Messages in dqn-list group. Page 31 of 80.

Group: dqn-list Message: 1507 From: Davis, John R Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Breaking Down Skill Groups (was: Complementing Ski lls)
Group: dqn-list Message: 1508 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Breaking Down Skill Groups
Group: dqn-list Message: 1509 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Breaking Down Skill Groups
Group: dqn-list Message: 1510 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Alternate Sub-Skill Breakdown (Was: Re:Re: Breaking Down Skill Grou
Group: dqn-list Message: 1511 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Ares Magazine (Was: Re: Re: New file uploaded to dqn-list)
Group: dqn-list Message: 1512 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Complementing Skills
Group: dqn-list Message: 1513 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Complementing Skills
Group: dqn-list Message: 1514 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Golems (XPM for the shaping of...)
Group: dqn-list Message: 1515 From: dbarrass_2000 Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Alternate Sub-Skill Breakdown (Was: Re:Re: Breaking Down Skill Grou
Group: dqn-list Message: 1516 From: Davis, John R Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Golems (XPM for the shaping of...)
Group: dqn-list Message: 1517 From: D. Cameron King Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Indexing Additional DQ Material
Group: dqn-list Message: 1518 From: Rodger Thorm Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Complementing Skills
Group: dqn-list Message: 1519 From: Rodger Thorm Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Complementing Skills
Group: dqn-list Message: 1520 From: John Carcutt Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Complementing Skills
Group: dqn-list Message: 1521 From: Steven Wiles Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Increasing Ranks
Group: dqn-list Message: 1522 From: Steven Wiles Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Increasing Ranks
Group: dqn-list Message: 1523 From: Steven Wiles Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Increasing Ranks
Group: dqn-list Message: 1524 From: Steven Wiles Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Complementing Skills
Group: dqn-list Message: 1525 From: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com Date: 9/20/2003
Subject: New file uploaded to dqn-list
Group: dqn-list Message: 1526 From: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com Date: 9/20/2003
Subject: New file uploaded to dqn-list
Group: dqn-list Message: 1527 From: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com Date: 9/20/2003
Subject: New file uploaded to dqn-list
Group: dqn-list Message: 1528 From: Bruce Probst Date: 9/20/2003
Subject: Re: Complementing Skills
Group: dqn-list Message: 1529 From: Bruce Probst Date: 9/20/2003
Subject: More on Names and Namers
Group: dqn-list Message: 1530 From: dbarrass_2000 Date: 9/20/2003
Subject: Re: Indexing Additional DQ Material
Group: dqn-list Message: 1531 From: dbarrass_2000 Date: 9/20/2003
Subject: Re: Complementing Skills
Group: dqn-list Message: 1532 From: dbarrass_2000 Date: 9/20/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
Group: dqn-list Message: 1533 From: Deven Atkinson Date: 9/21/2003
Subject: Re: Complementing Skills
Group: dqn-list Message: 1534 From: Bruce Probst Date: 9/21/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
Group: dqn-list Message: 1535 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/21/2003
Subject: Re: Alternate Sub-Skill Breakdown (Was: Re:Re: Breaking Down Skill
Group: dqn-list Message: 1536 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/21/2003
Subject: Re: Golems (XPM for the shaping of...)
Group: dqn-list Message: 1537 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/21/2003
Subject: Re: Complementing Skills
Group: dqn-list Message: 1538 From: Steven Wiles Date: 9/21/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
Group: dqn-list Message: 1539 From: Steven Wiles Date: 9/21/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
Group: dqn-list Message: 1540 From: Steven Wiles Date: 9/21/2003
Subject: Wizardry?
Group: dqn-list Message: 1541 From: Bruce Probst Date: 9/22/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
Group: dqn-list Message: 1542 From: dbarrass_2000 Date: 9/22/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
Group: dqn-list Message: 1543 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/22/2003
Subject: Re: Complementing Skills
Group: dqn-list Message: 1544 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/22/2003
Subject: Re: Increasing Ranks
Group: dqn-list Message: 1545 From: Rodger Thorm Date: 9/22/2003
Subject: Re: Alternate Sub-Skill Breakdown (Was: Re:Re: Breaking Down Skill
Group: dqn-list Message: 1546 From: Rodger Thorm Date: 9/22/2003
Subject: Re: Wizardry?
Group: dqn-list Message: 1547 From: D. Cameron King Date: 9/22/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
Group: dqn-list Message: 1548 From: D. Cameron King Date: 9/22/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
Group: dqn-list Message: 1549 From: Davis, John R Date: 9/23/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
Group: dqn-list Message: 1550 From: dbarrass_2000 Date: 9/23/2003
Subject: Re: Wizardry?
Group: dqn-list Message: 1551 From: Davis, John R Date: 9/23/2003
Subject: Re: Wizardry?
Group: dqn-list Message: 1552 From: terryintransit Date: 9/23/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
Group: dqn-list Message: 1553 From: John Carcutt Date: 9/23/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
Group: dqn-list Message: 1554 From: Stephen Lister Date: 9/23/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
Group: dqn-list Message: 1555 From: Bruce Probst Date: 9/24/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
Group: dqn-list Message: 1556 From: Stephen Lister Date: 9/24/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers



Group: dqn-list Message: 1507 From: Davis, John R Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Breaking Down Skill Groups (was: Complementing Ski lls)
Seem to have taken it upon myself to break each skill group into the
individual skill feats. Doesnt look too bad to calculate. Question is
thenwhat should be the weighting factors for each skill feat.
2nd one im doing is Astrolger.
wf1 Make a general prediction
wf2 Change a general prediction
wf3 Answer a specific question
wf1 Predict anothers aspect after

These are my thoughts.

Any comments?

JohnD


*********************************************************************
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
*********************************************************************
Group: dqn-list Message: 1508 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Breaking Down Skill Groups
Hullo, JohnD,

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 14:25:51 +0100, Davis, John R wrote:

>I guess with modern spreadsheets it shouldnt be too difficult to
>break down almost any DQ 'skill group' (I.e Thief, ranger,
>Alchemist) into individual 'skill feats'(tracking, climbing,create
>antidote, raise willpower).

Geez, this is starting to sound very D&D3-ish. :)

>I guess 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
>damage per rank from a rare attack is maybe more valuable
>than his +2%per rank to stealth).
>Throw in another multiplier to reflect cumulative knowledge
>gained in other 'skill feats' within the 'skill group' (on the
>assumption that the fact someone with good ranks for
>enchanced frontal crit, torture skill is going to more easily
>pick up rear attack bonus)and you end up with a really messy
>spreadsheet and maybe this is too much hard work.

Hmm, the methodology that you suggest here is probably going to
work well for this sort of thing, but to be honest, this realises my
fear of complicating things too much. What I love about DQ is the
simplicity of the system, a system that uses basic math addition and
subtraction to resolve matters during game play, something that people
don't need a calculator to do. Let alone spreadsheet programs. I
didn't really want this system to get overly complicated to come up
with a solution for a problem posed to me by a player.

>Hmm
>may look at one 'skill group' and have a go

However, if you choose to follow up on this, it'll be interesting
to see where you go with it. :)

....."Next time, remember to completely *draw* the circle for the protection
spell." - Argius the White, Earth Mage

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane
Group: dqn-list Message: 1509 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Breaking Down Skill Groups
Hullo, JohnD,

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 15:24:52 +0100, Davis, John R wrote:

>Ok, I have done this for the ranger...8 skill feats within the ranger
>skill group
>1 Determine true north accurately to... Wf:1
>2 Determine distance traveled to... Wf:1
>3 Find shortest route to a location..Wf:1
>4 Detect an ambush or a trap.. Wf:2
>5 Tracking.. Wf:3
>6 Identify Products.. Wf:2
>7 Cure Disease, Fever, of skin irritations..Wf:2
>8 May cure lost Endurace points up to.. Wf:2
>Wf=weighting factor.

Personally, I would have reversed the Wf on #3 and #4, as
detecting an ambush/trap seems to be more valuable than tracking, and I
would have increased the Wf on #8 to 3, since that seems to have a good
deal of importance.

>So , divide xp needed per rank of ranger by the total sum
>of Wf (ie 14 in this case), add an arbitrary 50% on top
>because its expensive learning things seperately, to get the
>XPM.

[stuff snipped]

>Back to the original question on tracking....
>It costs 193xp R:0, 80xp R:1, 257 R:2, 530 R:3, and so on

I'm not going to comment on the mathematics involved herein,
since I find this makes things overly complicated, and my head is
spinning from this exercise. :)

>Need lie down

I agree...and no wonder. :)

Again, however, thanks for posting this and showing how it could
be done this way. :)

.....OS/2: Drag me, drop me, make me feel like an object!

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane
Group: dqn-list Message: 1510 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Alternate Sub-Skill Breakdown (Was: Re:Re: Breaking Down Skill Grou
Hullo, David,

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 14:42:12 -0000, dbarrass_2000 wrote:

<stuff snipped>

>I would make buying the Skill as all the subskills at least twice as
>expensive, and would lean towards 5 times, to encourage people
>to be a theif, assassin etc and only take a sub skill if they really
>wanted one thing from it.

