On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 14:50:38 -0500 (CDT), Arturo Algueiro Melo wrote:

>Talking about allowing only 1 level increase between adventures;
>with skills, for example thief, if you pick a lock, you can advance in
>climbing and picking pockets.

This is actually a good point to make about increasing Rank with
skills, since technically, using your Thief skill example, if one
detects a trap and picks a lock during the course of an adventure, one
can raise one's pickpocket skill and all the other Thief sub-skills,
even though one didn't use them. What comments do folks have on this
issue?

>Did you enforced the use of each particular spell to increase rank
>with it, or only the type of magic (talent, general spells, general rituals,
>special spells, special rituals)?

As a general rule, a character can only increase the Rank of a
spell that she has used during the course of play. On the other hand,
I allow a character between scenarios to increase a spell's Rank as
well if they can find a teacher to help train them a bit and spend the
appropriate funds on doing so. But one could argue that a character
can practice spells, in the same way that characters can practice
skills, so...

>If so, how could you rank the special ritual of necromantic conj.
>"Becoming Undead"? You can only become undead once.

You raise an interesting point about rituals, Arturo, and the
example of the Necromantic ritual is very good here. I think that the
answer to this question lies simply in the fact that rituals can be
raised , since one can't really practice them. You either use the
ritual or you don't. Some rituals might be more suitable to
non-adventuring time than to during actual play, and this would
somewhat moderate whether one could increase one's Rank with the
ritual. I personally don't want to go through all the rituals and do
the math and everything on these, but... That said, one of the
Colleges that I am very fond of is Rune Magics, and the novice Rune
Mage must go through an awful lot of runewands and the like during
their early days, not to mention runesticks.

....."How disappointing that other scavengers have robbed us of our glory." -
Aeryn Sun (FFS; PKTG)

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane

On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 10:04:04 +1000, Stephen Lister wrote:

>Two options, just off the top of my head,

Yep, that appears to be the consensus around here. :)

>Since the player already has the skill of tracking (via the Ranger skill)
>that means that he can't take the Secondary Skill of Tracking, as it's
>assumed to be subsumed in the Ranger skill.
>
>or
>
>He can take both, but he only gets to use one or the other for any check
>(probably whichever is the highest at the time.)

I can't honestly say that my players will like that option, since
it seems to be somewhat futile in terms of what it gives you for how
much you pay for it. Of course, the whole idea for these is to
supplement the sub-skills that are already covered in the book under
the main skills and all. If anyone has other ideas on this subject,
I'm all ears.

....."When was the last time you ever knew a faerie treasure to be anything but coal %:Line% and fool's gold?" - Trayne Therral, a thief

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane

On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 18:06:05 -0700 (PDT), Steven Wiles wrote:

>> Let's say that I have a set of skills, called Secondary Skills,
>> that I want to use for both minor skills and for complementing major
>> skills. How would you go about setting up the way the complementary
>> skill affects the main skill?
>
>I would have to agree with those who've already
>responded. If the character wants to have both the
>main and complementary skills, I'd say he uses the
>better of the two checks.

That would appear to be the consensus on this matter, and this is
the solution to the problem with which everyone seems to agree on. I
need to think about this for a couple of more days and see what others,
if anyone, has to say on the matter and subject.

....."Confront your demons, Rygel, or they will chase you from the shadows to
the pyre." - Zhaan (FS; PKTG)

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane

On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 22:12:16 -0700 (PDT), Steven Wiles wrote:

[stuff snipped]
>We didn't see Alchemists in my old group too often either.
>I don't know about other groups, but I think it was largely
>a factor of the production costs for things being a little too
>high.

I can't honestly say that I've ever considered the Alchemist
potions all that expensive in DQ, simply because you have to take into
account the cost to make the potion or whatever versus the market price
that you're going to sell it at.

>Hmm... question to the group: How often have people had
>their characters make or buy Alchemist's potions (at costs
>as listed in the Alchemist skill), what were the circumstances,
>and what level/how wealthy were the characters at the time?

Well, the Friday night group that I run have characters who are
quite experienced and getting up there in years, so they have quite a
good supply of money for things like this (and that doesn't mean the
Adventurer's Guild, where you might get a discount on the cost of
potions if going through a Guild alchemist). There are several, next
generation characters in that group, so it's more a matter of finances
and all... the youngsters don't have the money, and the old-timers keep
these things for when they really need them, and buy them only when
they think they will need them.

>Anyway, the stuff we started incorporating into the Alchemist
>skill for our group came from a positively neolithic RPG
>supplement called "The Compleat Alchemist", published by
(the now-defunct?) Bard's Games.

<stuff snipped>

Yes, I have that supplement as well, although I never used all
that much out of it. As you said, the material was rsearched very
well.

.....Take me with a grain of salt, but add some thyme and coriander.

