.

If 2.1.5 is an improvement, we should have 2.1.5 in preference to 2.1.4
If not, what was the committee doing?

So my vote is for 2.1.5, having not read the document thoroughly, but
trusting the committee to have made things better on average.


Andrew


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

Could we have a quick summary of what the Rune 3.0 outline is ?

E.g. "we are changing it to being about totem spirits and painting
sigils on people's foreheads".

This may help decide whether people would be interested in coming along,
and stop them from trying to pull it in a radically different direction.

Andrew

-----Original Message-----
From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz] On Behalf Of
Jonathan Bean - TME
Sent: Friday, 31 March 2006 9:24 a.m.
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Subject: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting


Hi all,

If you are interested in coming along to a meeting/working group
regarding Rune 3.0 this weekend please email me.

Kind regards,

Jonathan Bean
Business Development Manager
TME -it's all about time
NZ Toll Free 0800 55 33 66
Aust Toll Free 1800 30 51 75
021 173 4060 www.tme.co.nz


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

Sure no problem.

Background:
GMs had issues with 1.* of Rune.
2.* was an effort to settle on a 'workable college' but was identified as
lacking flavour or direction.
3.* was agreed to as having a major re-write or change from the current
flavour or direction of 'Rune, Elemental'

It was agreed that flavour and a large change like 3.* would take time
(maybe years).
2.* was aimed at being the 'working college' while 3.* came out, for Rune
Mages characters.

So on to 3.0

Some peoples views (not all), have included:

"The College of Rune Magic's is concerned with the use of special symbols,
totems, aspects, fetish's, charms, shaman magic's, the spirit world, all to
assist in the shaping of mana into desired forms. Rune mages or Shaman's
often use these elements when creating magic.

In rare cases, additional Runes, totems, fetish's, medicine bags, may be
developed or discovered which employ parts of existing Runes mages. However,
much of the power of the Runes derives from their constant usage over many
centuries, and most useful Runes will be known to all Adepts of this College
(or at least be readily available to them with very little research).

Focus of the college, Rune's of Power, Healing, Shaman, Spirit Guides etc
etc."

I hope this helps peoples understanding of the general direction that the
Rune working group is going in at this stage. This is not a 100% complete
view but is a general direction of 'most' of the people involved in the
working group.

Jono



> -----Original Message-----
> From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]On Behalf Of
> Andrew Withy (DSL AK)
> Sent: Friday, 31 March 2006 10:27 a.m.
> To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> Subject: Re: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting
>
>
> Could we have a quick summary of what the Rune 3.0 outline is ?
>
> E.g. "we are changing it to being about totem spirits and painting
> sigils on people's foreheads".
>
> This may help decide whether people would be interested in coming along,
> and stop them from trying to pull it in a radically different direction.
>
> Andrew
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz] On Behalf Of
> Jonathan Bean - TME
> Sent: Friday, 31 March 2006 9:24 a.m.
> To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> Subject: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> If you are interested in coming along to a meeting/working group
> regarding Rune 3.0 this weekend please email me.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Jonathan Bean
> Business Development Manager
> TME -it's all about time
> NZ Toll Free 0800 55 33 66
> Aust Toll Free 1800 30 51 75
> 021 173 4060 www.tme.co.nz
>
>
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>
>


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

If the approach is to make the college shamanic in nature, then make it clear
that it is a shamanic college. Such a college would not have much, if anything
to do with rune magic, which is predominantly a North European notion.

This is not to say that there is no tradition of shamanic magic in the North
European tradition, but shamanism extends itself across most of the world, and
bugger all of them had any access to runes. If runes are to be a point of
difference with this college, then there must be more focus on that.

Otherwise, all you are creating is a shaman, and calling it a rune mage.

Jim.
Quoting Jonathan Bean - TME <Jonathan@tme.co.nz>:

> Sure no problem.
>
> Background:
> GMs had issues with 1.* of Rune.
> 2.* was an effort to settle on a 'workable college' but was identified as
> lacking flavour or direction.
> 3.* was agreed to as having a major re-write or change from the current
> flavour or direction of 'Rune, Elemental'
>
> It was agreed that flavour and a large change like 3.* would take time
> (maybe years).
> 2.* was aimed at being the 'working college' while 3.* came out, for Rune
> Mages characters.
>
> So on to 3.0
>
> Some peoples views (not all), have included:
>
> "The College of Rune Magic's is concerned with the use of special symbols,
> totems, aspects, fetish's, charms, shaman magic's, the spirit world, all to
> assist in the shaping of mana into desired forms. Rune mages or Shaman's
> often use these elements when creating magic.
>
> In rare cases, additional Runes, totems, fetish's, medicine bags, may be
> developed or discovered which employ parts of existing Runes mages. However,
> much of the power of the Runes derives from their constant usage over many
> centuries, and most useful Runes will be known to all Adepts of this College
> (or at least be readily available to them with very little research).
>
> Focus of the college, Rune's of Power, Healing, Shaman, Spirit Guides etc
> etc."
>
> I hope this helps peoples understanding of the general direction that the
> Rune working group is going in at this stage. This is not a 100% complete
> view but is a general direction of 'most' of the people involved in the
> working group.
>
> Jono
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]On Behalf Of
> > Andrew Withy (DSL AK)
> > Sent: Friday, 31 March 2006 10:27 a.m.
> > To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> > Subject: Re: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting
> >
> >
> > Could we have a quick summary of what the Rune 3.0 outline is ?
> >
> > E.g. "we are changing it to being about totem spirits and painting
> > sigils on people's foreheads".
> >
> > This may help decide whether people would be interested in coming along,
> > and stop them from trying to pull it in a radically different direction.
> >
> > Andrew
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz] On Behalf Of
> > Jonathan Bean - TME
> > Sent: Friday, 31 March 2006 9:24 a.m.
> > To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> > Subject: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting
> >
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > If you are interested in coming along to a meeting/working group
> > regarding Rune 3.0 this weekend please email me.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Jonathan Bean
> > Business Development Manager
> > TME -it's all about time
> > NZ Toll Free 0800 55 33 66
> > Aust Toll Free 1800 30 51 75
> > 021 173 4060 www.tme.co.nz
> >
> >
> > -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
> >
> >
>
>
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>


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

------=_Part_7525_28401456.1143759999418
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 3/31/06, raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz <raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
>
> If runes are to be a point of difference with this college, then there
> must be more focus on that.
>
> Otherwise, all you are creating is a shaman, and calling it a rune mage.


I agree unreservedly with Jim.

- Martin

<goes off to watch demons ice-skating>  :-)

------=_Part_7525_28401456.1143759999418
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 3/31/06, <b class=3D"gmail_sendername"><a href=3D"mailto:raro002@ec.auck=
land.ac.nz">raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz</a></b> &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:raro002=
@ec.auckland.ac.nz">raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz</a>&gt; wrote:<div><span clas=
s=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;">If runes a=
re to be a point of difference with this college, then there must be more f=
ocus on that.
<br><br>Otherwise, all you are creating is a shaman, and calling it a rune =
mage.</blockquote><div><br>I agree unreservedly with Jim.<br><br>- Martin<b=
r><br>&lt;goes off to watch demons ice-skating&gt;&nbsp; :-)<br></div></div=
>
<br>

------=_Part_7525_28401456.1143759999418--


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

> If the approach is to make the college shamanic in nature, 
> then make it clear that it is a shamanic college. Such a 
> college would not have much, if anything to do with rune 
> magic, which is predominantly a North European notion.
> 
> This is not to say that there is no tradition of shamanic 
> magic in the North European tradition, but shamanism extends 
> itself across most of the world, and bugger all of them had 
> any access to runes. If runes are to be a point of difference 
> with this college, then there must be more focus on that.
> 
> Otherwise, all you are creating is a shaman, and calling it a 
> rune mage.

So what? 

Create the damn college, see what turns up, see if it benefits the game
and if there is still an issue I think we could probably argue for a few
years and change the name. It's not even remotely important as long as
the group does have a defined direction and gets something completed. 

Mandos
/s


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

Upon reading both these emails (which both struck a nice chord)

My first thought was "Hmm, yay a good college basis and theme much
like what happened when Black Magics became Witchcraft."
So of course my second thought was "Change the name!"

which of course lead to "To what?" but it is a touch early for that,
but I would still offer the position that there will be a sufficient
change of focus, intent and theme that a college name change will be
in order for "Rune" 3.0.