One of the things that those of us who play and run DRAGONQUEST
claim is that one can create any character based on fantasy literature,
etc. While I agree with your statement on principle, how do you do the
character who grew up in the small village and learned to track and
fish/hunt, but who went on to become a Merchant instead of going ahead
with Ranger? If one claims that one has to take Ranger at Rank 0 just
to get tracking and fish/hunt, the cost is 600 XPs. And one can think
of dozens of other examples from fantasy literature and the like where
this problem might arise.

>For ExP cost haw about a multiple, easy to start with, dificult to
>master (eg 2xExp multile to get rank 0 as starting is always more
>difficult). This has the advantage that you only need to think up
>and record in tables one number.
>
>As for cost there are some "sub-skills" in the DQ book that have
>been costed as such, for example troubadour's play instrument,
>amuse etc. He pays 500Exps to gain more abillities at rank 10
>and a courtisan 1000 to gain similar abillities. Probably the
>diference in cost is due to training availability. Both probably
>have a "bulk discount" and so the cost will be about 2000-5000
>Exps to gain rank 10 in a sub-skill.

My only comment on this part of things is that the cost to gain
the additional sub-skills listed in [54.2] and [62.1] is that they may
be so "cheap" because the character has already got the Courtesan or
Troubador sub-skill set, and is adding to it. Look at section [57.6]
under Merchant, pertaining to the areas of specialisation for assayal,
where the cost of additional ones over Rank 10 is 1,500 XPs.
Sometimes I have to wonder how the XP costs for different Skills at
different Ranks was calculated to begin with, but I guess we'll never
know. (Hmm, on that subject, is there a difference in any of the XP
costs per Rank for skills between the SPI and Bantam 2nd Editions?)

>Hanging on by my fingernails here :--)

Nope, you're doing all right so far. :)

>so an Experience multiple would be somewhere in the region of
>30 to 60

Okay. :)

>All of these sub-skills are of the 90+Rank variety, Could we double
>the cost for each 10% reduction in the average PC's Base Chance for
>example?

You could, I suppose. :)

>Does this make sense?

Not a clue at the moment. I'll see what others have to say on
this matter.

>I am not going to be offended by any comments, I'd just like feedback

I'm sorry that this feedback hasn't been of that much use.
However, it will be interesting to see what direction this take on the
sub-skills follows.

.....The absurd is the essential concept and the first truth. (Albert Camus)

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane
Group: dqn-list Message: 1511 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Ares Magazine (Was: Re: Re: New file uploaded to dqn-list)
Hullo, David,

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 15:15:29 -0000, dbarrass_2000 wrote:

>> 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.
>
>Thanks, I don't think Ares was published here in the UK (not sure
>about 1st ed and the Bantam ed either). I've managed to pick up a
>few Ares at conventions

Ares Magazine was published in the early 80s, from 1980 through
1982 or 1983 (I forget when the last issue came out, although by that
time it was a TSR magazine). Not having lived in the UK, I don't know
whether one could have subscribed to it there or not.

.....Man cannot live on bread alone; that's why there's orange marmelade.

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane
Group: dqn-list Message: 1512 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Complementing Skills
Hullo, Bruce,

On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 04:18:46 +1000, Bruce Probst wrote:

>> Ah, but is Astrology skill actually equivalent to a
>>fortune-telling skill?
>
>For *real* fortunes, yes.

hehe Now *that* made my head spin, for just a moment. :)

>>And if it is, what differentiates the charlatan from the real
>honest-to-goddess-show-me-the-future astrologer?
>
>Um, the charlatan just makes it up and doesn't care what his
>dice roll is?

Yeah, but at that point, why even expend XPs on a skill to fake
it? One could do that without the skill.

>A "good" charlatan is exercising his Troubadour skill, not his
>Astrology skill.

Good point. :)

>> Ah, but which version of Climbing skill do you use? :)
>
>Mine <g>.

Of course. :)

.....There is intelligent life on Earth, but I'm just visiting.

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane
Group: dqn-list Message: 1513 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Complementing Skills
Hullo, Rodger,

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 10:38:31 -0700 (PDT), Rodger Thorm wrote:

>> 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. :)
>
>I don't think this is a problem. The character is getting a
>discount on the *whole* ranger skill because he already
>knows something about tracking, and so he doesn't
>have to relearn that part.

Agreed. But does this mean you increase the discount if the
character takes another sub-skill from the Ranger skill group, such as
detecting ambushes?

>I can completely identify with this from personal experience:
>I took physics in high school and college and did reasonably
>well in it. Twelve years later I was back in school in an
>architecture program where I had to take some engineering
>courses. A couple of days into the class things started
>clicking with me because these were old physics principles
>(in a more applied format). Having had physics classes didn't
>make me a structural engineer, but it made some parts of the
>class a lot easier on me, because I had already learned
>some of the principles involved.

I understand and agree with this logic, but to be honest, I think
that keeping it as simple as possible in the case of these
complementary skills is the way to go.

>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).

Hmm, I can also see the reasoning behind this...

Thanks for your input on this whole business, Rodger. :)

.....All the world's a stage, and I seem to have missed the rehearsal.

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane
Group: dqn-list Message: 1514 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Golems (XPM for the shaping of...)
Hullo, JohnD,

On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 08:15:20 +0100, Davis, John R wrote:

>Cant seem to find XPM for shape stone or iron golem? I
>could sort of see why they might not have one, but
>maybe I just cant find it anywhere?

Hmm, that's interesting, and I noticed that in the versions found
in DQ 3rd Edition and "The Shattered Statue" product as well. My copy
of AW has the EXMs listed as 375 (stone) and 450 (iron) respectively,
pencilled in as side notes, but they're not my handwriting.

....."What we need to do is isolate the most highly developed organisms." -
Zhaan "Well, that rules out the three we're looking for." - Aeryn (FS; JC)

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane
Group: dqn-list Message: 1515 From: dbarrass_2000 Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Alternate Sub-Skill Breakdown (Was: Re:Re: Breaking Down Skill Grou
--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "John M. Kahane" <jkahane@c...>
wrote:
> Hullo, David,
>
> >I would make buying the Skill as all the subskills at least twice
as
> >expensive, and would lean towards 5 times, to encourage people
> >to be a theif, assassin etc and only take a sub skill if they
really
> >wanted one thing from it.
>
> One of the things that those of us who play and run DRAGONQUEST
> claim is that one can create any character based on fantasy
literature,
> etc. While I agree with your statement on principle, how do you do
the
> character who grew up in the small village and learned to track and
> fish/hunt, but who went on to become a Merchant instead of going
ahead
> with Ranger? If one claims that one has to take Ranger at Rank 0
just
> to get tracking and fish/hunt, the cost is 600 XPs. And one can
think
> of dozens of other examples from fantasy literature and the like
where
> this problem might arise.

I was thinking more in the region of 30 - 60 for a sub skill, I just
wanted to say that, for the sake of simplicity and consistancy people
should be encourged to by the package if they wanted most of the
subskills

> My only comment on this part of things is that the cost to gain
> the additional sub-skills listed in [54.2] and [62.1] is that they
may
> be so "cheap" because the character has already got the Courtesan or
> Troubador sub-skill set, and is adding to it. Look at section
[57.6]
> under Merchant, pertaining to the areas of specialisation for
assayal,
> where the cost of additional ones over Rank 10 is 1,500 XPs.
> Sometimes I have to wonder how the XP costs for different Skills at
> different Ranks was calculated to begin with, but I guess we'll
never
> know.

I've always wondered, it seems to make no sense to me, I've tried
drawing graphs and all sorts of things - but dispite that the DQ
system does work

I've pritty much abaondoned this way of working sub-skills, having
worked through the other John's ideas I've decided they're better

David
Group: dqn-list Message: 1516 From: Davis, John R Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Golems (XPM for the shaping of...)
JohnK

Thanks

numbers seem about right so will adopt them as rule JMK.67.7.2 and
JMK.67.7.3 ;-)

JohnD

-----Original Message-----
From: John M. Kahane [mailto:jkahane@comnet.ca]
Sent: 19 September 2003 14:26
To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [DQN-list] Golems (XPM for the shaping of...)


Hullo, JohnD,

On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 08:15:20 +0100, Davis, John R wrote:

>Cant seem to find XPM for shape stone or iron golem? I
>could sort of see why they might not have one, but
>maybe I just cant find it anywhere?

Hmm, that's interesting, and I noticed that in the versions found
in DQ 3rd Edition and "The Shattered Statue" product as well. My copy
of AW has the EXMs listed as 375 (stone) and 450 (iron) respectively,
pencilled in as side notes, but they're not my handwriting.