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane

On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 15:33:44 +1000, Bruce Probst wrote:

>> Let's say that I have a set of skills, called Secondary Skills,
>>that I want to use for both minor skills and for complementing major
>>skills. How would you go about setting up the way the complementary
>>skill affects the main skill?
>
>If I understand you correctly, I have a similar system, where I have
>a separate "Climbing" skill available to non-Thieves.

It's not just that sort of thing... I've been working on this for
a bit, ever since I did some reading in another game system, where
basically my players said, "I want to have the ability to sort of tell
fortunes, without having to resort to buying the whole Astrology skill.
So, I created a minor skill (they used to be called Secondary Skills)
called Astrology. The layman version of knowledge of religion is
covered under the Theology minor skill. I've added Midwifery,
Seduction, Scan, Search, Archery, Artist, Acting and a whole bunch of
other things to the skill list.

>As far as % chance goes, they don't modify each other if a character
>has both. Whichever calculation gives the higher chance is used. At
>the same Rank, this will always be Thief.

Yes, I understand this, Bruce... What was your rationale for
doing it that way? :)

However, that said, why shouldn't the Secondary Skills provide the
character with somewhat of a bonus, if he has both Troubador and let's
say a minor skill called Persuasion or one called Oration?

>> Any thoughts on other ways to handle this kind of situation for a
>>complementary skill? Look forward to some other thoughts on this...
>
>I would use the same system as above in your Ranger/Tracking example.
>The best trackers are Rangers; other people can learn it, but Rangers
>do it best. A Ranger would not need to learn Tracking separately.

That's what I expected you to say, to be honest, since that seems
to be the consensus with everyone who's dropped a line into this
discussion. The question becomes what motivates the character to take
the extra, minor skill?

.....One good thing about pain: it proves you're alive.

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane

     That's what I expected you to say, to be honest, since that seems
to be the consensus with everyone who's dropped a line into this
discussion.   The question becomes what motivates the character to take
the extra, minor skill?

When it comes to characters motivations to take a minor skill, they could be as endless as the personality types that play DQ. The answer to this can only be found if you also answer this question. “Is there ANY difference between the way the minor skill works, and the way the skill within the major skill works?” I would lean towards a big NO on that one. So if the answer is NO, then following should also be true...

1. Both can reach Rank 10, and one character with the Minor Skill of “Tracking” at Rank 10 could track exactly the same as another character with Rank 10 Ranger.
2. Rank 10 is the best, a character with both at Rank 10 would be able to track at Rank 10. Period.
3. If the character has both at different levels, the higher of the two should be used to determine success.
   

If you think they should be different, then they should be treated as different skills. You would need to be VERY clear which skill is to be used in which situations and make sure the skills are completely separated.

Your original question here is “What motivates the character to take the extra, minor skill?” the answer would be different based on how you answered the above question about how the minor skill works.

John (aka: Axl)

> Six versions of Rune Magics?? Ye gods... So, just out of
> curiosity, which are these six?
>

> Hi Steven:
>
> Even with Spell you have the Low chances problems.
>
> For example Spell of Molecular Rearrangement (S-5)
> S. of M. vas a base
> chance of 1%. Suppose the magic user has a MA of 15
> plus purification and
> without cold iron metals, it give you 18% to cast
> the Spell. Very difficult
> and much probable to gain the hate of the party than
> the rank in the spell.
>
> The same could be use to all the spells with low
> base chance.
>
> OF course we use to fix it with a "Controlled-cast
> House".
>
> What's that?
>
> At the end of the game, you go to that House and pay
> an amount of money, and
> the services of a healer Rk. 8 (just in case you
> need extra assistance),
> depending the spell and the effects. It is a place
> who give you +15 to your
> chances (consecrate ground) and you prepare with
> ritual spell preparation.
> After all the pluses, you cast the spell, and you
> accomplished with the
> rule.
>
> I think this is a good way to fix the problem, not
> the best, but one at
> least.
>
> Regards.
>
> Gabriel.
>
>
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: Steven Wiles [mailto:mortdemuerte@yahoo.com]
> Enviado el: Martes, 16 de Septiembre de 2003 05:42
> p.m.
> Para: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
> Asunto: Re: [DQN-list] Re: Increasing Ranks
>
>
> --- Arturo Algueiro Melo <aleam00@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Hi, people!
> > Talking about allowing only 1 level increase
> between
> > adventures; with skills,
> > for example thief, if you pick a lock, you can
> > advance in climbing and picking
> > pockets. Did you enforced the use of each
> particular
> > spell to increase rank
> > with it, or only the type of magic (talent,
> general
> > spells, general rituals,
> > special spells, special rituals)? If so, how could
> > you rank the special ritual
> > of necromantic conj. "Becoming Undead"? You can
> only
> > become undead once.
> > Greetings... Arturo
>
> A most excellent question. You give the example of
> the Ritual of Becoming Undead, which is the ritual
> that first got me thinking about this as well. I've
> noticed a similar problem respecting the Ritual of
> Remove Curse in the Adventure section at the back of
> the book. Trying that ritual at lower Ranks is more
> likely to make a curse worse than it is to remove
> it.
>
> Having given it some thought, I think that Rituals
> should probably be an exception to the
> used-during-campaign rule. I rationalize that
> decision as follows. In principle, the idea of a
> ritual is something that you wouldn't ordinarily do
> during a campaign (out on the battlefield, as it
> were), but rather during the lulls between
> campaigns.
> Rituals are supposed to be difficult operations that
> require time, quiet meditation, and sometimes
> expensive materials to complete. I realize that in
> practice some rituals are used during campaigns
> quite
> often, which is why I say "in principle". So, I
> could
> see relaxing the rule on this matter. In fact, in
> the
> campaigns I've been in/run, we usually said that if
> you used a ritual during the between-campaign lull,
> that was the one use you needed for ranking.
>
> Some college's rituals are simpler and have more of
> a
> in-adventure usage, so I'd definitely say this
> should
> be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. As an
> afterthought, I might also say that if you prepared
> a
> spell as a ritual, that would -not- count as a usage
> towards ranking the spell.
>
> Mort
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site
> design software
> http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
> <http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>