Given both emails my first inclanation as to a new name would be
"College of Totem Magics" (or Totemic) as being slightly more
appropriate than "College of Shamanism" (or Shamanic Magics)

TTFN, Struan

On 3/31/06, raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz <raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
> If the approach is to make the college shamanic in nature, then make it clear
> that it is a shamanic college. Such a college would not have much, if anything
> to do with rune magic, which is predominantly a North European notion.
>
> This is not to say that there is no tradition of shamanic magic in the North
> European tradition, but shamanism extends itself across most of the world, and
> bugger all of them had any access to runes. If runes are to be a point of
> difference with this college, then there must be more focus on that.
>
> Otherwise, all you are creating is a shaman, and calling it a rune mage.
>
> Jim.
> Quoting Jonathan Bean - TME <Jonathan@tme.co.nz>:
>
> > Sure no problem.
> >
> > Background:
> > GMs had issues with 1.* of Rune.
> > 2.* was an effort to settle on a 'workable college' but was identified as
> > lacking flavour or direction.
> > 3.* was agreed to as having a major re-write or change from the current
> > flavour or direction of 'Rune, Elemental'
> >
> > It was agreed that flavour and a large change like 3.* would take time
> > (maybe years).
> > 2.* was aimed at being the 'working college' while 3.* came out, for Rune
> > Mages characters.
> >
> > So on to 3.0
> >
> > Some peoples views (not all), have included:
> >
> > "The College of Rune Magic's is concerned with the use of special symbols,
> > totems, aspects, fetish's, charms, shaman magic's, the spirit world, all to
> > assist in the shaping of mana into desired forms. Rune mages or Shaman's
> > often use these elements when creating magic.
> >
> > In rare cases, additional Runes, totems, fetish's, medicine bags, may be
> > developed or discovered which employ parts of existing Runes mages. However,
> > much of the power of the Runes derives from their constant usage over many
> > centuries, and most useful Runes will be known to all Adepts of this College
> > (or at least be readily available to them with very little research).
> >
> > Focus of the college, Rune's of Power, Healing, Shaman, Spirit Guides etc
> > etc."
> >
> > I hope this helps peoples understanding of the general direction that the
> > Rune working group is going in at this stage. This is not a 100% complete
> > view but is a general direction of 'most' of the people involved in the
> > working group.
> >
> > Jono
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]On Behalf Of
> > > Andrew Withy (DSL AK)
> > > Sent: Friday, 31 March 2006 10:27 a.m.
> > > To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> > > Subject: Re: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting
> > >
> > >
> > > Could we have a quick summary of what the Rune 3.0 outline is ?
> > >
> > > E.g. "we are changing it to being about totem spirits and painting
> > > sigils on people's foreheads".
> > >
> > > This may help decide whether people would be interested in coming along,
> > > and stop them from trying to pull it in a radically different direction.
> > >
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz] On Behalf Of
> > > Jonathan Bean - TME
> > > Sent: Friday, 31 March 2006 9:24 a.m.
> > > To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> > > Subject: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > If you are interested in coming along to a meeting/working group
> > > regarding Rune 3.0 this weekend please email me.
> > >
> > > Kind regards,
> > >
> > > Jonathan Bean
> > > Business Development Manager
> > > TME -it's all about time
> > > NZ Toll Free 0800 55 33 66
> > > Aust Toll Free 1800 30 51 75
> > > 021 173 4060 www.tme.co.nz
> > >
> > >
> > > -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
> >
>
>
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>


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

My prefernece is to pur 2.15 in the rulebook so everybody including 
those who don't regulary use the net are working from the same starting 
point.

Scott Whitaker


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

If you say Rune and mean Shamanism and I say Rune and mean nordic Runes then it makes it very hard
to have a conversation on the same topic.

The problem with ver 2 is that it is being both and neither.

If the aim is to create a college that is a fusion of Runes and Shamanism then that is what should
be stated as the aim and everyone who wants to be involved can work towards that.

Another option is that it could be split into two colleges:
- Rune which is a college based on a written method of doing magic.
- Shamanism which is based on spirits and totems.


Mandos Mitchinson said:
>>
>> Otherwise, all you are creating is a shaman, and calling it a
>> rune mage.
>
> So what?
>
> Create the damn college, see what turns up, see if it benefits the game and if there is still an
> issue I think we could probably argue for a few years and change the name. It's not even
> remotely important as long as the group does have a defined direction and gets something
> completed.
>
> Mandos
> /s


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

Jim maybe correct.

The upshot is this:

Rune has been a mess for more than 8 years.
I want to see something come out - which can then be judged for that it is -
or call it what it is.
I want to see that the players of the character who play Rune involved.
I do want to see peoples views taken into account but at the same time I do
not want to see death by committee as we have seen with the last 5 attempts.
All people including me have to able to have a flexable view, so we end up
with something.

If you care about this you are welcome to come to the Rune meeting. Jim
can't come because I am running out of fingers :-)

Jono


> -----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: Friday, 31 March 2006 11:00 a.m.
> To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> Subject: Re: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting Spirit Guides
>
>
> If the approach is to make the college shamanic in nature, then
> make it clear
> that it is a shamanic college. Such a college would not have
> much, if anything
> to do with rune magic, which is predominantly a North European notion.
>
> This is not to say that there is no tradition of shamanic magic
> in the North
> European tradition, but shamanism extends itself across most of
> the world, and
> bugger all of them had any access to runes. If runes are to be a point of
> difference with this college, then there must be more focus on that.
>
> Otherwise, all you are creating is a shaman, and calling it a rune mage.
>
> Jim.
> Quoting Jonathan Bean - TME <Jonathan@tme.co.nz>:
>
> > Sure no problem.
> >
> > Background:
> > GMs had issues with 1.* of Rune.
> > 2.* was an effort to settle on a 'workable college' but was
> identified as
> > lacking flavour or direction.
> > 3.* was agreed to as having a major re-write or change from the current
> > flavour or direction of 'Rune, Elemental'
> >
> > It was agreed that flavour and a large change like 3.* would take time
> > (maybe years).
> > 2.* was aimed at being the 'working college' while 3.* came
> out, for Rune
> > Mages characters.
> >
> > So on to 3.0
> >
> > Some peoples views (not all), have included:
> >
> > "The College of Rune Magic's is concerned with the use of
> special symbols,
> > totems, aspects, fetish's, charms, shaman magic's, the spirit
> world, all to
> > assist in the shaping of mana into desired forms. Rune mages or Shaman's
> > often use these elements when creating magic.
> >
> > In rare cases, additional Runes, totems, fetish's, medicine bags, may be
> > developed or discovered which employ parts of existing Runes
> mages. However,
> > much of the power of the Runes derives from their constant
> usage over many
> > centuries, and most useful Runes will be known to all Adepts of
> this College
> > (or at least be readily available to them with very little research).
> >
> > Focus of the college, Rune's of Power, Healing, Shaman, Spirit
> Guides etc
> > etc."
> >
> > I hope this helps peoples understanding of the general
> direction that the
> > Rune working group is going in at this stage. This is not a
> 100% complete
> > view but is a general direction of 'most' of the people involved in the
> > working group.
> >
> > Jono
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]On Behalf Of
> > > Andrew Withy (DSL AK)
> > > Sent: Friday, 31 March 2006 10:27 a.m.
> > > To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> > > Subject: Re: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting
> > >
> > >
> > > Could we have a quick summary of what the Rune 3.0 outline is ?
> > >
> > > E.g. "we are changing it to being about totem spirits and painting
> > > sigils on people's foreheads".
> > >
> > > This may help decide whether people would be interested in
> coming along,
> > > and stop them from trying to pull it in a radically different
> direction.
> > >
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz] On
> Behalf Of
> > > Jonathan Bean - TME
> > > Sent: Friday, 31 March 2006 9:24 a.m.
> > > To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> > > Subject: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > If you are interested in coming along to a meeting/working group
> > > regarding Rune 3.0 this weekend please email me.
> > >
> > > Kind regards,
> > >
> > > Jonathan Bean
> > > Business Development Manager
> > > TME -it's all about time
> > > NZ Toll Free 0800 55 33 66
> > > Aust Toll Free 1800 30 51 75
> > > 021 173 4060 www.tme.co.nz
> > >
> > >
> > > -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
> >
>
>
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>
>


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

------=_Part_7713_12720705.1143761399440
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 3/31/06, Stephen Martin <stephenm@castle.pointclark.net> wrote:
>
>
> Another option is that it could be split into two colleges:
> - Rune which is a college based on a written method of doing magic.


And the question becomes: is there / can there be a sufficiently large body
of commonly themed magic related to Runes to support this?

What are the historical examples of rune magic, and is there something
intrinsically "runic" about them, or are the rune simply the way they were
done because of their cultural context?

(The only ones I know of are detecting poison -- by carving on a cup -- and
cursing by erecting a runestaff -- with a horse's head on it).

- Martin

------=_Part_7713_12720705.1143761399440
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 3/31/06, <b class=3D"gmail_sendername">Stephen Martin</b> &lt;<a href=3D=
"mailto:stephenm@castle.pointclark.net">stephenm@castle.pointclark.net</a>&=
gt; wrote:<div><span class=3D"gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class=3D"gmai=
l_quote" style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0p=
t 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>Another option is that it could be split into two colleges:<br>- Rune w=
hich is a college based on a written method of doing magic.</blockquote><di=
v><br>And the question becomes: is there / can there be a sufficiently larg=
e body of commonly themed magic related to Runes to support this?
<br><br>What are the historical examples of rune magic, and is there someth=
ing intrinsically &quot;runic&quot; about them, or are the rune simply the =
way they were done because of their cultural context?<br><br>(The only ones=
 I know of are detecting poison -- by carving on a cup -- and cursing by er=
ecting a runestaff -- with a horse's head on it).
<br></div><br>- Martin<br><div><br><br></div></div><br>

------=_Part_7713_12720705.1143761399440--


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

> If the aim is to create a college that is a fusion of Runes 
> and Shamanism then that is what should be stated as the aim 
> and everyone who wants to be involved can work towards that.