....."What we need to do is isolate the most highly developed organisms." -
Zhaan "Well, that rules out the three we're looking for." - Aeryn (FS; JC)

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
*********************************************************************
Group: dqn-list Message: 1517 From: D. Cameron King Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Indexing Additional DQ Material
John Davis wrote:

>LLL.NNN.NNN.NNN.....letters first probably is better

I'm not sure it is. If what we're envisioning is a document that
contains the "default" rules (2nd edition Bantam, for example),
*plus* optional house rules, clarifications, and so forth, it's
going to look strange if the order is [NN.NN], [LLL.NN.NN.N],
[NN.NN]. It seems more pleasing to my eye if it's [NN.NN],
[NN.NN.LLL.N], [NN.NN].


And David Barrass wrote:

>I think we should in corporate edition numbers, the problem comes
>when the editions have different paragraph numbers, if you refer to a
>rule as number [xx.xx] you will be referencing diferent rules in the
>various editions.

My understanding is that we will vote on what edition to use
as the "baseline" or "default" rules, though, making this problem
moot. If you're referring to a rule as [xx.xx], it will *always*
be the version in the baseline. If there is a need to refer to a
non-baseline edition's version, then an edition number (say, TSR's
3rd edition) can be added like so: [xx.xx.DQ3]

>It might be easier to put the letters as a prefix rather than in the
>nuber itself, so my rules would be
>
>[JDB.12.2.1] and I would refer to QA book rules as [DQB.12.2]

Maybe I'm not paying close attention. What's "QA" stand for?

-Cameron King

_________________________________________________________________
Compare Cable, DSL or Satellite plans: As low as $29.95.
https://broadband.msn.com
Group: dqn-list Message: 1518 From: Rodger Thorm Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Complementing Skills
No, I disagree. In this example, I think that finding
True North is strongly integrated into the rest of the
skill. Without the other cues they are getting from
the other aspects of their skill, Rangers would have a
difficult time knowing where True North is.

And without the other parts of the Ranger skill
contributing, I wouldn't think you could determine
True North with nearly the accuracy that a Ranger has.


This makes a good example of what *not* to break out
as a subskill.

--RT

--- dbarrass_2000 <david.barrass@ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, Rodger Thorm
> <rodger_thorm@y...>
> wrote:
> > 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
>
> How about a max rank of 10 - the Wf Weighting Factor
> in John Davis'
> rules (Post #1485 and the spreadsheet
> SkillsFeat_Ranger.xls in the
> files section - this has saddy lost its formulae,
> but they can
> easilly be re-created)
>
> This would give tracking as max rank 10 - 3 = 7 and
> finding true
> north as 10 - 1 = 9
>
> David
>
>
>


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Group: dqn-list Message: 1519 From: Rodger Thorm Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Complementing Skills
Let me reiterate that in principle I am opposed to the
idea of breaking down the DQ skills into their
individual subspecialties. It seems too much like
GURPS to me (someone else compared it to D&D3e, but
I'm not familiar with their mechanics), and the
'Generic'-ness of GURPS is what has always bothered me
about that game. Similarly, breaking out subskills
draws the flavor out of it and reduces it to just a
set of functions.

Nonetheless, I'm participating in this discussion just
to make some suggestions about how it might be
implemented in a less-bad way.

I'll admit that I could see a special circumstance
where it might be useful for a character to have just
a single ability (subskill), but I would never want to
have this system open to all characters for general
use. In most of those instances (such as a character
who can only track, to stick with our example), I
would instead prefer to have the character carry the
whole skill but only use the applicable portion. EXP
awards for good role-playing could offset some of the
penalty the character was paying for the full skill.

As for the EXP costs question, I'd say yes, if the
character had bought the Tracking sub and the Detect
Ambush sub, then they would get two discounts on
buying up full skill Ranger. But the costs should
always be figured so that it was more expensive to get
the pieces rather than following the full skill path.

--RT


--- "John M. Kahane" <jkahane@comnet.ca> wrote:
> Hullo, Rodger,
>
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 10:38:31 -0700 (PDT), Rodger
> Thorm wrote:
>
> >> 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. :)
> >
> >I don't think this is a problem. The character is
> getting a
> >discount on the *whole* ranger skill because he
> already
> >knows something about tracking, and so he doesn't
> >have to relearn that part.
>
> Agreed. But does this mean you increase the
> discount if the
> character takes another sub-skill from the Ranger
> skill group, such as
> detecting ambushes?
>
> >I can completely identify with this from personal
> experience:
> >I took physics in high school and college and did
> reasonably
> >well in it. Twelve years later I was back in
> school in an
> >architecture program where I had to take some
> engineering
> >courses. A couple of days into the class things
> started
> >clicking with me because these were old physics
> principles
> >(in a more applied format). Having had physics
> classes didn't
> >make me a structural engineer, but it made some
> parts of the
> >class a lot easier on me, because I had already
> learned
> >some of the principles involved.
>
> I understand and agree with this logic, but to
> be honest, I think
> that keeping it as simple as possible in the case of
> these
> complementary skills is the way to go.
>
> >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).
>
> Hmm, I can also see the reasoning behind
> this...
>
> Thanks for your input on this whole
> business, Rodger. :)
>
> .....All the world's a stage, and I seem to have
> missed the rehearsal.
>
> JohnK
> e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
> web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane
>
>
>


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Group: dqn-list Message: 1520 From: John Carcutt Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Complementing Skills
Re: [DQN-list] Complementing Skills Hi Rodger and everyone,

Let me reiterate that in principle I am opposed to the
idea of breaking down the DQ skills into their
individual subspecialties.  It seems too much like
GURPS to me (someone else compared it to D&D3e, but
I'm not familiar with their mechanics), and the
'Generic'-ness of GURPS is what has always bothered me
about that game.  Similarly, breaking out subskills
draws the flavor out of it and reduces it to just a
set of functions.

Nonetheless, I'm participating in this discussion just
to make some suggestions about how it might be
implemented in a less-bad way.  

Personally, I think “a less-bad way” means a simple solution. Simple to me, includes incorporating as much of the current rules structure as possible. I appreciate all of the ideas that have been offered so far and most of them are quite interesting. However, I think if we have to go as far as creating a whole new aspect of the game such as “weighting factors” we might want to step back and re-evaluate the solution. To me simple is not just about now many dice rolls or the number of calculations, its the overall feel of the game as well. :)

I'll admit that I could see a special circumstance
where it might be useful for a character to have just
a single ability (subskill), but I would never want to
have this system open to all characters for general
use.  In most of those instances (such as a character
who can only track, to stick with our example), I
would instead prefer to have the character carry the
whole skill but only use the applicable portion.  EXP
awards for good role-playing could offset some of the
penalty the character was paying for the full skill.

I kind of like the idea of allowing the learning of individual sub-skills. One thing I have heard over and over again as I try to “convert” people from other game systems is they love that they are not locked into specific skills by their characters “class”. This modification would open that up even further as long as steps are take not to let it get out of control. Rodger said in his next paragraph “.. costs should always be figured so that it was more expensive to get the pieces rather than following the full skill path.” and this is an absolute must to keep things under control.

As for the EXP costs question, I'd say yes, if the
character had bought the Tracking sub and the Detect
Ambush sub, then they would get two discounts on
buying up full skill Ranger.  But the costs should
always be figured so that it was more expensive to get
the pieces rather than following the full skill path.

I Agree Wholeheartedly. :)

John (aka:Axl)
Group: dqn-list Message: 1521 From: Steven Wiles Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Increasing Ranks
Sorry to take so long getting responding to this.
Been a busy week, and I got sick. Anyway...

--- gmartinez@medioambiente.gov.ar wrote:
> 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.

I don't personally regard that as a "problem". Yes,
with spells like Molecular Rearrangement, you have an
absolutely abyssmal chance of casting it if you have
very little Rank in it. But, that's the way it should
be. Spells that have very low base chances are always
extremely powerful spells. You should have to work on
them a lot to be able to cast them reliably.

This leads to the point I was trying to make with my
previous post. Only with further reflection do I see
the point I was previously dancing around. I believe
in using the rule that you must have attempted a spell
during a previous adventure because I believe you must
have risked -backfiring- the spell to have -earned-
the right to Rank it. This is my personal philosophy
on the matter.

That having been said, let me retract or clarify
statements I made in my previous post. If a spell
primarily has use as a -combat- spell, I feel it would
not be appropriate to allow someone to Rank it if they
had only ever attempted it using a Ritual Preparation.
Ritual Preparation is, by nature, a calm and
controlled situation, and does not accurately reflect
the chaos of combat. I would not view that as having
"practiced" the spell adequately. I'm ambivalent
about what ruling I'd make as a GM if they used 1
minute of preperation to "practice" a combat spell,
but I'd consider that pretty inadequate too. Any
attempt of the spell outside of combat is unlikely to
be an adequate practice -for- combat.