>

> 9&media=atkins> click here
>
>

> l/S=:HM/A=1754016/rand=592396622>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
> Terms of Service
> <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
>
>

> Renumbering can cause confusion that is for sure.
> Perhaps for clarity, the
> below idea can be used a little more descriptively.
> For example: a clarification to rule 12.3 is
> 12.3.DQPA.1 and so on.
> This will also allow for anyone to insert house or
> campaign rules into their
> copy.
> For example a Thieves' World campaign rule
> clarification could be 12.3.TW.1
> or even 12.3.DQPA.1.TW.1 and so on.
> Differing versions could be documented this way. A
> third edition rule that
> is to be used could be 12.3.3RD.1
> Yes, there are more characters per rule ID, but
> there is also much more
> clarity and flexibility.
>
> The only issue with this is deciding which version
> to use as the base line.
> Thoughts about the number scheme???
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "rthorm" <dqn@earthlink.net>
> To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 12:50 PM
> Subject: [DQN-list] Indexing Additional DQ Material
>
>
> > I've given this topic a new subject line in order
> to help get more
> > people's attention to it and comments about it.
> The original item is
> > included at the bottom of this message.
> >
> > David proposed a numbering system that would allow
> for the
> > organization of additional DragonQuest material.
> I'll weigh in with
> > my own specific comments in a separate message.
> But some sort of
> > unified structure is essential to produce a
> coordinated work of any kind.
> >
> > --RT
> >
> > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "dbarrass_2000"
> <david.barrass@e...>
> > wrote:
> > > > It would be nice, for example, to have a
> consistent format for
> > > numbering and organizing various contributions
> and additions. That's
> > > just one of many reasons that I see for this to
> be a more formally
> > > organized project.
> > >
> > >
> > > OK to get more practical things started and get
> away from the rather
> > > tedious discussion about whether we can call it
> a canon
> > >
> > > How about this for a consistent numbering system
> > >
> > > Interpretations/clarifications of the existing
> rules drop down one
> > > level, eg a clarification of rule [12.3] becomes
> [12.3.1] and so on.
> > >
> > > The original rules (including AW) go up to about
> 97., additional
> > > rules would go above this. We could try this
> system:-
> > >
> > > For example
> > > 100.-149. Additional rules for Character
> Generation including new
> > > races
> > > 150.-199. Additional rules for Combat
> > > 200.-249. Additional rules for Magic
> > > 250.-299. Additional Magic Colleges
> > > 300.-349. Additional rules for Skills
> > > 350.-399. Additional Skills
> > > 400.-449. Additional Monsters
> > > 450.-499. Additional rules for Adventure
> > > 500.-549. Religion
> > > 550.- onwards things I haven't thought of
> > >
> > > The ranges will have to be tweaked but it should
> work
> > >
> > > David
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
>
>

> Hullo, Viktor,
>
> On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 10:41:33 -0400, Viktor Haag wrote:
>
>
>>> I'm sorry to hear about James's decision to drop the DQ
>>>support material that he had up on the website, and am also
>>>sorry that he chose to intepret Deven's words as being so
>>>personally directed at him.
>>
>>As far as I know there is NO indication WHO's words James
>>permitted to offend him. I did NOT mean to imply that it was
>>Deven, and in hind-sight, I can see that I should have been more
>>clear on that point.
>
>
> I understood that you never meant to imply that it was Deven's
> post(s) that were responsible for James's decision, and should have
> made that clear in the part of the message above. I do wish that
> things had turned out differently...
>
>
>>Unless James responds to the list, there's no real way of
>>knowning who it was he took offense to.
>
>
> ...but as you say, this is the situation. Perhaps he'll change
> his mind when he calms down a bit, or perhaps he won't. Either way,
> his site and the material on it is a loss for the DRAGONQUEST
> community. :(
>
> Either way, 'nuff said on the subject.
>
> .....Those who rest long on their laurels seldom get off them.
>
> JohnK
> e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
> web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