The run through that Jono gave certainly gives that impression. A good
clear summation, a direction the group is heading and a rough outline of
the expected results. 

Lets give them a chance to produce something before we work so hard to
derail it with arguments over the name, whether two colleges are better
than one etc. 

People who are interested get involved, those not activly involved stay
out of it until something is presented for review.

Having a storm in a teacup now simply stifles creativity and stops
people producing anything at all. 

Mandos
/s


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

------=_Part_7757_16336011.1143761682947
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 3/31/06, Martin Dickson <martin.dickson@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> And the question becomes: is there / can there be a sufficiently large
> body of commonly themed magic related to Runes to support this?
>

I should note -- I'm very supportive of a Shaman type approach for a
college... I'm just still not sure of its fit with Rune... and additionally
how certain traditional (within DQ) rune Mage abilities might fit within th=
e
framework of Shamanism.  (Rune Portal being an obvious high profile example=
)
:-)

- Martin

------=_Part_7757_16336011.1143761682947
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 3/31/06, <b class=3D"gmail_sendername">Martin Dickson</b> &lt;<a href=3D=
"mailto:martin.dickson@gmail.com">martin.dickson@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<d=
iv><span class=3D"gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" sty=
le=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex;=
 padding-left: 1ex;">
<div style=3D"direction: ltr;"><span class=3D"q" id=3D"q_10a4d7e6f9dbe66d_0=
"><div><div>And the question becomes: is there / can there be a sufficientl=
y large body of commonly themed magic related to Runes to support this?
</div></div></span></div></blockquote><div><br>I should note -- I'm very su=
pportive of a Shaman type approach for a college... I'm just still not sure=
 of its fit with Rune... and additionally how certain traditional (within D=
Q) rune Mage abilities might fit within the framework of Shamanism.&nbsp; (=
Rune Portal being an obvious high profile example) :-)
<br><br>- Martin<br></div><br></div><br>

------=_Part_7757_16336011.1143761682947--


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

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_002A_01C654B7.730FEE10
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

So... if people (not just Martin) are interested in coming along this
weekend... please email me.

Thanks

Jono
  -----Original Message-----
  From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]On Behalf Of
Martin Dickson
  Sent: Friday, 31 March 2006 11:35 a.m.
  To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
  Subject: Re: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting Spirit Guides


  On 3/31/06, Martin Dickson <martin.dickson@gmail.com> wrote:
    And the question becomes: is there / can there be a sufficiently large
body of commonly themed magic related to Runes to support this?

  I should note -- I'm very supportive of a Shaman type approach for a
college... I'm just still not sure of its fit with Rune... and additionally
how certain traditional (within DQ) rune Mage abilities might fit within the
framework of Shamanism.  (Rune Portal being an obvious high profile example)
:-)

  - Martin





------=_NextPart_000_002A_01C654B7.730FEE10
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 6.00.2800.1528" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D307063623-30032006><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =
size=3D2>So...=20
if people (not just Martin) are interested in coming along this =
weekend...=20
please email me.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D307063623-30032006><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D307063623-30032006><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Thanks</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D307063623-30032006><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=3D307063623-30032006><FONT face=3DArial color=3D#0000ff =

size=3D2>Jono</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px =
solid">
  <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> Friday, 31 March 2006 11:35 a.m.<BR><B>To:</B> =

  dq@dq.sf.org.nz<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting Spirit=20
  Guides<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>On 3/31/06, <B =
class=3Dgmail_sendername>Martin=20
  Dickson</B> &lt;<A=20
  =
href=3D"mailto:martin.dickson@gmail.com">martin.dickson@gmail.com</A>&gt;=
 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">
    <DIV style=3D"DIRECTION: ltr"><SPAN class=3Dq =
id=3Dq_10a4d7e6f9dbe66d_0>
    <DIV>
    <DIV>And the question becomes: is there / can there be a =
sufficiently large=20
    body of commonly themed magic related to Runes to support this?=20
    </DIV></DIV></SPAN></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
  <DIV><BR>I should note -- I'm very supportive of a Shaman type =
approach for a=20
  college... I'm just still not sure of its fit with Rune... and =
additionally=20
  how certain traditional (within DQ) rune Mage abilities might fit =
within the=20
  framework of Shamanism.&nbsp; (Rune Portal being an obvious high =
profile=20
  example) :-) <BR><BR>- =
Martin<BR></DIV><BR></DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_002A_01C654B7.730FEE10--


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

Jim maybe correct.

The upshot is this:

Rune has been a mess for more than 8 years.
I want to see something come out - which can then be judged for that it is -
or call it what it is.
I want to see that the players of the character who play Rune involved.
I do want to see peoples views taken into account but at the same time I do
not want to see death by committee as we have seen with the last 5 attempts.
All people including me have to able to have a flexable view, so we end up
with something.

If you care about this you are welcome to come to the Rune meeting. Jim
can't come because I am running out of fingers :-)

Jono


> -----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: Friday, 31 March 2006 11:00 a.m.
> To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> Subject: Re: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting Spirit Guides
>
>
> If the approach is to make the college shamanic in nature, then
> make it clear
> that it is a shamanic college. Such a college would not have
> much, if anything
> to do with rune magic, which is predominantly a North European notion.
>
> This is not to say that there is no tradition of shamanic magic
> in the North
> European tradition, but shamanism extends itself across most of
> the world, and
> bugger all of them had any access to runes. If runes are to be a point of
> difference with this college, then there must be more focus on that.
>
> Otherwise, all you are creating is a shaman, and calling it a rune mage.
>
> Jim.
> Quoting Jonathan Bean - TME <Jonathan@tme.co.nz>:
>
> > Sure no problem.
> >
> > Background:
> > GMs had issues with 1.* of Rune.
> > 2.* was an effort to settle on a 'workable college' but was
> identified as
> > lacking flavour or direction.
> > 3.* was agreed to as having a major re-write or change from the current
> > flavour or direction of 'Rune, Elemental'
> >
> > It was agreed that flavour and a large change like 3.* would take time
> > (maybe years).
> > 2.* was aimed at being the 'working college' while 3.* came
> out, for Rune
> > Mages characters.
> >
> > So on to 3.0
> >
> > Some peoples views (not all), have included:
> >
> > "The College of Rune Magic's is concerned with the use of
> special symbols,
> > totems, aspects, fetish's, charms, shaman magic's, the spirit
> world, all to
> > assist in the shaping of mana into desired forms. Rune mages or Shaman's
> > often use these elements when creating magic.
> >
> > In rare cases, additional Runes, totems, fetish's, medicine bags, may be
> > developed or discovered which employ parts of existing Runes
> mages. However,
> > much of the power of the Runes derives from their constant
> usage over many
> > centuries, and most useful Runes will be known to all Adepts of
> this College
> > (or at least be readily available to them with very little research).
> >
> > Focus of the college, Rune's of Power, Healing, Shaman, Spirit
> Guides etc
> > etc."
> >
> > I hope this helps peoples understanding of the general
> direction that the
> > Rune working group is going in at this stage. This is not a
> 100% complete
> > view but is a general direction of 'most' of the people involved in the
> > working group.
> >
> > Jono
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]On Behalf Of
> > > Andrew Withy (DSL AK)
> > > Sent: Friday, 31 March 2006 10:27 a.m.
> > > To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> > > Subject: Re: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting
> > >
> > >
> > > Could we have a quick summary of what the Rune 3.0 outline is ?
> > >
> > > E.g. "we are changing it to being about totem spirits and painting
> > > sigils on people's foreheads".
> > >
> > > This may help decide whether people would be interested in
> coming along,
> > > and stop them from trying to pull it in a radically different
> direction.
> > >
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz] On
> Behalf Of
> > > Jonathan Bean - TME
> > > Sent: Friday, 31 March 2006 9:24 a.m.
> > > To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> > > Subject: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > If you are interested in coming along to a meeting/working group
> > > regarding Rune 3.0 this weekend please email me.
> > >
> > > Kind regards,
> > >
> > > Jonathan Bean
> > > Business Development Manager
> > > TME -it's all about time
> > > NZ Toll Free 0800 55 33 66
> > > Aust Toll Free 1800 30 51 75
> > > 021 173 4060 www.tme.co.nz
> > >
> > >
> > > -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
> >
>
>
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>
>


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

On Fri, 2006-03-31 at 11:29, Martin Dickson wrote:
> On 3/31/06, Stephen Martin <stephenm@castle.pointclark.net> wrote:
>         Another option is that it could be split into two colleges:
>         - Rune which is a college based on a written method of doing
>         magic.
> 
> And the question becomes: is there / can there be a sufficiently large
> body of commonly themed magic related to Runes to support this? 
> 
> What are the historical examples of rune magic, and is there something
> intrinsically "runic" about them, or are the rune simply the way they
> were done because of their cultural context?

>From my limited experience (a few fantasy novels), oriental mages often
operate via runes. I'm afraid I can't remember any book titles/authors
to support this.