Hmmm... a thought occured to me. I would allow
Ranking if the Adept practiced his combat spell
between campaigns by engaging in some sort of
"wizard's duel" competitions. Depending on your
campaign, I could see that kind of thing being
supervised at an Adventurer's Guild. Of course, such
a combat should be role-played, and fatalities could
happen, even to the player... :)

Conversely, I would say it was just fine for a
character to cast a spell that does not usually have
combat use with either 1 minute of prep or using a
Ritual Preparation and consider that a valid "attempt"
for Ranking, either during or between campaigns. For
example, a character of mine used to cast Protection
from Magical Fire by sitting in a bonfire and doing
Ritual Prep and anything else he could think of to
boost its cast chance. He always did this -before-
leaving on a campaign. However, in any situation, the
character must be risking backfire (and no matter how
high you boost the cast chance, a 00 is always a
backfire). He must roll for it and deal with the
consequences, whether this is during a campaign or
between campaigns.

The preceeding comments applied to spells. Rituals
and talents are a bit different. Talents never
backfire, and rituals don't have backfires unless they
specifically state they do. If a talent or ritual has
no backfire, I guess it wouldn't matter under what
circumstances it was attempted. There's never any
risk, so it can be practiced at leisure. On the other
hand, if a ritual does have a backfire (or has costly
material components), that should be dealt with. No
pain (in backfires), no gain (in Ranks).

And yes, even if that backfire ends up pissing off
your Adept's colleagues, that's just too bad. Either
that Adept needs to convince his colleagues the
potential pain his practice brings them (and more
often him) will be worth the pay-off, or they need to
convince him to find other, safer spells to cast.
This is the essence of party personality dynamics to
me.

Now, a couple of points about the specific examples
we've used. How do you "practice" the Ritual of
Becoming Undead? Well, this is a ritual does have a
listed backfire result: the wight or wraith the victim
became immediately attacks the Adept. So, as long as
that was played out, I would consider each such
unsuccessful attempt of the Ritual good enough for
Ranking. Note that to practice such a ritual involves
becoming, in effect, a serial killer. The Adept's
player should also be prepared to deal with the
consequences of his depraved activities. I mean not
just the possible attention of legal authorities but
also the terrible taint of dark magic upon his soul.

Your other example of the Spell of Molecular
Rearrangment, upon re-reading, seems to be the
exception to my philosophy that tests it. I have to
admit that as written, it could conceivably have both
combat and non-combat uses. Since it is effectively
an instant-kill spell when used in combat, I would err
on the side of caution and say that to Rank it
requires a trial-in-combat. Of course, that doesn't
prevent it from being -used- at low Rank with
appropriate preparations to boost it to castable
levels.

Well, after all that, I also want to add the
following: circumstances vary. If a player was
willing to cast a combat spells (say Dragon Flames) at
trees in the forest 10 or so times with only 1 Pulse
preparation, taking any backfires that might result,
I'd probably accept that as enough practice. Good
luck, little Fire Mage...

> 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.

Having some sort of magic-enhancing "spell rooms"
rented out to Adepts is an interesting idea. It would
have to be outside of an populated area (which are
always low-mana areas), but I could see such a market
developing. I could even see making some rules for
Adepts who assist each other in a ritual. Add that to
Bruce's (?) idea about Namers adding True Name bonuses
to things like Remove Curse, and I think you can cast
just about anything if you have enough time and money
to prepare thoroughly. Note, my previous ramblings
still apply. :)

I'm a little confused by your use of the term
"consecrated ground", though. In the books, that
refers to a place consecrated to the Powers of Light,
and such places -interfere- with casting magic. I
assume you meant these are special places
"consecrated" to magic, like the "Places of Power" in
Earth Magics.

Mort


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Group: dqn-list Message: 1522 From: Steven Wiles Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Increasing Ranks
--- Bruce Probst <bprobst@netspace.net.au> wrote:

> Yes, which is why in my game I heavily modified it.
> I improved the Base
> Chance to begin with, and also made it available to
> Namers (and their Naming
> bonuses). That makes the ritual actually practical
> to attempt it.

A most excellent suggestion, as well as a somewhat
obvious one in retrospect. It's also one of the few
situations where I can imagine a character -wanting-
to give a Namer their Individual True Name. I was
wondering, has anyone in your campaigns done so for
this reason? Also, I'm not clear what you meant by
"made it available to Namers", since it's a
universally available ritual.

General question to the group: I can't find the rules
about how a Namer attains Ranks in True Names. I see
in [39.2] that they can Rank Names, but I can't find
what the XP Multiplier is or how long it takes.

Mort

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Group: dqn-list Message: 1523 From: Steven Wiles Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Increasing Ranks
--- "John M. Kahane" <jkahane@comnet.ca> wrote:
> 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?

Well, I'm tabling the idea of splitting out sub-skills
to Rank separately for -this- answer. I agree that
it's a little strange that you can practice opening
locks on adventure, and that somehow makes you
prepared to get better at climbing, sneaking, picking
pockets, cracking safes, etc. I suppose one could
rule that a person needs to use at least 3 different
subskills in a skill before they are ready to Rank it,
or something like that.

Of course, this raises the point that some people only
typically use one or two subskills out of a skill
suite, and leads us right back to the whole subskills
issue...

> 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...

That's a good idea. How much money do you charge? I
assume there's some formula based on Rank to be
achieved like there is for a trainer in weapons and
skills?

Mort

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Group: dqn-list Message: 1524 From: Steven Wiles Date: 9/19/2003
Subject: Re: Complementing Skills
--- "John M. Kahane" <jkahane@comnet.ca> wrote:
> 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?

I think somebody already answered this, and I agree
with that person (sorry, dude, can't remember names
too good). It's all about the performance, reading
your customer, telling 'em what they want to know,
dressing the part, maybe doing a few minor magics to
be convincing. If that ain't Troubador skill, I don't
know what is... :)

> 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.

I'm going to play a bit of the Devil's Advocate here
and reverse my stance on this for a bit.

Hmmmm. Let's go back to the Ranger skill as an
example. I could see that if you already had Rank 2
in Ranger, and therefore in Tracking, you could only
need to Rank the Tracking subskill from Rank 2 to 3.
In other words, rather than having to Rank the
subskill up to Rank 3 from 0 before seeing any benefit
from it, you already automatically have Rank 2 in it
from Ranger (the converse wouldn't apply, of course).
Then, if you also incorporate the idea of higher Rank
in the subskill giving a discount to Ranking the
skill, I think you have a pretty good synergy going
(as long as you make sure that its never cheaper to
Rank subskills individually instead of the whole
skill, of course). Just an idea, comments?

Mort

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Group: dqn-list Message: 1525 From: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com Date: 9/20/2003
Subject: New file uploaded to dqn-list
Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the dqn-list
group.

File : /DragonNotesAres11.pdf
Uploaded by : John_Rauchert <john.rauchert@sait.ca>
Description : Ares Magazine Feature

You can access this file at the URL

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dqn-list/files/DragonNotesAres11.pdf

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit

http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files

Regards,

John_Rauchert <john.rauchert@sait.ca>
Group: dqn-list Message: 1526 From: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com Date: 9/20/2003
Subject: New file uploaded to dqn-list
Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the dqn-list
group.

File : /DragonNotesAres6.pdf
Uploaded by : John_Rauchert <john.rauchert@sait.ca>
Description : Ares Magazine Feature

You can access this file at the URL

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dqn-list/files/DragonNotesAres6.pdf

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit

http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files

Regards,

John_Rauchert <john.rauchert@sait.ca>
Group: dqn-list Message: 1527 From: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com Date: 9/20/2003
Subject: New file uploaded to dqn-list
Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the dqn-list
group.

File : /QuickCombatIIAres6.pdf
Uploaded by : John_Rauchert <john.rauchert@sait.ca>
Description : Ares Game Variant

You can access this file at the URL

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dqn-list/files/QuickCombatIIAres6.pdf

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit

http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files

Regards,

John_Rauchert <john.rauchert@sait.ca>
Group: dqn-list Message: 1528 From: Bruce Probst Date: 9/20/2003
Subject: Re: Complementing Skills
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 08:24:48 -0400, "John M. Kahane" <jkahane@comnet.ca>
wrote:

>>Um, the charlatan just makes it up and doesn't care what his
>>dice roll is?
>
> Yeah, but at that point, why even expend XPs on a skill to fake
>it? One could do that without the skill.

?? Who said anything about the charlatan learning the actual skill? A
charlatan doesn't need to know how to read fortunes -- he only needs to make
other people think that he knows.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au ICQ 6563830
Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 SCA #80160
"Until actual humour can be found, please accept this substitute."
ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ
Group: dqn-list Message: 1529 From: Bruce Probst Date: 9/20/2003
Subject: More on Names and Namers
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 17:02:55 -0700 (PDT), Steven Wiles
<mortdemuerte@yahoo.com> wrote:

Re: Remove Curse ritual

>> Yes, which is why in my game I heavily modified it.
>> I improved the Base
>> Chance to begin with, and also made it available to
>> Namers (and their Naming
>> bonuses). That makes the ritual actually practical
>> to attempt it.
>
>A most excellent suggestion, as well as a somewhat
>obvious one in retrospect. It's also one of the few
>situations where I can imagine a character -wanting-
>to give a Namer their Individual True Name. I was
>wondering, has anyone in your campaigns done so for
>this reason?