> >
> >He can take both, but he only gets to use one or the other for any

> >(probably whichever is the highest at the time.)
>
> I can't honestly say that my players will like that option, since
> it seems to be somewhat futile in terms of what it gives you for how
> much you pay for it. Of course, the whole idea for these is to
> supplement the sub-skills that are already covered in the book under
> the main skills and all. If anyone has other ideas on this subject,
> I'm all ears.
>

> That's what I expected you to say, to be honest, since that seems
> to be the consensus with everyone who's dropped a line into this
> discussion. The question becomes what motivates the character to take
> the extra, minor skill?
>

>Here are the ones I am currently looking at if anyone knows of others
>they can let me know (unfortunately I do not have handy a copy of the
>rune magics college from ARES magazine but I strangely seem to
>remember seeing it somewhere).

> It's not just that sort of thing... I've been working on this for
>a bit, ever since I did some reading in another game system, where
>basically my players said, "I want to have the ability to sort of tell
>fortunes, without having to resort to buying the whole Astrology skill.

>>As far as % chance goes, they don't modify each other if a character
>>has both. Whichever calculation gives the higher chance is used. At
>>the same Rank, this will always be Thief.
>
> Yes, I understand this, Bruce... What was your rationale for
>doing it that way? :)

> However, that said, why shouldn't the Secondary Skills provide the
>character with somewhat of a bonus, if he has both Troubador and let's
>say a minor skill called Persuasion or one called Oration?

>The question becomes what motivates the character to take
>the extra, minor skill?

--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Probst <bprobst@n...> wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 20:24:11 -0000, "John Rauchert"
>
> If you really want it I could probably scan it into a PDF.
>

>
> File : /DragonNotesAres7.pdf
> Uploaded by : John_Rauchert <john.rauchert@s...>
> Description : Ares Magazine Feature

> My first thought is that your version is pretty
> convoluted. I don't see a need to incorporate version
> in the numbering; there needs to be no differentiation
> between 2nd and 3rd edition, for example.
>
> I think you do raise a good point about being able to
> have your own house rules easily integrated into the
> system.
>
> --RT

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rodger Thorm" <rodger_thorm@yahoo.com>
To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 5:29 PM
Subject: Re: [DQN-list] Indexing Additional DQ Material


> My first thought is that your version is pretty
> convoluted. I don't see a need to incorporate version
> in the numbering; there needs to be no differentiation
> between 2nd and 3rd edition, for example.

For historical perspective identifying the source is a good idea if for no
other reason than to document where a particular clarification came from.
If for example the SPI 2nd Edition is chosen for the baseline, then it might
be good to know what clarifications came from the Bantam edition, (and 3rd
edition, Ares DragonNotes, etc.). This way someone with SPI 2nd edition
hardcopy in hand knows *why* there is a difference from this proposed
resource and the hardcopy.
I am not proposing that the source identifier be used everywhere, ONLY where
there is a divergence from the baseline edition.

I am, of course, only expressing an opinion. Perhaps it would be sufficient
to document in the text where the clarificaion came from and not include it
in the identifier.

>> That's what I expected you to say, to be honest, since that
>>seems to be the consensus with everyone who's dropped a
>>line into this discussion. The question becomes what
>>motivates the character to take the extra, minor skill?
>
>When it comes to characters motivations to take a minor skill,
>they could be as endless as the personality types that play DQ.

>The answer to this can only be found if you also answer this question.
>"Is there ANY difference between the way the minor skill works,
>and the way the skill within the major skill works?" I would lean
>towards a big NO on that one.

>So if the answer is NO, then following should also be true...
>
>Both can reach Rank 10, and one character with the Minor
>Skill of "Tracking" at Rank 10 could track exactly the same
>as another character with Rank 10 Ranger.

>Rank 10 is the best, a character with both at Rank 10 would
>be able to track at Rank 10. Period.

>If the character has both at different levels, the higher of the two
>should be used to determine success.

On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 20:24:11 -0000, John Rauchert wrote:

>> Six versions of Rune Magics?? Ye gods... So, just out of
>> curiosity, which are these six?
>
>I would hestitate to call them versions as this seems to imply that
>there are substantial differences between them.