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

Jim maybe correct.

The upshot is this:

Rune has been a mess for more than 8 years.
I want to see something come out - which can then be judged for that it is -
or call it what it is.
I want to see that the players of the character who play Rune involved.
I do want to see peoples views taken into account but at the same time I do
not want to see death by committee as we have seen with the last 5 attempts.
All people including me have to able to have a flexable view, so we end up
with something.

If you care about this you are welcome to come to the Rune meeting. Jim
can't come because I am running out of fingers :-)

Jono


> -----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: Friday, 31 March 2006 11:00 a.m.
> To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> Subject: Re: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting Spirit Guides
>
>
> If the approach is to make the college shamanic in nature, then
> make it clear
> that it is a shamanic college. Such a college would not have
> much, if anything
> to do with rune magic, which is predominantly a North European notion.
>
> This is not to say that there is no tradition of shamanic magic
> in the North
> European tradition, but shamanism extends itself across most of
> the world, and
> bugger all of them had any access to runes. If runes are to be a point of
> difference with this college, then there must be more focus on that.
>
> Otherwise, all you are creating is a shaman, and calling it a rune mage.
>
> Jim.
> Quoting Jonathan Bean - TME <Jonathan@tme.co.nz>:
>
> > Sure no problem.
> >
> > Background:
> > GMs had issues with 1.* of Rune.
> > 2.* was an effort to settle on a 'workable college' but was
> identified as
> > lacking flavour or direction.
> > 3.* was agreed to as having a major re-write or change from the current
> > flavour or direction of 'Rune, Elemental'
> >
> > It was agreed that flavour and a large change like 3.* would take time
> > (maybe years).
> > 2.* was aimed at being the 'working college' while 3.* came
> out, for Rune
> > Mages characters.
> >
> > So on to 3.0
> >
> > Some peoples views (not all), have included:
> >
> > "The College of Rune Magic's is concerned with the use of
> special symbols,
> > totems, aspects, fetish's, charms, shaman magic's, the spirit
> world, all to
> > assist in the shaping of mana into desired forms. Rune mages or Shaman's
> > often use these elements when creating magic.
> >
> > In rare cases, additional Runes, totems, fetish's, medicine bags, may be
> > developed or discovered which employ parts of existing Runes
> mages. However,
> > much of the power of the Runes derives from their constant
> usage over many
> > centuries, and most useful Runes will be known to all Adepts of
> this College
> > (or at least be readily available to them with very little research).
> >
> > Focus of the college, Rune's of Power, Healing, Shaman, Spirit
> Guides etc
> > etc."
> >
> > I hope this helps peoples understanding of the general
> direction that the
> > Rune working group is going in at this stage. This is not a
> 100% complete
> > view but is a general direction of 'most' of the people involved in the
> > working group.
> >
> > Jono
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]On Behalf Of
> > > Andrew Withy (DSL AK)
> > > Sent: Friday, 31 March 2006 10:27 a.m.
> > > To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> > > Subject: Re: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting
> > >
> > >
> > > Could we have a quick summary of what the Rune 3.0 outline is ?
> > >
> > > E.g. "we are changing it to being about totem spirits and painting
> > > sigils on people's foreheads".
> > >
> > > This may help decide whether people would be interested in
> coming along,
> > > and stop them from trying to pull it in a radically different
> direction.
> > >
> > > Andrew
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz] On
> Behalf Of
> > > Jonathan Bean - TME
> > > Sent: Friday, 31 March 2006 9:24 a.m.
> > > To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> > > Subject: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > If you are interested in coming along to a meeting/working group
> > > regarding Rune 3.0 this weekend please email me.
> > >
> > > Kind regards,
> > >
> > > Jonathan Bean
> > > Business Development Manager
> > > TME -it's all about time
> > > NZ Toll Free 0800 55 33 66
> > > Aust Toll Free 1800 30 51 75
> > > 021 173 4060 www.tme.co.nz
> > >
> > >
> > > -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
> >
>
>
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>
>


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

I had a discussion with someone the other night over the purpose of
Scribe notes and how there role may change with the advent of the Wiki. 

Just to get an idea from people I wonder if people could answer a few
questions for me. 

1. What do you believe the purpose of scribe notes is?

2. How often do you review old notes?
 - To read for entertainment?
 - To find out information about prior events and places?

:-)

Mandos
/s


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

> Rune has been a mess for more than 8 years.
> I want to see something come out - which can then be judged 
> for that it is - or call it what it is. I want to see that 
> the players of the character who play Rune involved. I do 

Your finger collection appears to be continually resending this
information :-)

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_01C65456.D4A25C6E
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Dickson [mailto:martin.dickson@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, 31 March 2006 11:35
> To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> Subject: Re: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting Spirit Guides
> 
> 
> On 3/31/06, Martin Dickson <martin.dickson@gmail.com> wrote:
> And the question becomes: is there / can there be a 
> sufficiently large body of commonly themed magic related to 
> Runes to support this? 
> 
> I should note -- I'm very supportive of a Shaman type 
> approach for a college... I'm just still not sure of its fit 
> with Rune... and additionally how certain traditional (within 
> DQ) rune Mage abilities might fit within the framework of 
> Shamanism.  (Rune Portal being an obvious high profile example) :-) 
> 

(recognising that a wide-ranging e-mail discussion at this stage isn't that
useful, but wanting to make a point that may help this weekend)
On the matter of the 'Rune Group' scope, an option that might not have been
considered:
Magics desired to be in the game that might not fit into whatever the
college becomes could be 'moved' (as individual spells or rituals) to an
existing college(s).

Cheers
Errol

------_=_NextPart_001_01C65456.D4A25C6E
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] Rune 3.0 meeting Spirit Guides</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; -----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; From: Martin Dickson [<A =
HREF=3D"mailto:martin.dickson@gmail.com">mailto:martin.dickson@gmail.com=
</A>]</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; Sent: Friday, 31 March 2006 11:35</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; Subject: Re: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting Spirit =
Guides</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; On 3/31/06, Martin Dickson =
&lt;martin.dickson@gmail.com&gt; wrote:</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; And the question becomes: is there / can there =
be a </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; sufficiently large body of commonly themed =
magic related to </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; Runes to support this? </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; I should note -- I'm very supportive of a =
Shaman type </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; approach for a college... I'm just still not =
sure of its fit </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; with Rune... and additionally how certain =
traditional (within </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; DQ) rune Mage abilities might fit within the =
framework of </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; Shamanism.&nbsp; (Rune Portal being an obvious =
high profile example) :-) </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>&gt; </FONT>
</P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>(recognising that a wide-ranging e-mail discussion at =
this stage isn't that useful, but wanting to make a point that may help =
this weekend)</FONT></P>

<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>On the matter of the 'Rune Group' scope, an option =
that might not have been considered:</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>Magics desired to be in the game that might not fit =
into whatever the college becomes could be 'moved' (as individual =
spells or rituals) to an existing college(s).</FONT></P>

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

</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C65456.D4A25C6E--


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

It has been sent three times (looking at my DQ email) and I dont think its
me :-/

Jono

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]On Behalf Of
> Mandos Mitchinson
> Sent: Friday, 31 March 2006 12:03 p.m.
> To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> Subject: Re: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting Spirit Guides
>
>
> > Rune has been a mess for more than 8 years.
> > I want to see something come out - which can then be judged
> > for that it is - or call it what it is. I want to see that
> > the players of the character who play Rune involved. I do
>
> Your finger collection appears to be continually resending this
> information :-)
>
> Mandos
> /s
>
>
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>
>


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

------=_Part_15878_32647187.1143764123947
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

IMHO Scribe notes should provide information for future visitors to the
locations and information on the PC's interactions with NPC's in the variou=
s
locations.
Scribe Notes that detail area, locations, history, interactions, results an=
d
relations would provide a good basis if the area is reused by the same GM o=
r
another GM.

If the scribe notes simply say we did this and this and this, then future
readers may not get any useful information for when next the area is used,
and effectively unless the same GM is involved then the information is lost
to the big blue yonder!

- CC

On 3/31/06, Mandos Mitchinson <MandosM@adhb.govt.nz> wrote:
>
>
> I had a discussion with someone the other night over the purpose of
> Scribe notes and how there role may change with the advent of the Wiki.
>
> Just to get an idea from people I wonder if people could answer a few
> questions for me.
>
> 1. What do you believe the purpose of scribe notes is?
>
> 2. How often do you review old notes?
> - To read for entertainment?
> - To find out information about prior events and places?
>
> :-)
>
> Mandos
> /s
>
>
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>

------=_Part_15878_32647187.1143764123947
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

<div>IMHO Scribe notes should provide information for future visitors to th=
e locations and information on the PC's interactions with NPC's in the vari=
ous locations.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </div>
<div>Scribe Notes that detail area, locations, history, interactions, resul=
ts and relations would provide a good basis if the area is reused by the sa=
me GM or another GM.</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>If the scribe notes simply say we did this and this and this, then fut=
ure readers may not get any useful information for when next the area is us=
ed, and effectively unless the same GM is involved then the information is =
lost to the big blue yonder!&nbsp;
</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div>- CC</div>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
<div><span class=3D"gmail_quote">On 3/31/06, <b class=3D"gmail_sendername">=
Mandos Mitchinson</b> &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:MandosM@adhb.govt.nz">MandosM@a=
dhb.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>I had a discussion with some=
one the other night over the purpose of<br>Scribe notes and how there role =
may change with the advent of the Wiki.
<br><br>Just to get an idea from people I wonder if people could answer a f=
ew<br>questions for me.<br><br>1. What do you believe the purpose of scribe=
 notes is?<br><br>2. How often do you review old notes?<br>- To read for en=
tertainment?
<br>- To find out information about prior events and places?<br><br>:-)<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_15878_32647187.1143764123947--


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

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0232_01C654C3.9ECF4EE0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I maybe wrong, but I think the problem is with the word Shaman.=20
Perhaps its because the use of the term Wizard has assumed a much =
broader meaning in western culture, the word Shaman springs more readly =
to the minds of those working on Rune as a description of the type of =
magic.