Yes. One of the "universal philosophies" in my campaign was that if you
couldn't trust a Namer with your Name, you couldn't trust anyone.

>Also, I'm not clear what you meant by
>"made it available to Namers", since it's a
>universally available ritual.

I thought I'd made it a General Knowledge ritual for Namers (the same way
that Investment is a General Knowledge ritual for Shapers), but on
re-examining my notes I see that's not the case.

Actually, there *is* a slight difference, even while keeping it as Special
Knowledge: the "common" spells and rituals (Counterspell, Purification,
Investment, etc.) are all "College Specific" -- i.e., while a Fire Mage and
a Mind Mage both have access to a Ritual of Investment, and that Ritual
works identically for both of them, those rituals are different -- the Fire
mage does his Investment differently to the way the Mind Mage does it (and
they each get different College-based bonuses and penalties).

However, the spells and rituals in the "Consequences" section are not
"College-specific" -- no matter what sort of Adept you are, you perform your
Remove Curse ritual identically to any other sort of Adept, and get the same
bonuses and penalties as anyone else.

Hence, by making a "Namers" version of Remove Curse, they actually have a
version of the ritual that is *different* to the one described in
"Consequences", and thus is unique to them, in the same way that Investment
is unique for each College.

>General question to the group: I can't find the rules
>about how a Namer attains Ranks in True Names. I see
>in [39.2] that they can Rank Names, but I can't find
>what the XP Multiplier is or how long it takes.

No XP required, just an expenditure of time. I thought there were some
rules on how long it takes described there? In any case here are the rules
I used in my campaign:

* All things made in the “Divine Creation” in a DragonQuest world were given
a Generic True Name at that time. The GM should decide whether this was
done by a supreme being or by the first Namer. This name is in an ancient
language, and the translation into the Common tongue would yield such terms
as Man, Elf, Tiger, Oak, Bee, Rattlesnake, Granite, Rose, etc. All such
names when uttered in their ancient form by a Namer give the Namer power to
control the object, and these Generic names are taught to an apprentice
Namer during the Namer’s training. It is possible a Namer would encounter
an object whose Generic name he would not be familiar with, and the GM must
adjudicate what objects the Namers in his world are familiar with. Namers
may learn a Generic True Name they are not familiar with by encountering the
object to which the Name refers. Once acquired, the Name may be studied at
any time. To achieve Rank with a Generic True Name, the name must be
studied for a number of weeks equal to the Rank to be achieved, at no XP
cost.

* All sentient entities (player character races, dragons, mermen, nagas,
etc.) are given an Individual True Name upon reaching maturity; this name is
either given to them by the aforementioned supreme being or the local Namer.
All sane sentient entities will know their own Individual True Name and no
force — physical or magical — can coerce the entity to reveal it. They may
choose to reveal it, however. The Name also cannot be forced from the Namer
who named the entity, if that method of naming is chosen. An entity will be
called by his Given (or Use) Name, which is given to him by his parents.
Both the Individual True Name and the Given Name will be in the entity’s
native tongue. When an Individual True Name is bestowed upon an entity, it
also becomes known to the Naming Demons (see the demon descriptions in the
College of Greater Summonings). Other than an entity choosing to reveal his
True Name, using a Demon is the only other method of acquiring an entity’s
True Name, although Adepts of various Colleges have been known to record
important entity’s names in magic tomes (also, unscrupulous Adepts or other
powerful beings — such as dragons — may disclose the Individual True Name of
other entities for their own nefarious purposes). Namers know only their
own Individual True Name upon completing their education. All other
Individual True Names must be learned before they can be used. They can be
learned by spending one month in study after the name has been acquired, and
may achieve Rank with the Name by spending additional months of study equal
to the Rank to be achieved (at no XP cost). The Generic True Name of an
entity must be known at an equal or greater Rank before the Individual True
Name may be studied to an equivalent Rank (i.e., the Rank that the Namer
knows an entity’s Individual True Name may not be greater than the Rank that
the Namer knows the Generic True Name of the entity’s race). Neither type
of True Name may be studied to a Rank greater than 20, and no other type of
study (XP expenditure) is permitted while increasing Rank in a Name.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au ICQ 6563830
Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 SCA #80160
"Until actual humour can be found, please accept this substitute."
ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ
Group: dqn-list Message: 1530 From: dbarrass_2000 Date: 9/20/2003
Subject: Re: Indexing Additional DQ Material
--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "D. Cameron King"
<monarchy2000@h...> wrote:
>
> John Davis wrote:
>
> >LLL.NNN.NNN.NNN.....letters first probably is better
>
> I'm not sure it is. If what we're envisioning is a document that
> contains the "default" rules (2nd edition Bantam, for example),
> *plus* optional house rules, clarifications, and so forth, it's
> going to look strange if the order is [NN.NN], [LLL.NN.NN.N],
> [NN.NN]. It seems more pleasing to my eye if it's [NN.NN],
> [NN.NN.LLL.N], [NN.NN].

If we adopt a standard basis, such as the Bantam, then no we don't
have to reference it explicitly, if we whiched to refer to a rule in
the TSR edition we would, but thinking about it that would be
replaced by the Arcane Wisdom section number

Aesthetically I prefer [LLL.NN.NN.NN], but I suppose it is not
immedialty clear to the reader what section that pertains to, so back
to [NN.NN.LLL.NN]


> And David Barrass wrote:
>
> >I think we should in corporate edition numbers, the problem comes
> >when the editions have different paragraph numbers, if you refer
to a
> >rule as number [xx.xx] you will be referencing diferent rules in
the
> >various editions.
>
> My understanding is that we will vote on what edition to use
> as the "baseline" or "default" rules, though, making this problem
> moot. If you're referring to a rule as [xx.xx], it will *always*
> be the version in the baseline. If there is a need to refer to a
> non-baseline edition's version, then an edition number (say, TSR's
> 3rd edition) can be added like so: [xx.xx.DQ3]
>
> >It might be easier to put the letters as a prefix rather than in
the
> >nuber itself, so my rules would be
> >
> >[JDB.12.2.1] and I would refer to QA book rules as [DQB.12.2]
>
> Maybe I'm not paying close attention. What's "QA" stand for?
>

Nothing, rather DQB stands for DragonQuest Bantam

David
Group: dqn-list Message: 1531 From: dbarrass_2000 Date: 9/20/2003
Subject: Re: Complementing Skills
--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, Rodger Thorm <rodger_thorm@y...>
wrote:
> No, I disagree. In this example, I think that finding
> True North is strongly integrated into the rest of the
> skill. Without the other cues they are getting from
> the other aspects of their skill, Rangers would have a
> difficult time knowing where True North is.
>
> And without the other parts of the Ranger skill
> contributing, I wouldn't think you could determine
> True North with nearly the accuracy that a Ranger has.
>
>
> This makes a good example of what *not* to break out
> as a subskill.


This is a good point, perhaps we aught to be more selective about
what is split out. But there definatly are things that can be split
out such as Climbing.

David
Group: dqn-list Message: 1532 From: dbarrass_2000 Date: 9/20/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Probst <bprobst@n...> wrote:


> as Man, Elf, Tiger, Oak, Bee, Rattlesnake, Granite, Rose, etc. All
such
> names when uttered in their ancient form by a Namer give the Namer
power to
> control the object, and these Generic names are taught to an
apprentice
> Namer during the Namer's training.

I've always wondered, and this has been a problem to me playing
Namers, What can a Namer do to it once he has control of Granite?

David
Group: dqn-list Message: 1533 From: Deven Atkinson Date: 9/21/2003
Subject: Re: Complementing Skills
Re: [DQN-list] Complementing Skills
----- Original Message From: John Carcutt

[snip]

>I kind of like the idea of allowing the learning of individual sub-skills.
One thing I have heard over and >over again as I try to “convert” people
from other game systems is they love that they are not locked >into specific
skills by their characters “class”. This modification would open that up
even further as >long as steps are take not to let it get out of control.
Rodger said in his next paragraph “.. costs >should always be figured so
that it was more expensive to get the pieces rather than following the full
>skill path.” and this is an absolute must to keep things under control.

I agree 100% with the "more expensive" aspect. There is another issue that
has occured to me. Namely some skills, like Assassin, have a structure in
the game. Is any dues paying Assassins' Guild member going to teach a
non-guild member any of the skill subsets?

Taking a step back and looking at historical reality, people did learn an
entire set of related skills as a journeyman "whatever". Very few people
would have had the opportunity to de-specialize, i.e. pick and choose what
skill sets they were going to learn. Instead the great generals brought
merchants along with them to assist with the logistics of feeding an army,
he did not learn the merchant sub-skills himself. Archane wisdom discussed
creating Magic Colleges. Perhaps instead of breaking out skills and making
all the determinations of EXP costs, etc. we would be better served if we
described the idea of subskills and offered an suggested process to use them
in a game setting.