Yes, I can see this point...but what else does one call them at
this point. "Six posted sets of rules on the College of Rune Magics"?
Hmm, probably. :)

>As I have said the first three that I looked at were essentially
>identical in content and you could cite rules from any of them
>and everyone would be on the same page (they might wonder
>a little when you call something a Specter vs Spectre or
>Blackthorn vs Blackthorne).

Maybe, but that's just semantics or more accurately, cultural
spelling. :)

>Here are the ones I am currently looking at if anyone knows of
>others they can let me know (unfortunately I do not have handy
>a copy of the rune magics college from ARES magazine but I
>strangely seem to remember seeing it somewhere).

The only other place I can think of where you might have seen it
would be the D&D/DQ scenario "The Shattered Statue".

>1. A Text Version from the defunct Archive ftp site at ftp.netcom.com
>in the pub/dr/drache directory at one time maintained by Archivist
>and ftp Guru: Drake Stanton

Anyone know where to contact Drake these days?

.....Bacteria is the only culture that some people will ever have.

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane

On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 13:55:32 -0700 (PDT), Rodger Thorm wrote:

>I'll ring in with my 2cf on this:

Please do. Always need more cf. :)

>I agree with the question about motivation helping to illuminate
>the answer. We had some discussion about this a while ago
>(either here or in dq-rules; I forget which). We were looking
>at which skills could be broken out and learned separately as
>minor skills.

Yes, I remember the discussion in question vaguely, but also
recall that it didn't really come up with anything concrete on the
subject. As for the business about motivation, that is certainly a
factor, but let's face it...a lot of players don't think in those terms
when creating their characters. Some will view the minor skill as
being "costly" and a "waste of XPs that could go towards other things,"
while others might think of it as a great idea...

>There was no overall consensus on the matter, but as I
>looked at it, I kept coming back to the question of how
>did the character learn this skill? Who taught them?
>In this manner, I think that a separate Tracking skill
>doesn't really fit.

I can understand this viewpoint as well. :)

>But there may be others, and you probably disagree with
>me on that point, so let's leave that aside.

Well, I wouldn't have raised this whole issue if I hadn't
disagreed with you on this, I suspect. :)

>What you are proposing is somewhat akin to the Spy/Thief
>overlap, but in a case where one skill is more complex than
>the other. My inclination would be to make the simple version
>less potent than the full skill version. A Rank 7 Ranger
>should be a better tracker than a Rank 7 Tracker, because
>the Ranger has a wider range of perceptions he is drawing on
>when using his skill.

Yes, and that is what I've done pretty much here. The formula for
the separate tracking ability provides a slightly lower percentage than
the Ranger tracking ability (with the same values plugged into the
formulae when I gave the example, I believe the raw numbers were 22 for
the Ranger and only 14 for the separate tracking ability. As you say,
I agree with you that a Rank 7 Ranger should be better than a Rank 7
tracker.

>In this example, I wouldn't give a Ranger any discount on
>increasing Tracker skill, but a character with rank in
>Tracker higher than rank in Ranger would probably get
>a discount on EXP cost for Ranger.

However, the only real problem I see with this is that the
character with Ranger skill and tracking minor skill isn't getting just
a discount on the XP cost for the tracking part of Ranger, he's getting
the discount for the *whole* Ranger skill. That's where the rub lies
with this solution, elegant though it is. :)

.....Old heroes never die, they reappear in sequels. (M. Moorcock)

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 10:07:44 +1000, Stephen Lister wrote:

>> >He can take both, but he only gets to use one or the other for
>> >any check (probably whichever is the highest at the time.)
>>
>> I can't honestly say that my players will like that option, since
>> it seems to be somewhat futile in terms of what it gives you for how
>> much you pay for it. Of course, the whole idea for these is to
>> supplement the sub-skills that are already covered in the book under
>> the main skills and all. If anyone has other ideas on this subject,
>> I'm all ears.
>
>The idea (as I see it) is that the minor Tracking skill should always be
>for the character that doesn't want to go whole hog and learn to be a
>Ranger.

I agree with that assessment, although there are always going to
be the players who want to pick it up to be better at it then they
already are. After all, what happens in the case of a (player)
character who learned the tracking skill from his father when he was a
little boy, but only became a Ranger upon reaching adulthood? I was
hoping that the minor skill business would satisfy for this
possibility.

>My experience in the Real World (tm) is that you can learn
>an entire discipline for (Amount X) or a small part of that
>discipline for 75% of (Amount X). The ostensible reason is
>that all of the skills you are learning as part of the full discipline
>are intertwined, so the basics are the same, and each of the
>skills is just a tweak of those. To learn a single skill still requires
>that you learn all of the basics, so you pay for that (in time,
>money, experience - whatever the appropriate coin is.)

This makes sense to me, and I can see implementing this rule
within the context of the material on Minor Skills.