If one goes back to the word root of Wizard,  and its more orginal =
meaning you get a wise man one who has knowledge of things beyond the =
understanding of the everyday man. Eg one whose role in the culture =
would be simular to that of a shaman.

There is also perhaps some sort of differing concept of meaning in the =
word Rune going on. I think Jono and Co are looking at runes as being =
more than the early Germanic Alphabet.
Esentally a rune is a symbol, used to represent and object or idea. its =
the basis of the writen word.
To our ancestors one who could read and write had mastery of some =
strange power/ magic, and the symbols themselves took on power.

I think what Jono and Co. are trying to do is to create a college where =
the symbols do have power, and they are used to control /define the =
effect of the use of mana.
Where the knowlegde of these powerful symbols and the proper formulars =
to activate this power can be passed from Shaman to aprentice, or =
perhaps found in moldy out tomes of magic by studious men of learning, =
Wizards.
My thoughs are that such symbols or Runes are a little like GTNs, and as =
namers study names so do Rune mages study the Symbols of Power, or Runes =
as we Alusians call them.

The shamanist look of the college maybe because the Runes and formulars =
that are general Knowlegde are the useful ones taught and preserved by =
these sort of people.

Helen
------=_NextPart_000_0232_01C654C3.9ECF4EE0
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 6.00.2800.1528" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I maybe wrong, but I think the problem =
is with the=20
word Shaman. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Perhaps its because the use of the term =
Wizard has=20
assumed a&nbsp;much broader meaning in western culture,&nbsp;the word =
Shaman=20
springs more readly to the minds of those working on Rune as a =
description of=20
the type of magic.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>If one goes back to the word root of =
Wizard,&nbsp;=20
and its more orginal meaning you get a wise man one who has knowledge of =
things=20
beyond the understanding of the everyday man. Eg one whose role in the =
culture=20
would be simular to that of a shaman.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>There is also perhaps some sort of =
differing=20
concept of meaning in the word Rune going on. I think Jono and Co are =
looking at=20
runes as being more than the early Germanic Alphabet.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Esentally a rune is a symbol, used to =
represent and=20
object or idea. its the basis of the writen word.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>To our ancestors one who could read and =
write had=20
mastery of some strange power/ magic, and the symbols themselves took on =

power.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I think what Jono and Co.&nbsp;are =
trying to do is=20
to create a college where the symbols do have power, and they are used =
to=20
control /define the effect of the use of mana.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Where the knowlegde of these powerful =
symbols and=20
the proper formulars to activate this power can be passed from Shaman to =

aprentice, or perhaps found in moldy out tomes of magic by studious men =
of=20
learning, Wizards.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>My thoughs are that&nbsp;such symbols =
or Runes are=20
a little like GTNs, and as namers study names so do Rune mages study the =
Symbols=20
of Power, or Runes as we Alusians call them.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The shamanist look of the=20
college&nbsp;maybe&nbsp;because the Runes and formulars that are general =

Knowlegde are the useful ones taught and preserved by these sort of=20
people.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Helen</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0232_01C654C3.9ECF4EE0--


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

I've no problem with a shaman college. As I said, however, the kinds of
allusions to be drawn for a shaman are much more universal than rune magic
would appear to be.

If you are making the college a rune college, then it seems much more sensible
to focus on what makes it different to a type of college that would be much
more culturally universal.

Jim.

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

> > If the approach is to make the college shamanic in nature,
> > then make it clear that it is a shamanic college. Such a
> > college would not have much, if anything to do with rune
> > magic, which is predominantly a North European notion.
> >
> > This is not to say that there is no tradition of shamanic
> > magic in the North European tradition, but shamanism extends
> > itself across most of the world, and bugger all of them had
> > any access to runes. If runes are to be a point of difference
> > with this college, then there must be more focus on that.
> >
> > Otherwise, all you are creating is a shaman, and calling it a
> > rune mage.
>
> So what?
>
> Create the damn college, see what turns up, see if it benefits the game
> and if there is still an issue I think we could probably argue for a few
> years and change the name. It's not even remotely important as long as
> the group does have a defined direction and gets something completed.
>
> Mandos
> /s
>
>
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>


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

Don't be mean, Jono.

Emily still has all her fingers...

Jim

Quoting Jonathan Bean - TME <Jonathan@tme.co.nz>:

> Jim maybe correct.
>
> The upshot is this:
>
> Rune has been a mess for more than 8 years.
> I want to see something come out - which can then be judged for that it is -
> or call it what it is.
> I want to see that the players of the character who play Rune involved.
> I do want to see peoples views taken into account but at the same time I do
> not want to see death by committee as we have seen with the last 5 attempts.
> All people including me have to able to have a flexable view, so we end up
> with something.
>
> If you care about this you are welcome to come to the Rune meeting. Jim
> can't come because I am running out of fingers :-)
>
> Jono
>
>
> > -----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: Friday, 31 March 2006 11:00 a.m.
> > To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> > Subject: Re: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting Spirit Guides
> >
> >
> > If the approach is to make the college shamanic in nature, then
> > make it clear
> > that it is a shamanic college. Such a college would not have
> > much, if anything
> > to do with rune magic, which is predominantly a North European notion.
> >
> > This is not to say that there is no tradition of shamanic magic
> > in the North
> > European tradition, but shamanism extends itself across most of
> > the world, and
> > bugger all of them had any access to runes. If runes are to be a point of
> > difference with this college, then there must be more focus on that.
> >
> > Otherwise, all you are creating is a shaman, and calling it a rune mage.
> >
> > Jim.
> > Quoting Jonathan Bean - TME <Jonathan@tme.co.nz>:
> >
> > > Sure no problem.
> > >
> > > Background:
> > > GMs had issues with 1.* of Rune.
> > > 2.* was an effort to settle on a 'workable college' but was
> > identified as
> > > lacking flavour or direction.
> > > 3.* was agreed to as having a major re-write or change from the current
> > > flavour or direction of 'Rune, Elemental'
> > >
> > > It was agreed that flavour and a large change like 3.* would take time
> > > (maybe years).
> > > 2.* was aimed at being the 'working college' while 3.* came
> > out, for Rune
> > > Mages characters.
> > >
> > > So on to 3.0
> > >
> > > Some peoples views (not all), have included:
> > >
> > > "The College of Rune Magic's is concerned with the use of
> > special symbols,
> > > totems, aspects, fetish's, charms, shaman magic's, the spirit
> > world, all to
> > > assist in the shaping of mana into desired forms. Rune mages or Shaman's
> > > often use these elements when creating magic.
> > >
> > > In rare cases, additional Runes, totems, fetish's, medicine bags, may be
> > > developed or discovered which employ parts of existing Runes
> > mages. However,
> > > much of the power of the Runes derives from their constant
> > usage over many
> > > centuries, and most useful Runes will be known to all Adepts of
> > this College
> > > (or at least be readily available to them with very little research).
> > >
> > > Focus of the college, Rune's of Power, Healing, Shaman, Spirit
> > Guides etc
> > > etc."
> > >
> > > I hope this helps peoples understanding of the general
> > direction that the
> > > Rune working group is going in at this stage. This is not a
> > 100% complete
> > > view but is a general direction of 'most' of the people involved in the
> > > working group.
> > >
> > > Jono
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]On Behalf Of
> > > > Andrew Withy (DSL AK)
> > > > Sent: Friday, 31 March 2006 10:27 a.m.
> > > > To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> > > > Subject: Re: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Could we have a quick summary of what the Rune 3.0 outline is ?
> > > >
> > > > E.g. "we are changing it to being about totem spirits and painting
> > > > sigils on people's foreheads".
> > > >
> > > > This may help decide whether people would be interested in
> > coming along,
> > > > and stop them from trying to pull it in a radically different
> > direction.
> > > >
> > > > Andrew
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz] On
> > Behalf Of
> > > > Jonathan Bean - TME
> > > > Sent: Friday, 31 March 2006 9:24 a.m.
> > > > To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
> > > > Subject: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > If you are interested in coming along to a meeting/working group
> > > > regarding Rune 3.0 this weekend please email me.
> > > >
> > > > Kind regards,
> > > >
> > > > Jonathan Bean
> > > > Business Development Manager
> > > > TME -it's all about time
> > > > NZ Toll Free 0800 55 33 66
> > > > Aust Toll Free 1800 30 51 75
> > > > 021 173 4060 www.tme.co.nz
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
> > >
> >
> >
> > -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
> >
> >
>
>
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>


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

Yes, there is. People cut runes into their shields and onto weapons, stuck it on
the lintels of doorways, etc. People seem to have thought it was connected to
magic in some way.