I hope this discussion is still going next weekend. I'll be on a business
trip this week...
Group: dqn-list Message: 1534 From: Bruce Probst Date: 9/21/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 17:34:47 -0000, "dbarrass_2000" <david.barrass@ed.ac.uk>
wrote:

>I've always wondered, and this has been a problem to me playing
>Namers, What can a Namer do to it once he has control of Granite?

Obviously, nothing, with the current list of spells for Namers.

In theory, what he should be able to do is manipulate it -- shape it, turn
it into something else, etc.

I would postulate that such transformations should be difficult, even with
the True Name known at a decent Rank ... but they should probably be
permanent, although a Namer ought to be able to dispel the transformation
relatively easily.

The Namers have great potential for a very interesting Special Knowledge
spell list IMO ....

----------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au ICQ 6563830
Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 SCA #80160
"Until actual humour can be found, please accept this substitute."
ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ
Group: dqn-list Message: 1535 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/21/2003
Subject: Re: Alternate Sub-Skill Breakdown (Was: Re:Re: Breaking Down Skill
Hullo, David,

On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 14:55:02 -0000, dbarrass_2000 wrote:

>> >I would make buying the Skill as all the subskills at least twice
>> >as expensive, and would lean towards 5 times, to encourage
>> >people to be a theif, assassin etc and only take a sub skill if
>> >they really wanted one thing from it.
>>
>> One of the things that those of us who play and run
>>DRAGONQUEST claim is that one can create any character
>>based on fantasy literature, etc. While I agree with your
>>statement on principle, how do you do the character who
>>grew up in the small village and learned to track and
>>fish/hunt, but who went on to become a Merchant instead
>>of going ahead with Ranger? If one claims that one has
>>to take Ranger at Rank 0 just to get tracking and fish/hunt,
>>the cost is 600 XPs. And one can think of dozens of other
>>examples from fantasy literature and the like where this
>>problem might arise.
>
>I was thinking more in the region of 30 - 60 for a sub skill, I
>just wanted to say that, for the sake of simplicity and
>consistancy people should be encourged to by the package
>if they wanted most of the subskills

When it comes right down to it, the DQ skill system is meant for
those characters who want to be the wilderness guide, the thief, the
alchemist, etc. However, the game system doesn't really allow a
character to be a Ranger, and pick up some knowlege of playing a
musical instrument or singing, unless one buys the Troubador skill. It
doesn't allow the character who is a Thief to disguise themselves,
unless one picks up Troubador skill. It doesn't reflect the farmer's
son who learned to track animals when he was a child, and then grows up
to be a Merchant, unless he buys Ranger. This is what I wanted - and
still want - to allow for in the game, since it's a traditional kind of
thing that is found in many fantasy literary works and in other rpgs.
One could argue that the DQ skill system has become redundant over the
years, simply because the game has not seen development (being a dead
game system with publishers does this!), and most rpgs these days do
seem to deal primarily with skills that are individual, not skills in
groups.

I'm not saying here that every sub-skill from the DQ skill
groups should be broken out as single skills in this manner. I can't
see an Assassin, Alchemist, or Healer (taking several that come to mind
immediately) teaching certain of their abilities (if not al of them) to
someone as individual skills, but the homeless kid growing up on the
streets of the big fantasy city should be able to pickpocket and
perhaps one or two other thieving abilities without having to know how
to open safes or pick locks. I'm sure others would also find this to
be true of some of the other skills, but this should be personal
interpretation (as most GMing is anyway).
>
>> My only comment on this part of things is that the cost to gain
>> the additional sub-skills listed in [54.2] and [62.1] is that they
>>may be so "cheap" because the character has already got the
>>Courtesan or Troubador sub-skill set, and is adding to it. Look
>>at section [57.6] under Merchant, pertaining to the areas of
>>specialisation for assayal, where the cost of additional ones
>>over Rank 10 is 1,500 XPs. Sometimes I have to wonder
>>how the XP costs for different Skills at different Ranks was
>>calculated to begin with, but I guess we'll never know.
>
>I've always wondered, it seems to make no sense to me, I've
>tried drawing graphs and all sorts of things - but dispite that the DQ
>system does work

Yes, the DQ system *does* work despite all this. I think that,
to all intents and purposes, the game system mechanics are such that
only the original designers would be able to give us the insights into
how the Rank mechanics were based and set up, but there's no hope of
that ever happening.

....."Well, we know he's seen the colour of *her* fur." - Kevelin Lanal, mercenary

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane
Group: dqn-list Message: 1536 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/21/2003
Subject: Re: Golems (XPM for the shaping of...)
Hullo, JohnD,

On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 16:06:39 +0100, Davis, John R wrote:

>Thanks

Not a problem. :)

>numbers seem about right so will adopt them as rule JMK.
>67.7.2 and JMK.67.7.3 ;-)

hehe Oh well, I guess being reduced to a number isn't half as
bad in this case. :)

.....The Goddess loves you...but wait until She's had Her tea!

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane
Group: dqn-list Message: 1537 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/21/2003
Subject: Re: Complementing Skills
Hullo, Rodger,

On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 11:35:14 -0700 (PDT), Rodger Thorm wrote:

>No, I disagree. In this example, I think that finding True North
>is strongly integrated into the rest of the skill. Without the other
>cues they are getting from the other aspects of their skill, Rangers
>would have a difficult time knowing where True North is.

Yep, I agree with you on this. :)
>
>And without the other parts of the Ranger skill contributing, I
>wouldn't think you could determine True North with nearly the
>accuracy that a Ranger has.
>
>This makes a good example of what *not* to break out
>as a subskill.

Yes, this is a good example of when a sub-skill should *not* be
broken out into a separate minor skill. I think that common sense
would be the way to go when deciding on the minor skills and the like,
and each skill would have to be dealt with separately in terms of being
evaluated on this basis.

.....A pat on the back is only a few centimeters from a kick in the butt.

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane
Group: dqn-list Message: 1538 From: Steven Wiles Date: 9/21/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
--- dbarrass_2000 <david.barrass@ed.ac.uk> wrote:
> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Probst
> <bprobst@n...> wrote:
>
> I've always wondered, and this has been a problem to
> me playing
> Namers, What can a Namer do to it once he has
> control of Granite?

It's been a long long time since I read the Earthsea
Trilogy. To get a real good understanding of what
this College was meant to be able to do, I'll have to
re-read them sometime.

In the few instances when I've seen a Namer played in
a group, it was usually someone who was interested in
the College purely for its counterspelling potential.
Admittedly, that's very useful, but I feel that the
heart of the college was being lost.

The college has only two Special Knowledge spells,
Charming and Compel Obedience. I think that's
deliberate, and was done for the same reason that
Illusions has no Special Knowledge spell. To my
thinking, they share a common feature: their utility
and variability does not lie in their written spells.
For Illusions, you Rank the four sensory General
Knowledge spells, but only so that you may create
individualized illusions yourself that become your
personal Special Knowlege. Similarly, I don't think
the power of Naming was ever supposed to lie so much
in Ranking its two Special Knowledge spells, but in
the Ranking of True Names.

The utility of the spell Charming is simple and
obvious, and seems particular in that it affects
living creatures only. However, I think there's a
-lot- of creative potential in the spell Compelling
Obedience. As written, the spell seems to -imply-
that its targets are living creatures. The wording is
a bit... ambiguous, though, if you don't mind playing
a game of semantics. I think one could, with some
justification, take the stance that the spell is
supposed to affect -any- target, living or otherwise,
and that opens the College up to a lot of
possibilities.

The spell says the caster may "order the target to
perform any action within its physical capabilities".
Well, consider the following possibilities. Order a
door to close and stay locked. Order a hillside to
crumble and slide. Order a wind to blow steadily, or
violently. Order a stream to support a person and
keep them from sinking. Order an arrow to fly true.
Order a piece of Granite (heh) to crack and split.
Much like Illusions, I think that once you consider
this idea for what Compel Obedience could mean, you
see why only two SK spells would be necessary, and all
the power would lie in learning and ranking True
Names.

The GM would have to do some case-by-case adjudication
on what is meant by "physical capabilities", but I
think my previous examples are reasonable. One might
even extend it to allow ordering a field of grass to
grow and entwine a target, ordering a boulder to roll,
or ordering a table to walk on its "legs" across a
room. I don't know if I'd allow that. Tastes may
vary. There may be justification for this all in the
Earthsea books, but I couldn't say right now. The one
thing I would be careful to avoid is this College
becoming an arch-College, able to replicate the
effects of any other College. Illusions has some of
this problem too, if given too free a rein (Omaq, if
you're reading this, yes, I'm still harping about
that... :> ).

I totally agree with Bruce that an obvious addition to
the Special Knowledge of the college would be a spell
of Renaming. Or perhaps a ritual would be more
appropriate. However, the idea would be to "reName"
something and thereby transform it into something
else. I would assume it would require knowledge of
the True Names of both the original and what it is to
be transformed into, if I were to write it. You know,
I have a vague recollection that in the Earthsea
books, shape-shifting was one of the things Namers
could do, and that's all the justification you need
for anything here.