.....An inch of gold cannot purchase an inch of time. (Chinese Proverb)

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 13:32:58 +1000, Bruce Probst wrote:

>> It's not just that sort of thing... I've been working on this for
>>a bit, ever since I did some reading in another game system, where
>>basically my players said, "I want to have the ability to sort of tell
>>fortunes, without having to resort to buying the whole Astrology skill.
>
>Ah. In my game, I'd tell my players "that's what Astrology *is*. If you
>want to learn it, you have to learn *all* of it."

Ah, but is Astrology skill actually equivalent to a
fortune-telling skill? And if it is, what differentiates the charlatan
from the real honest-to-goddess-show-me-the-future astrologer?

>That's my attitude on the esoteric, semi-magical stuff any way.
>For the more mundane, practical stuff, like Climbing, it seemed
>to me that having a "layman's" version of the skill available is
>only common-sense.

Ah, but which version of Climbing skill do you use? :)

>>>As far as % chance goes, they don't modify each other if a
>>>character has both. Whichever calculation gives the higher
>>>chance is used. At the same Rank, this will always be Thief.
>>
>> Yes, I understand this, Bruce... What was your rationale for
>>doing it that way? :)
>
>Well, without any modifications to the game, it postulates that
>Thieves are the *only* people who can climb. While I certainly
>don't agree with that as a concept, it lends credence to the
>philosophy that Thieves are *famous* for their climbing ability ...
>which implies that they must be *very* good at it <g>.

Agreed with your logic here so far. :)

>The extra XP (and time) you expend on your Thief training gives
>you access to knowledge that the plebs *don't* get access to.

Agreed. :)

>I also don't want to encourage the concept of "de facto"
>Skill packages --

Ah, "Skill packages" - that's a good term for it. :)

>i.e., what's so special about being a "Thief" if you can be
>just as good a Thief by learning all the bits separately.
>Which in turn goes back to the concept of being a "Thief"
>is "special", as opposed to being someone who just
knows how to climb and pick pockets etc.

Agreed.

>> However, that said, why shouldn't the Secondary Skills
>>provide the character with somewhat of a bonus, if he has
>>both Troubador and let's say a minor skill called Persuasion
>>or one called Oration?
>
>I would argue that he's already learnt everything (better) when
>he learnt Troubadour (at the equivalent Rank). Learning the
>same thing twice doesn't make you better at doing it.

Well, I can't argue with this pair of statements, although I would
have thought that even if the minor skill did augment the primary
skill, it certainly would only augment it by Rank% or (Rank x 2)% at
best.


.....Silk was invented so that women could go naked in clothes.

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 10:07:44 +1000, Stephen Lister wrote:

>> >He can take both, but he only gets to use one or the other for
>> >any check (probably whichever is the highest at the time.)
>>
>> I can't honestly say that my players will like that option, since
>> it seems to be somewhat futile in terms of what it gives you for how
>> much you pay for it. Of course, the whole idea for these is to
>> supplement the sub-skills that are already covered in the book under
>> the main skills and all. If anyone has other ideas on this subject,
>> I'm all ears.
>
>The idea (as I see it) is that the minor Tracking skill should always be
>for the character that doesn't want to go whole hog and learn to be a
>Ranger.

I agree with that assessment, although there are always going to
be the players who want to pick it up to be better at it then they
already are. After all, what happens in the case of a (player)
character who learned the tracking skill from his father when he was a
little boy, but only became a Ranger upon reaching adulthood? I was
hoping that the minor skill business would satisfy for this
possibility.

>My experience in the Real World (tm) is that you can learn
>an entire discipline for (Amount X) or a small part of that
>discipline for 75% of (Amount X). The ostensible reason is
>that all of the skills you are learning as part of the full discipline
>are intertwined, so the basics are the same, and each of the
>skills is just a tweak of those. To learn a single skill still requires
>that you learn all of the basics, so you pay for that (in time,
>money, experience - whatever the appropriate coin is.)

This makes sense to me, and I can see implementing this rule
within the context of the material on Minor Skills.

.....An inch of gold cannot purchase an inch of time. (Chinese Proverb)

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane






Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



*********************************************************************
This e-mail message, and any files transmitted with it, are
confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee.
If this message was not addressed to you, you have received
it in error and any copying, distribution or other use of any
part of it is strictly prohibited. Any views or opinions presented
are solely those of the sender and do not necessarily represent
those of the British Geological Survey. The security of e-mail
communication cannot be guaranteed and the BGS accepts
no liability for claims arising as a result of the use of this medium
to transmit from or to the BGS. The BGS cannot accept any
responsibility for viruses, so please scan all attachments.
http://www.bgs.ac.uk
*********************************************************************

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 10:07:44 +1000, Stephen Lister wrote:

>> >He can take both, but he only gets to use one or the other for
>> >any check (probably whichever is the highest at the time.)
>>
>> I can't honestly say that my players will like that option, since
>> it seems to be somewhat futile in terms of what it gives you for how
>> much you pay for it. Of course, the whole idea for these is to
>> supplement the sub-skills that are already covered in the book under
>> the main skills and all. If anyone has other ideas on this subject,
>> I'm all ears.
>
>The idea (as I see it) is that the minor Tracking skill should always be
>for the character that doesn't want to go whole hog and learn to be a
>Ranger.