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

> On 3/31/06, Stephen Martin <stephenm@castle.pointclark.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Another option is that it could be split into two colleges:
> > - Rune which is a college based on a written method of doing magic.
>
>
> And the question becomes: is there / can there be a sufficiently large body
> of commonly themed magic related to Runes to support this?
>
> What are the historical examples of rune magic, and is there something
> intrinsically "runic" about them, or are the rune simply the way they were
> done because of their cultural context?
>
> (The only ones I know of are detecting poison -- by carving on a cup -- and
> cursing by erecting a runestaff -- with a horse's head on it).
>
> - Martin
>


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

--=_alternative 00093259CC257142_=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I normally read scribe notes of previous missions to find out stuff about=20
general geography, the local customs, and any weird stuff.
Stuff on prominent NPC's is good but I especially look for stuff that is=20
different from Alusia.

On current missions I read the scribe notes to catch up on fiddly details=20
that I might have missed in play, like who is related to whom, what magic=20
worked  in an odd situation etc

There are a few people who's notes I'll read for general entertainment,=20
but not many.

Regards,
Rosemary


Attention: This message and accompanying data are confidential and may cont=
ain information that is subject to legal privilege. If you are not the inte=
nded recipient, you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution =
or copying of this message or data is prohibited. If you have received this=
 email in error, please notify us immediately and erase all copies of the m=
essage and attachments. This email and any attachments may contain views or=
 opinions that are those of the sender and not necessarily the view or opin=
ions of ING (NZ) Limited and/or its associated entities. =

--=_alternative 00093259CC257142_=
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


<br><font size=3D2 face=3D"sans-serif">I normally read scribe notes of prev=
ious
missions to find out stuff about general geography, the local customs,
and any weird stuff.</font><br><font size=3D2 face=3D"sans-serif">Stuff on =
prominent NPC's is good but
I especially look for stuff that is different from Alusia.</font><br><br><f=
ont size=3D2 face=3D"sans-serif">On current missions I read the scribe
notes to catch up on fiddly details that I might have missed in play, like
who is related to whom, what magic worked &nbsp;in an odd situation etc</fo=
nt><br><br><font size=3D2 face=3D"sans-serif">There are a few people who's =
notes I'll
read for general entertainment, but not many.</font><br><br><font size=3D2 =
face=3D"sans-serif">Regards,<br>Rosemary<br></font><font face=3D"sans-serif=
"><FONT Size=3D1><BR>Attention: This message and accompanying data are conf=
idential and may contain information that is subject to legal privilege. If=
 you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any use, dissemi=
nation, distribution or copying of this message or data is prohibited. If y=
ou have received this email in error, please notify us immediately and eras=
e all copies of the message and attachments. This email and any attachments=
 may contain views or opinions that are those of the sender and not necessa=
rily the view or opinions of ING (NZ) Limited and/or its=20
associated entities.<BR></FONT>
</font>

--=_alternative 00093259CC257142_=--


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

Quoting Helen Saggers <helen@owbn.net.nz>:

> I maybe wrong, but I think the problem is with the word Shaman.
> Perhaps its because the use of the term Wizard has assumed a much broader
> meaning in western culture, the word Shaman springs more readly to the minds
> of those working on Rune as a description of the type of magic.
>
> If one goes back to the word root of Wizard,  and its more orginal meaning
> you get a wise man one who has knowledge of things beyond the understanding
> of the everyday man. Eg one whose role in the culture would be simular to
> that of a shaman.

The etymological derivation of wizard is conjectural. No definite source has
ever been identified. If the term appears, then it appears as a word that means
'user of magic' not requiring the user to, themselves, be magical. Which is
about as helpful as, well, nothing really.
>
> There is also perhaps some sort of differing concept of meaning in the word
> Rune going on. I think Jono and Co are looking at runes as being more than
> the early Germanic Alphabet.

The early germanic alphabet wasn't runic, it was roman, where it even had a
lettering system.

You get runes in places like Scandinavia or the British Isles, and they were
almost certainly brought there by vikings or other big hairy chaps with big
sharp swords.

> Esentally a rune is a symbol, used to represent and object or idea. its the
> basis of the writen word.
> To our ancestors one who could read and write had mastery of some strange
> power/ magic, and the symbols themselves took on power.

That, as a rationalisation, might be what is at the root of the rune college,
but then it would be pretty much saying that the practitioners of rune magic
are more civilised than other users of magic. And, when you take the time to
look at the kind of people who introduced runes to the world, we see that they
are also the kind of people who most of us feel have some kind of proprietary
right on terms like 'rape', 'pillage', 'looting' and 'manslaughter'.

An interpretation of runes as being a logomantic system of magic is probably not
going to capture the notion of rune magic, since, in this case, it's
abstracting away from a particular instance to something so general, we
probably want to give it another name.
>
> I think what Jono and Co. are trying to do is to create a college where the
> symbols do have power, and they are used to control /define the effect of the
> use of mana.
> Where the knowlegde of these powerful symbols and the proper formulars to
> activate this power can be passed from Shaman to aprentice, or perhaps found
> in moldy out tomes of magic by studious men of learning, Wizards.
> My thoughs are that such symbols or Runes are a little like GTNs, and as
> namers study names so do Rune mages study the Symbols of Power, or Runes as
> we Alusians call them.

If you want a college that specialises in symbols, then surely it makes sense to
create a college that has that as an identifier. One would assume that, in that
case, they would use an alphabet which was either magically fundamental, or
that they worked with symbols as and when they found them. If the first, then
that means that runes are somehow magically important, if the second, then why
call it a rune college.

There is no problem with either of these things. A shaman might be a great idea.
A logomancer might be another good idea. They aren't rune mages, however, and
tying them together with duct tape is not going to be a workable solution.
People pick away at things that don't fit.

Jim


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

------=_Part_9021_21069946.1143769718006
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 3/31/06, raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz <raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
>
> Yes, there is. People cut runes into their shields and onto weapons, stuc=
k
> it on
> the lintels of doorways, etc. People seem to have thought it was connecte=
d
> to
> magic in some way.
>
> Quoting Martin Dickson <martin.dickson@gmail.com>:
> > And the question becomes: is there / can there be a sufficiently large
> body
> > of commonly themed magic related to Runes to support this?


Yes, you are right.  The runes were associated with magic... but were they
associated with a commonly themed body of magic?

That is, was there a common theme besides simply "doing it with runes"?

Cheers,
Martin

------=_Part_9021_21069946.1143769718006
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

On 3/31/06, <b class=3D"gmail_sendername"><a href=3D"mailto:raro002@ec.auck=
land.ac.nz">raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz</a></b> &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:raro002=
@ec.auckland.ac.nz">raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz</a>&gt; wrote:<div><span clas=
s=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;">Yes, there=
 is. People cut runes into their shields and onto weapons, stuck it on<br>t=
he lintels of doorways, etc. People seem to have thought it was connected t=
o
<br>magic in some way.<br><br>Quoting Martin Dickson &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:=
martin.dickson@gmail.com">martin.dickson@gmail.com</a>&gt;:<br>&gt; And the=
 question becomes: is there / can there be a sufficiently large body<br>&gt=
; of commonly themed magic related to Runes to support this?
</blockquote><div><br>Yes, you are right.&nbsp; The runes were associated w=
ith magic... but were they associated with a commonly themed body of magic?=
<br><br>That is, was there a common theme besides simply &quot;doing it wit=
h runes&quot;?
<br><br>Cheers,<br>Martin<br></div></div><br>

------=_Part_9021_21069946.1143769718006--


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

The distinction is minor.

Magic is either a collection of abilities with no underlying metaphor to gather
them together (except for being 'magic', I suppose), or it is a collection of
abilities related by the creation, destruction or manipulation of an element,
or it is a methodology.

For preference, I mislike magic that is an unremarked collection of abilities
labelled 'magical', and prefer something which has some inherent structure.
Beyond that, I could give a rat's arse whether the magic is as a result of
making use of some element, or if it is some method of doing something.

Although we don't let players advance Summoners, no one has seriously considered
getting rid of the college, and neither should we. It is, however, a college
about ways of doing things. It is also one of the original colleges that is
rich in flavour, as opposed to the rest which are...not.

Jim

Quoting Martin Dickson <martin.dickson@gmail.com>:
>
> Yes, you are right.  The runes were associated with magic... but were they
> associated with a commonly themed body of magic?
>
> That is, was there a common theme besides simply "doing it with runes"?
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>


-- 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_01C6546A.CB7D88CA
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"

In addition to the 'after the fact' use below, scribe notes during the
season should serve as a information store for the characters (generally
more detailed and comprehensive than what is required for final submission -
the watch order generally isn't something _needed_ to be shared for
instance) and a reminder for players and the GM of what the party
knows/thinks. The after the fact SNs should also have a ~one-page summary,
something the 'live' SNs lack.
 