I don't know how Namers got played in other people's
groups, but I feel a vast pool of creative potential
has been overlooked in the one's I've been in.

Mort




__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Group: dqn-list Message: 1539 From: Steven Wiles Date: 9/21/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
As long as I'm on the subject of Namers, I've got some
questions for the group.

I've always felt that it was too difficult to dispel
spells. The only means to do so I'm familiar with is
the Ritual of Dissipation in Namings, but even that
ritual takes an hour. Obviously, this is no help in
quenching an enemy's Weapon of Flame in combat or
lifting a spell of darkness from an area, spells which
for the most part don't last an hour anyway. The
Namer's ability to counteract spells is entirely
prophylactic and never curative. I speak from the
bitter experience of having had an entire party
trapped in Earthen Hands for eight -long- hours, with
the realization that even if we had had a Namer
present, it would've taken him an hour to do anything.


Does anyone else find this to be a problem? Do people
think that if Namers could -both- prevent spellcasting
with counterspells -and- undo spells after they came
into effect, it would be too crippling for
spellcasters in general?

The next question I have is whether people allow an
Adept to dismiss his own spells automatically, or at
least dispel them with a counterspell? As written,
even the caster can't get rid of the effects of a
spell once its cast.

Mort

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Group: dqn-list Message: 1540 From: Steven Wiles Date: 9/21/2003
Subject: Wizardry?
I was skimming through the Ares articlese that JohnR
has so graciously provided the group recently, and was
stopped cold by something I saw in
DesignersNotesAres11.pdf:

"A decision still must be reached as to the addition
of three more Colleges still in the design state �
Wizardry, White Magics, and Faerie Magics. Blindtest
copies have gone out and we are awaiting the results."

First off, I find it very amusing that I have seen so
many people do versions of a College of White Magic.
Clearly, even the original designers perceived a lack.
Moreover, I've seen a version of Fae Magics. If the
creators of these versions are reading this, were any
of you influenced by this article to write these
colleges, or were you completely unaware of the
coincidence?

My main question can be summed up in one word:
Wizardry!? I would love to know what that College was
supposed to be about. My impression is that
Enchantments and Ensorcellments was always meant to
emulate the classic Merlin-style wizard. What could
this Wizardry have been?

My secondary question is: Blindtest copies? Oh, what
a treasure of gaming archeology it would be to dig one
of those up! Does anyone out there have any leads on
this, however slim?

Mort

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Group: dqn-list Message: 1541 From: Bruce Probst Date: 9/22/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 21:58:50 -0700 (PDT), Steven Wiles
<mortdemuerte@yahoo.com> wrote:

>Does anyone else find this to be a problem? Do people
>think that if Namers could -both- prevent spellcasting
>with counterspells -and- undo spells after they came
>into effect, it would be too crippling for
>spellcasters in general?

I think it's a statement on the effectiveness of Magic in a DQ world -- it
can be difficult to get it right, but once you've done it, it's there to
stay!

I think it would change the dynamics of the game to permit "easy/quick"
dispelling of another's magic.

>The next question I have is whether people allow an
>Adept to dismiss his own spells automatically, or at
>least dispel them with a counterspell? As written,
>even the caster can't get rid of the effects of a
>spell once its cast.

I generally allow people under the affect of a long-term benevolent spell to
dismiss it at will. You don't have to be the original caster, it just has
to be something affecting you personally (i.e., not an area-affect spell).

By "benevolent spell" I mean one not cast on you with malice aforethought
<g> -- e.g., Invisibility, spells that give a defensive bonus, etc.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au ICQ 6563830
Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 SCA #80160
"Until actual humour can be found, please accept this substitute."
ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ
Group: dqn-list Message: 1542 From: dbarrass_2000 Date: 9/22/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, Steven Wiles <mortdemuerte@y...>
wrote:
> --- dbarrass_2000 <david.barrass@e...> wrote:
> > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Probst
> > <bprobst@n...> wrote:
> >
> > I've always wondered, and this has been a problem to
> > me playing
> > Namers, What can a Namer do to it once he has
> > control of Granite?
>
> It's been a long long time since I read the Earthsea
> Trilogy. To get a real good understanding of what
> this College was meant to be able to do, I'll have to
> re-read them sometime.

I've been trying to find them in second hand bookshops, no luck so far

<snip>

> I don't think
> the power of Naming was ever supposed to lie so much
> in Ranking its two Special Knowledge spells, but in
> the Ranking of True Names.

OK

<snip>

> The GM would have to do some case-by-case adjudication
> on what is meant by "physical capabilities", but I
> think my previous examples are reasonable. One might
> even extend it to allow ordering a field of grass to
> grow and entwine a target, ordering a boulder to roll,
> or ordering a table to walk on its "legs" across a
> room. I don't know if I'd allow that. Tastes may
> vary. There may be justification for this all in the
> Earthsea books, but I couldn't say right now. The one
> thing I would be careful to avoid is this College
> becoming an arch-College, able to replicate the
> effects of any other College. Illusions has some of
> this problem too, if given too free a rein (Omaq, if
> you're reading this, yes, I'm still harping about
> that... :> ).

This is on the lines I was thinking, I hadn't interpreted the spell
of compelling Obedience in this way, but I see how you could

Thanks

David
Group: dqn-list Message: 1543 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/22/2003
Subject: Re: Complementing Skills
Hullo, Rodger,

On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 11:59:47 -0700 (PDT), Rodger Thorm wrote:

>Let me reiterate that in principle I am opposed to the idea
>of breaking down the DQ skills into their individual
>subspecialties. It seems too much like GURPS to me
>(someone else compared it to D&D3e, but I'm not familiar
>with their mechanics), and the 'Generic'-ness of GURPS
>is what has always bothered me about that game.
>Similarly, breaking out subskills draws the flavor out of it
>and reduces it to just a set of functions.

Well, never let it be said that DRAGONQUEST isn't a game with a
mathematical base, in terms of the formulae and the like for various
skills and abilities. :) That said, I'm not proposing breaking out
all the game skills into individual sub-skills or whatever, just
provding GMs and their players a means of coming up with the character
that they want, and developing a few of the minor abilities into
something that is worthwhile for background and the like.

>Nonetheless, I'm participating in this discussion just to make
>some suggestions about how it might be implemented in a
>less-bad way.

Discussion on this mailing list is a worthwhile thing. :)

>I'll admit that I could see a special circumstance where
>it might be useful for a character to have just a single
>ability (subskill), but I would never want to have this
>system open to all characters for general use.

I'm not saying that I want to use this system of sub-skills for
generic use, but don't you think that some sort of minor skills along
the lines of Lore are useful? (Plant and herb lore, arcane lore,
ancient lore, and City/Town/whatever lore come to mind right away.) I
suspect, however, that personal preference is the way this works, and
whether the GM decides to use this or not.

>As for the EXP costs question, I'd say yes, if the character
>had bought the Tracking sub and the Detect Ambush sub,
>then they would get two discounts on buying up full skill
>Ranger. But the costs should always be figured so that
>it was more expensive to get the pieces rather than following
>the full skill path.

Agreed, but as you said in another post, I don't think that the
True North ability of Rangers should be a skill that can be broken out;
that one's got to be purchased as part of the Ranger skill.

.....We don't see things as they are; we see them as we are. (Anais Nin)

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane
Group: dqn-list Message: 1544 From: John M. Kahane Date: 9/22/2003
Subject: Re: Increasing Ranks
Hullo, Steven,

On Fri, 19 Sep 2003 19:14:55 -0700 (PDT), Steven Wiles wrote:

>> 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?

>Well, I'm tabling the idea of splitting out sub-skills to Rank
>separately for -this- answer. I agree that it's a little strange
>that you can practice opening locks on adventure, and
>that somehow makes you prepared to get better at climbing,
>sneaking, picking pockets, cracking safes, etc. I suppose
>one could rule that a person needs to use at least 3 different
>subskills in a skill before they are ready to Rank it, or
>something like that.

You probably could do it that way, but I suspect the player
characters might start accumulating a lot more XPs since they wouldn't
necessarily be able to raise their Ranks in the skills that quickly or
rapidly. That said, the DQ skill system is very much almost a "Class"
system in the sense that each "skill group" seems to be almost a
profession/job/class in and of itself. Probably stems from when DQ
came out and the other game systems that were available at the time as
well.

>Of course, this raises the point that some people only typically
>use one or two subskills out of a skill suite, and leads us right
>back to the whole subskills issue...

Yes, yes it does. :)

>> 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...
>
>That's a good idea. How much money do you charge? I
>assume there's some formula based on Rank to be
>achieved like there is for a trainer in weapons and
>skills?

Well, I said that one could argue the point that you could do
this that way, except I don't believe that wielding spells and the like
should or could be handled in this way. I don't consider the "use" of
magic and the "use" of weapons/skills to be quite the same thing, if
you take my meaning. Besides, how do you go about "practicing" a
ritual? <g>

.....Dogs come when called; cats have voice mail.