I agree with that assessment, although there are always going to
be the players who want to pick it up to be better at it then they
already are. After all, what happens in the case of a (player)
character who learned the tracking skill from his father when he was a
little boy, but only became a Ranger upon reaching adulthood? I was
hoping that the minor skill business would satisfy for this
possibility.

>My experience in the Real World (tm) is that you can learn
>an entire discipline for (Amount X) or a small part of that
>discipline for 75% of (Amount X). The ostensible reason is
>that all of the skills you are learning as part of the full discipline
>are intertwined, so the basics are the same, and each of the
>skills is just a tweak of those. To learn a single skill still requires
>that you learn all of the basics, so you pay for that (in time,
>money, experience - whatever the appropriate coin is.)

This makes sense to me, and I can see implementing this rule
within the context of the material on Minor Skills.

.....An inch of gold cannot purchase an inch of time. (Chinese Proverb)

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane






Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



*********************************************************************
This e-mail message, and any files transmitted with it, are
confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee.
If this message was not addressed to you, you have received
it in error and any copying, distribution or other use of any
part of it is strictly prohibited. Any views or opinions presented
are solely those of the sender and do not necessarily represent
those of the British Geological Survey. The security of e-mail
communication cannot be guaranteed and the BGS accepts
no liability for claims arising as a result of the use of this medium
to transmit from or to the BGS. The BGS cannot accept any
responsibility for viruses, so please scan all attachments.
http://www.bgs.ac.uk
*********************************************************************





Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

> I guess with modern spreadsheets it shouldnt be too difficult to

> almost any DQ 'skill group' (I.e Thief, ranger, Alchemist) into

> 'skill feats'(tracking, climbing,create antidote, raise

> all you need to do is:
> Divide the number of 'skill feats' by the total xp per rank
> Multiply by a 'weighting factor' (As I assume an assassins +1

> rank from a rare attack is maybe more valuable than his +2%per rank

> stealth).
> Throw in another multiplier to reflect cumulative knowledge gained

> 'skill feats' within the 'skill group' (on the assumption that the

> someone with good ranks for enchanced frontal crit, torture skill

> to more easily pick up rear attack bonus)and you end up with a

> spreadsheet and maybe this is too much hard work.
>
> Hmm
>
> may look at one 'skill group' and have a go

>
> >
> > File : /DragonNotesAres7.pdf
> > Uploaded by : John_Rauchert <john.rauchert@s...>
> > Description : Ares Magazine Feature
>
> Well that answers that question
>
> Would it be possible to get all the Ares Dragon Notes stuff on the
> web in the same way the Dragon stuff was?
>
> It would be a great resourse, especially if we're doing rule
> clarifications for the consensus DQPA rules
>
> Thanks
> David

>I have found that included in the Microsoft Office XP suite is a
>fairly good OCR program.
>
>Previously when I tried to OCR it from my Scanner software but it
>came out really crappy and the size of the scan in PDF format was way
>out there.
>
>You have to convert the PDF to TIF format to do the conversion (which
>you can do in Acrobat 6 Professional) but with this technique it took
>about half an hour to do clean up on the file and bang it out to pdf
>(at about 19k for file size).
>
>I will be doing all the articles from the issues in my possession.
>After that I will see if I can get the rest from the DQ community.
>
>--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "dbarrass_2000" <david.barrass@e...>
>wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > File : /DragonNotesAres7.pdf
>> > Uploaded by : John_Rauchert <john.rauchert@s...>
>> > Description : Ares Magazine Feature
>>
>> Well that answers that question
>>
>> Would it be possible to get all the Ares Dragon Notes stuff on the
>> web in the same way the Dragon stuff was?
>>
>> It would be a great resourse, especially if we're doing rule
>> clarifications for the consensus DQPA rules
>>
>> Thanks
>> David
>
>
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

> --oops i meant 0.9 not 0.85....
>
>
> This Basically this means for example That if you have rank 3 in

> and
> rank 3 in detect ambush, it only costs 0.85*354 xp to attain rank 3

> identify common and uncommon products.
>

> I will be doing all the articles from the issues in my possession.
> After that I will see if I can get the rest from the DQ community.

--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, Jason Winter <Alarian@d...> wrote:
> I would be interested to learn more about the OCR feature you
mentioned in
> Office XP. Just where do you find it? I have office XP Small
business is
> it included in there? Feel free to email me personally if you feel
this
> doesn't belong on the list.