I very occasionally read scribe notes for entertainment, selected from
newly-posted ones that catch my eye, and ones that I look at for reference
that likewise catch my eye. The quality of writing of course varies, and
I've noticed that ones that are better reads for their own sake tend to be
poor for extracting information from quickly and completely.
 
I read/skim for info more often, when my characters have the opportunity and
motivation especially.
 
Cheers
Errol

-----Original Message-----
From: dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]On Behalf Of Chris
Caulfield
Sent: Friday, 31 March 2006 12:15
To: dq@dq.sf.org.nz
Subject: Re: [dq] Scribe Notes.


IMHO Scribe notes should provide information for future visitors to the
locations and information on the PC's interactions with NPC's in the various
locations.    
Scribe Notes that detail area, locations, history, interactions, results and
relations would provide a good basis if the area is reused by the same GM or
another GM.
 
If the scribe notes simply say we did this and this and this, then future
readers may not get any useful information for when next the area is used,
and effectively unless the same GM is involved then the information is lost
to the big blue yonder!  
 
- CC
 
On 3/31/06, Mandos Mitchinson < MandosM@adhb.govt.nz
<mailto:MandosM@adhb.govt.nz> > wrote: 


I had a discussion with someone the other night over the purpose of
Scribe notes and how there role may change with the advent of the Wiki. 

Just to get an idea from people I wonder if people could answer a few
questions for me.

1. What do you believe the purpose of scribe notes is?

2. How often do you review old notes?
- To read for entertainment? 
- To find out information about prior events and places?




------_=_NextPart_001_01C6546A.CB7D88CA
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 6.00.2800.1106" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><SPAN class=180565600-31032006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>In 
addition to the 'after the fact' use below, scribe notes during the season 
should serve as a information store for the characters (generally more detailed 
and comprehensive than what is required for final submission - the watch 
order&nbsp;generally isn't something _needed_ to be shared for instance) and a 
reminder for players and the GM of what the party knows/thinks. The after the 
fact SNs should also have a ~one-page summary, something the 'live' SNs 
lack.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=180565600-31032006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff 
size=2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=180565600-31032006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>I very 
occasionally read scribe notes for entertainment, selected from newly-posted 
ones that catch my eye, and ones that I look at for reference that likewise 
catch my eye. The quality of writing of course varies, and I've noticed that 
ones that are better reads for their own sake tend to be poor for extracting 
information from quickly and completely.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=180565600-31032006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff 
size=2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=180565600-31032006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>I 
read/skim for info more often, when my characters have the opportunity and 
motivation especially.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=180565600-31032006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff 
size=2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=180565600-31032006><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff 
size=2>Cheers</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=180565600-31032006><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> dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz 
  [mailto:dq-owner@dq.sf.org.nz]<B>On Behalf Of</B> Chris 
  Caulfield<BR><B>Sent:</B> Friday, 31 March 2006 12:15<BR><B>To:</B> 
  dq@dq.sf.org.nz<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [dq] Scribe Notes.<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
  <DIV>IMHO Scribe notes should provide information for future visitors to the 
  locations and information on the PC's interactions with NPC's in the various 
  locations.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </DIV>
  <DIV>Scribe Notes that detail area, locations, history, interactions, results 
  and relations would provide a good basis if the area is reused by the same GM 
  or another GM.</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>If the scribe notes simply say we did this and this and this, then future 
  readers may not get any useful information for when next the area is used, and 
  effectively unless the same GM is involved then the information is lost to the 
  big blue yonder!&nbsp; </DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV>- CC</DIV>
  <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV><SPAN class=gmail_quote>On 3/31/06, <B class=gmail_sendername>Mandos 
  Mitchinson</B> &lt;<A 
  href="mailto:MandosM@adhb.govt.nz">MandosM@adhb.govt.nz</A>&gt; wrote:</SPAN> 
  <BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote 
  style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid"><BR>I 
    had a discussion with someone the other night over the purpose of<BR>Scribe 
    notes and how there role may change with the advent of the Wiki. 
    <BR><BR>Just to get an idea from people I wonder if people could answer a 
    few<BR>questions for me.<BR><BR>1. What do you believe the purpose of scribe 
    notes is?<BR><BR>2. How often do you review old notes?<BR>- To read for 
    entertainment? <BR>- To find out information about prior events and 
    places?<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------_=_NextPart_001_01C6546A.CB7D88CA--


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

1. What do you believe the purpose of scribe notes is?

They are there for fun. They should be interesting to read and be a record
of what happened from a biased observer. If I want terse after action
reports I'll suscribe to Janes.

2. How often do you review old notes?
 - To read for entertainment?

Occasionally I'll read scribe notes for amusement value.

 - To find out information about prior events and places?

I use them more as clues to how various PCs think than anything.

:-)

Mandos
/s


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

--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.2/293 - Release Date: 26/03/2006

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.2/293 - Release Date: 26/03/2006


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

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_028F_01C654D6.0EDEBA10
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


----- Original Message -----=20
From: <raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz>
To: <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 1:44 PM
Subject: Re: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting Spirit Guides


The early germanic alphabet wasn't runic, it was roman, where it even =
had a
lettering system.

Take this up with the oxford english dictonary, I looked up the =
defintion of Rune.

You get runes in places like Scandinavia or the British Isles, and they =
were
almost certainly brought there by vikings or other big hairy chaps with =
big
sharp swords.

Runes as you define them are most certainly of that origin, repeated =
pattens, symbols or marks that have meaning to the culture are common to =
all peoples of the world, these Symbols may have religous signifgance, =
identify tribal or clan relatons, even denote status.

That, as a rationalisation, might be what is at the root of the rune =
college,
but then it would be pretty much saying that the practitioners of rune =
magic
are more civilised than other users of magic. And, when you take the =
time to
look at the kind of people who introduced runes to the world, we see =
that they
are also the kind of people who most of us feel have some kind of =
proprietary
right on terms like 'rape', 'pillage', 'looting' and 'manslaughter'.

The Aztecs practised Human sacrifice, the Chinese sacrifice to their =
ancestors, and the egyptions had slaves.
The Romans who were civilised had galdiators, and need we go as far the =
acts of the spanish in early america.
Cilvlisation, not behavoural mores devolopes writing. Even the =
Aboriginals paint things with meaning on walls, objects and bodies.

If you want a college that specialises in symbols, then surely it makes =
sense to
create a college that has that as an identifier. One would assume that, =
in that
case, they would use an alphabet which was either magically fundamental, =
or
that they worked with symbols as and when they found them. If the first, =
then
that means that runes are somehow magically important, if the second, =
then why
call it a rune college.

Because the name we Alusians give to either the Magical Alphabet, or the =
Symbols that work is Rune.

Helen
------=_NextPart_000_028F_01C654D6.0EDEBA10
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 6.00.2800.1528" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>----- Original Message ----- </FONT>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>From: &lt;</FONT><A=20
href=3D"mailto:raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz"><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>&gt;</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>To: &lt;</FONT><A=20
href=3D"mailto:dq@dq.sf.org.nz"><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>dq@dq.sf.org.nz</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>&gt;</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 1:44 =
PM</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Subject: Re: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting =
Spirit=20
Guides</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial><BR><FONT size=3D2></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The early germanic alphabet wasn't =
runic, it was=20
roman, where it even had a<BR>lettering system.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Take this up with =
the oxford=20
english dictonary, I looked up the defintion of =
Rune.</FONT><BR></FONT><FONT=20
face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>You get runes in places like =
Scandinavia or the=20
British Isles, and they were<BR>almost certainly brought there by =
vikings or=20
other big hairy chaps with big<BR>sharp swords.<BR><BR><FONT =
color=3D#0000ff>Runes=20
as you define them are most certainly of that origin, repeated pattens, =
symbols=20
or&nbsp;marks that have meaning to the culture are common to all peoples =
of the=20
world, these Symbols&nbsp;may have religous signifgance,&nbsp;identify =
tribal or=20
clan relatons, even denote status.</FONT></FONT></DIV><FONT face=3DArial =

size=3D2><FONT color=3D#0000ff></FONT>
<DIV><BR>That, as a rationalisation, might be what is at the root of the =
rune=20
college,<BR>but then it would be pretty much saying that the =
practitioners of=20
rune magic<BR>are more civilised than other users of magic. And, when =
you take=20
the time to<BR>look at the kind of people who introduced runes to the =
world, we=20
see that they<BR>are also the kind of people who most of us feel have =
some kind=20
of proprietary<BR>right on terms like 'rape', 'pillage', 'looting' and=20
'manslaughter'.<BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff>The Aztecs practised Human sacrifice, the=20
Chinese&nbsp;sacrifice to&nbsp;their ancestors, and the egyptions had=20
slaves.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff>The Romans who were civilised had galdiators, =
and need=20
we go as far the acts of the spanish in early america.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=3D#0000ff>Cilvlisation, not behavoural mores devolopes =
writing.=20
Even the Aboriginals paint things with meaning on walls, objects and=20
bodies.</FONT><BR><BR>If you want a college that specialises in symbols, =
then=20
surely it makes sense to<BR>create a college that has that as an =
identifier. One=20
would assume that, in that<BR>case, they would use an alphabet which was =
either=20
magically fundamental, or<BR>that they worked with symbols as and when =
they=20
found them. If the first, then<BR>that means that runes are somehow =
magically=20
important, if the second, then why<BR>call it a rune=20
college.<BR><BR></FONT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><FONT =
color=3D#0000ff>Because the=20
name we Alusians give to either the Magical Alphabet, or the Symbols =
that work=20
is Rune.</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><FONT =
color=3D#0000ff></FONT></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><FONT=20
color=3D#0000ff>Helen</FONT></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_028F_01C654D6.0EDEBA10--


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

Quoting Helen Saggers <helen@owbn.net.nz>:

>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz>
> To: <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>
> Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 1:44 PM
> Subject: Re: [dq] Rune 3.0 meeting Spirit Guides
>
>
> The early germanic alphabet wasn't runic, it was roman, where it even had a
> lettering system.
>
> Take this up with the oxford english dictonary, I looked up the defintion of
> Rune.

Yes, but I think you'll find they were talking about Germanic people, not a
Germanic alphabet.
>
> You get runes in places like Scandinavia or the British Isles, and they were
> almost certainly brought there by vikings or other big hairy chaps with big
> sharp swords.
>
> Runes as you define them are most certainly of that origin, repeated pattens,
> symbols or marks that have meaning to the culture are common to all peoples
> of the world, these Symbols may have religous signifgance, identify tribal or
> clan relatons, even denote status.
>
> That, as a rationalisation, might be what is at the root of the rune college,
> but then it would be pretty much saying that the practitioners of rune magic
> are more civilised than other users of magic. And, when you take the time to
> look at the kind of people who introduced runes to the world, we see that
> they
> are also the kind of people who most of us feel have some kind of proprietary
> right on terms like 'rape', 'pillage', 'looting' and 'manslaughter'.
>
> The Aztecs practised Human sacrifice, the Chinese sacrifice to their
> ancestors, and the egyptions had slaves.
> The Romans who were civilised had galdiators, and need we go as far the acts
> of the spanish in early america.
> Cilvlisation, not behavoural mores devolopes writing. Even the Aboriginals
> paint things with meaning on walls, objects and bodies.

What of it?

I was making a reference to them as an allusion.
>
> If you want a college that specialises in symbols, then surely it makes sense
> to
> create a college that has that as an identifier. One would assume that, in
> that
> case, they would use an alphabet which was either magically fundamental, or
> that they worked with symbols as and when they found them. If the first, then
> that means that runes are somehow magically important, if the second, then
> why
> call it a rune college.
>
> Because the name we Alusians give to either the Magical Alphabet, or the
> Symbols that work is Rune.

Only by your particular rationalisation. It's not a universal.

Jim


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

I think that a Rune college is a method based college, it doesn't have an obvious theme.

The benefit of a themed college is that it becomes easier to decide what sort of magics should be
in and what should be out.
With a method based college we should probably start by setting boundaries of what can be done
with runes.

If runes have inherent magic then I think that they should have commonality with names, perhaps
they are the written form of true names.

If Runes are linked to Names, and we have established in DQ that only the living & formerly living
have names then that limits the college to magics that affect the living & formerly living.

No working with raw elements (Magic, Air, Earth, Fire, ...) but they could affect elementals
because they have names.

Runes being associated with portals and planar travel is established in our campaign and some
other literature, so we probably keep that in scope.

For feel I think Rune magics should always have visible effects.
They should usually have short range and be tied to the Runes used to cast them.


Not entirely sure where I'm going with this, just thowing out ideas to try and define what Rune
magics are.

Cheers, Stephen.

Martin Dickson said:
> On 3/31/06, raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz <raro002@ec.auckland.ac.nz> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, there is. People cut runes into their shields and onto weapons, stuck it on
>> the lintels of doorways, etc. People seem to have thought it was connected to
>> magic in some way.
>>
>> Quoting Martin Dickson <martin.dickson@gmail.com>:
>> > And the question becomes: is there / can there be a sufficiently large
>> body
>> > of commonly themed magic related to Runes to support this?
>
>
> Yes, you are right.  The runes were associated with magic... but were they associated with a
> commonly themed body of magic?
>
> That is, was there a common theme besides simply "doing it with runes"?
>
> Cheers,
> Martin


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

A different thought that came along during previous ramble...

What about introducing Rune as a method of storage that applies to all colleges (like Investment &
Ward).
And what was the Rune College goes down the path of spirit/totemic/shamanistic magics.

Cheers, Stephen.


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

The problem with this is that you are then changing all the colleges in some
way, not just one.

Because of the hold put on rune 1.1 and the problems involved in playing one
it will be easier to change the path of rune (with or without a name change)
and to get the agreement of the current players to adapt, retire the PC, or
what ever, than to change  all the colleges to absorb Rune however minor the
change.

Helen

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Stephen Martin" <stephenm@castle.pointclark.net>
To: <dq@dq.sf.org.nz>
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 4:29 PM
Subject: [dq] Storage: Rune


> A different thought that came along during previous ramble...
>
> What about introducing Rune as a method of storage that applies to all
colleges (like Investment &
> Ward).
> And what was the Rune College goes down the path of
spirit/totemic/shamanistic magics.
>
> Cheers, Stephen.
>
>
> -- to unsubscribe notify mailto:dq-request@dq.sf.org.nz --
>


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

On 31/03/2006, at 12:02, Mandos Mitchinson wrote:

> 1. What do you believe the purpose of scribe notes is?

So that someone is keeping track of what has happened on an adventure  
for the use of the characters on that adventure while it is happening.

> 2. How often do you review old notes?
>  - To read for entertainment?
>  - To find out information about prior events and places?

Never.

cheers,

clare


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

Quoting Stephen Martin <stephenm@castle.pointclark.net>:

> I think that a Rune college is a method based college, it doesn't have an
> obvious theme.
>
> The benefit of a themed college is that it becomes easier to decide what sort
> of magics should be
> in and what should be out.
> With a method based college we should probably start by setting boundaries of
> what can be done
> with runes.

You could do anything you like. It is a fantasy to think that you could exclude
effects based on the metaphors involved. These things are as elastic as the
imagination of the person making the case.

A methodology maybe just as limiting as something defined by an element.
Ultimately, it comes down to what has the best flavour, and what contributes
most usefully to the game. Elements, methodologies, they're all the same sort
of thing.

Which is to say, constraints.

And, if we are going to set boundaries, then we would need to set boundaries on
every college. Unless I'm very much mistaken, the constraints that apply to
them are simply lines drawn in the sand about what we are happy to live with.
>
> If runes have inherent magic then I think that they should have commonality
> with names, perhaps
> they are the written form of true names.
>
> If Runes are linked to Names, and we have established in DQ that only the
> living & formerly living
> have names then that limits the college to magics that affect the living &
> formerly living.
>
> No working with raw elements (Magic, Air, Earth, Fire, ...) but they could
> affect elementals
> because they have names.
>
> Runes being associated with portals and planar travel is established in our
> campaign and some
> other literature, so we probably keep that in scope.
>
I don't see anything wrong with any of this stuff, really. Mind you, stuff that
a player might be able to do is not unbalancing. The DM always has ways to
counter these things.

At this level, the real concern about what is to be allowed into the game is
what this tells us about the world.

If we put an effect in the college, what we are saying is that this effect is a
legal part of the world, and any entity that satisfies the necessary criteria
is qualified to have that ability. Which is an awfully long-winded way of
saying: If you put an ability into the game, then you cannot say 'only players
can have this ability', because that breaks suspension of disbelief.

The problem lies in what this makes the world like. In a world where a rune mage
might exist, and assuming they have magic like Rune Portal, then we must
necessarily consider how such a world would comport itself. And, frankly, that
would be hard.

Somebody will reply with the tired old chestnut about magic use being rare, but
you wouldn't know it in the Guild, really. Every adventure you go on, the tough
people are either crawling with special magical abilities or they have people
who are crawling with special magical abilities. On some adventures, limbless
beggars on street corners are crawling with special magical abilities.

It seems to me that the only sensible position is to assume that the species of
rune mage that let DMs create interesting NPCs, but don't overshadow players.
The world should be one where the players are the ones crawling with special
magical abilities. In fact, they should have a crawl factor somewhat higher
than even the tougher NPCs.

But, as a baseline, standard NPCs should not be able to create portal networks
that obviate the need for empires to build roads, at the very least.

> For feel I think Rune magics should always have visible effects.
> They should usually have short range and be tied to the Runes used to cast
> them.

Well, as a general rule, any spell should have a visible effect, with the
possible exception of the Mind college, because they hemmhorage xp to raise
their spells. But, not all effects need to be visible, and I think you make
this distinction on a case by case basis.

If they are casting magic by leaving marks, that's pretty obvious, and suggests
a standard, non-magical way of countering much of it. If that is what you mean
by having a visible effect, fine. Otherwise, I don't think you can make such a
blanket projection.

Jim


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