--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Davis, John R" <jrda@b...> wrote:
> --oops i meant 0.9 not 0.85....
>
>
> This Basically this means for example That if you have rank 3 in
true north
> and
> rank 3 in detect ambush, it only costs 0.85*354 xp to attain rank 3
in
> identify common and uncommon products.
>

Please post the spreadsheet, my head is spinning.

I made my post before I saw yours, could our ideas be combined?

eg the WF based on the success chance, this would make deciding the
WF more objective. I still like the idea of an exp multiple :--)

David - still waiting for the flack :--)





Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



*********************************************************************
This e-mail message, and any files transmitted with it, are
confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee.
If this message was not addressed to you, you have received
it in error and any copying, distribution or other use of any
part of it is strictly prohibited. Any views or opinions presented
are solely those of the sender and do not necessarily represent
those of the British Geological Survey. The security of e-mail
communication cannot be guaranteed and the BGS accepts
no liability for claims arising as a result of the use of this medium
to transmit from or to the BGS. The BGS cannot accept any
responsibility for viruses, so please scan all attachments.
http://www.bgs.ac.uk
*********************************************************************

> Uploaded, hope it makes sense
>
> John

--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Davis, John R" <jrda@b...> wrote:
> Uploaded, hope it makes sense
>
> John

yes it does, good work - forget my idea of EP multiple. One minor
critisism, I would prefer double the EP cost, or even 4 times the cost

Expanding on my idea of tying the Wf to the success chance, maybe it
works here it is

Task Success Your SC based
Chance wf wf
Determine true north 10-Rk 1 1
Determine distance travelled 90+Rank 1 1
Find shortest route to a location 2xPC + 7xRank 1 2
Detect an ambush or a trap 3xPC + 5xRank 2 2
Tracking PC + 6xRank 3 3
Identify Products PC + 10xRank 2 3
Cure Disease, Fever, or skin 90+Rank 2 1
May cure lost Endurance points up to 90+Rank 2 1
14 14

David






Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



*********************************************************************
This e-mail message, and any files transmitted with it, are
confidential and intended solely for the use of the addressee.
If this message was not addressed to you, you have received
it in error and any copying, distribution or other use of any
part of it is strictly prohibited. Any views or opinions presented
are solely those of the sender and do not necessarily represent
those of the British Geological Survey. The security of e-mail
communication cannot be guaranteed and the BGS accepts
no liability for claims arising as a result of the use of this medium
to transmit from or to the BGS. The BGS cannot accept any
responsibility for viruses, so please scan all attachments.
http://www.bgs.ac.uk
*********************************************************************

> However, the only real problem I see with this
> is that the
> character with Ranger skill and tracking minor skill
> isn't getting just
> a discount on the XP cost for the tracking part of
> Ranger, he's getting
> the discount for the *whole* Ranger skill. That's
> where the rub lies
> with this solution, elegant though it is. :)
>

> Ah, but is Astrology skill actually equivalent to a
>fortune-telling skill?

>And if it is, what differentiates the charlatan
>from the real honest-to-goddess-show-me-the-future astrologer?

> Ah, but which version of Climbing skill do you use? :)

> One other thought on the whole subskills question: I
> would limit the maximum rank of the subskill (Tracking
> in this example) to some percentage of the maximum
> rank of the main skill (i.e. Tracking can only be
> raised to Rank 7).
>
> --RT

> One other thought on the whole subskills question: I
> would limit the maximum rank of the subskill (Tracking
> in this example) to some percentage of the maximum
> rank of the main skill (i.e. Tracking can only be
> raised to Rank 7).
>
> --RT

> Hi dave, et al
>
> more I think about it the more expensive it should be , like you

> Otherwise naughty people would just pick up the good bits from each

> group and not the less. All getting a bit complex but then the DQ

> are exactly easy to work with anyway (spell multiples with someone

> 21 MA but is an elf for example). Also lots of factors to add into

> things.

> I use spreadhseets for all tour characters at the moment. i have

> created them for almost every spell college to make life easier (it
> calculates cast chance, XPM etc) based the DQUCS excel spreadsheet

> downloaded.
>
> My idea of simplicity in an rpg is too have less dice rolls.

> Task Success Your SC based
> Chance

> Determine true north 10-Rk 1 1
> Determine distance travelled 90+Rank 1 1
> Find shortest route to a location 2xPC + 7xRank 1 2
> Detect an ambush or a trap 3xPC + 5xRank 2 2
> Tracking PC + 6xRank 3 3
> Identify Products PC + 10xRank 2 3
> Cure Disease, Fever, or skin 90+Rank 2 1
> May cure lost Endurance points up to 90+Rank 2 1
> 14 14
>
> David