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane
Group: dqn-list Message: 1545 From: Rodger Thorm Date: 9/22/2003
Subject: Re: Alternate Sub-Skill Breakdown (Was: Re:Re: Breaking Down Skill
These are the kind of examples I was thinking about
when we were discussing subskills several months back.
And in each of these examples, I don't see a problem
with a character having an extra skill, even if it is
at a low level. Why would the farmer's
son-turned-Mercahnt only know how to track animals,
and not the whole of the Ranger skill? It seems
precisely the kind of background that would suggest
having the complete skill set.

Troubador is inexpensive enough that I don't have any
problem with a character taking that skill in order to
play an instrument, even if he is really a Ranger by
trade. Likewise, where else would the Thief learn
disguise if not from a Troubador? There is nothing
that requires that they attain mastery of those
skills. It can remain a skill in which they have some
small ability.

Thief (and spy) do incorporate a number of abilities
that might more readily break out as subskills, I will
agree. But if the character is going to have more
than Rank 1 in that ability, I would generally expect
the character to have the whole skill.

There are certainly going to be some exceptions. The
examples above are such. But are the exceptions more
prevalent than the rule such that the rule should be
changed? I think the exceptions are rare, and the
rules work as they stand.

--RT

--- "John M. Kahane" <jkahane@comnet.ca> wrote:
[cut]
>
> When it comes right down to it, the DQ skill
> system is meant for
> those characters who want to be the wilderness
> guide, the thief, the
> alchemist, etc. However, the game system doesn't
> really allow a
> character to be a Ranger, and pick up some knowlege
> of playing a
> musical instrument or singing, unless one buys the
> Troubador skill. It
> doesn't allow the character who is a Thief to
> disguise themselves,
> unless one picks up Troubador skill. It doesn't
> reflect the farmer's
> son who learned to track animals when he was a
> child, and then grows up
> to be a Merchant, unless he buys Ranger. This is
> what I wanted - and
> still want - to allow for in the game, since it's a
> traditional kind of
> thing that is found in many fantasy literary works
> and in other rpgs.
> One could argue that the DQ skill system has become
> redundant over the
> years, simply because the game has not seen
> development (being a dead
> game system with publishers does this!), and most
> rpgs these days do
> seem to deal primarily with skills that are
> individual, not skills in
> groups.
>
> I'm not saying here that every sub-skill from
> the DQ skill
> groups should be broken out as single skills in this
> manner. I can't
> see an Assassin, Alchemist, or Healer (taking
> several that come to mind
> immediately) teaching certain of their abilities (if
> not al of them) to
> someone as individual skills, but the homeless kid
> growing up on the
> streets of the big fantasy city should be able to
> pickpocket and
> perhaps one or two other thieving abilities without
> having to know how
> to open safes or pick locks. I'm sure others would
> also find this to
> be true of some of the other skills, but this should
> be personal
> interpretation (as most GMing is anyway).


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Group: dqn-list Message: 1546 From: Rodger Thorm Date: 9/22/2003
Subject: Re: Wizardry?
I've never heard a peep from anyone who had anything
on this, and I think I've been trolling for online DQ
stuff, begging for Newsletter submissions and the
like, for as long as anyone has. Even when I was in
brief contact with Chris Klug, all of his DQ stuff was
long gone and probably never to be found.

I suspect that there were only a very few copies of
this that went to a couple of playtest campaigns, and
that none of those players are still active in DQ.
I'd love to see these someday, but I doubt they'll
ever surface.

--Rodger

--- Steven Wiles <mortdemuerte@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I was skimming through the Ares articlese that JohnR
> has so graciously provided the group recently, and
> was
> stopped cold by something I saw in
> DesignersNotesAres11.pdf:
>
> "A decision still must be reached as to the addition
> of three more Colleges still in the design state �
> Wizardry, White Magics, and Faerie Magics.
> Blindtest
> copies have gone out and we are awaiting the
> results."
>
> First off, I find it very amusing that I have seen
> so
> many people do versions of a College of White Magic.
>
> Clearly, even the original designers perceived a
> lack.
> Moreover, I've seen a version of Fae Magics. If
> the
> creators of these versions are reading this, were
> any
> of you influenced by this article to write these
> colleges, or were you completely unaware of the
> coincidence?
>
> My main question can be summed up in one word:
> Wizardry!? I would love to know what that College
> was
> supposed to be about. My impression is that
> Enchantments and Ensorcellments was always meant to
> emulate the classic Merlin-style wizard. What could
> this Wizardry have been?
>
> My secondary question is: Blindtest copies? Oh,
> what
> a treasure of gaming archeology it would be to dig
> one
> of those up! Does anyone out there have any leads
> on
> this, however slim?
>
> Mort
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site
> design software
> http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Group: dqn-list Message: 1547 From: D. Cameron King Date: 9/22/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
Steven Wiles wrote:

>The next question I have is whether people allow an
>Adept to dismiss his own spells automatically, or at
>least dispel them with a counterspell? As written,
>even the caster can't get rid of the effects of a
>spell once its cast.

We always permitted the caster to dispel his own
spells with the appropriate counterspell. There is
some explicit support for this in the rules (though
it is only in the context of dismissing summoned
entities).

-Cameron King

_________________________________________________________________
Share your photos without swamping your Inbox. Get Hotmail Extra Storage
today! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es
Group: dqn-list Message: 1548 From: D. Cameron King Date: 9/22/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
Steven Wiles wrote:

>I've always felt that it was too difficult to dispel
>spells. The only means to do so I'm familiar with is
>the Ritual of Dissipation in Namings, but even that
>ritual takes an hour. Obviously, this is no help in
>quenching an enemy's Weapon of Flame in combat or
>lifting a spell of darkness from an area, spells which
>for the most part don't last an hour anyway. The
>Namer's ability to counteract spells is entirely
>prophylactic and never curative. I speak from the
>bitter experience of having had an entire party
>trapped in Earthen Hands for eight -long- hours, with
>the realization that even if we had had a Namer
>present, it would've taken him an hour to do anything.
>
>Does anyone else find this to be a problem? Do people
>think that if Namers could -both- prevent spellcasting
>with counterspells -and- undo spells after they came
>into effect, it would be too crippling for
>spellcasters in general?

Actually, I do. Because Namers can loose counterspells
without preparing them, they already have an advantage
over other Adepts in combat. When the non-Namer
begins preparing a spell, the Namer can simply place an
area-effect counterspell over him, thus "interrupting"
his spellcasting. (And then, when the non-Namer moves
out of the counterspell's area, the Namer can go occupy
it and get the increased Magic Resistance!)

-Cameron King

_________________________________________________________________
Instant message in style with MSN Messenger 6.0. Download it now FREE!
http://msnmessenger-download.com
Group: dqn-list Message: 1549 From: Davis, John R Date: 9/23/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
Because Namers can loose counterspells
without preparing them, they already have an advantage
over other Adepts in combat.

Can they prepare and fire a counterspell all in one pulse? where is that
rule hidden away? we have anamer in the party I have been GMing DQ on and
off to for the last 10 years...he is gonna be a tad miffed if this rule
exists?

JohnD


*********************************************************************
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
*********************************************************************
Group: dqn-list Message: 1550 From: dbarrass_2000 Date: 9/23/2003
Subject: Re: Wizardry?
--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, Rodger Thorm <rodger_thorm@y...>
wrote:
> I've never heard a peep from anyone who had anything
> on this, and I think I've been trolling for online DQ
> stuff, begging for Newsletter submissions and the
> like, for as long as anyone has. Even when I was in
> brief contact with Chris Klug, all of his DQ stuff was
> long gone and probably never to be found.
>
> I suspect that there were only a very few copies of
> this that went to a couple of playtest campaigns, and
> that none of those players are still active in DQ.
> I'd love to see these someday, but I doubt they'll
> ever surface.
>
> --Rodger

I suppose the answer to this is to make our own :--) anybody got
some role-models?


> --- Steven Wiles <mortdemuerte@y...> wrote:
> > I was skimming through the Ares articlese that JohnR
> > has so graciously provided the group recently, and
> > was
> > stopped cold by something I saw in
> > DesignersNotesAres11.pdf:
> >
> > "A decision still must be reached as to the addition
> > of three more Colleges still in the design state —
> > Wizardry, White Magics, and Faerie Magics.
> > Blindtest
> > copies have gone out and we are awaiting the
> > results."
> >
> > First off, I find it very amusing that I have seen
> > so
> > many people do versions of a College of White Magic.

There a plenty to choose from

> > Clearly, even the original designers perceived a
> > lack.
> > Moreover, I've seen a version of Fae Magics.

These are excellent Thanks to John Kahane I tried to do my own, but
adopted this college as soon as I saw it.

David
Group: dqn-list Message: 1551 From: Davis, John R Date: 9/23/2003
Subject: Re: Wizardry?
Was there even a hint as to what 'Wizardry' entailed?? What sort of magic
does DQ still lack? Does it really lack any? I cant quite think what is
missing to be honest!

JohnD

-----Original Message-----
From: dbarrass_2000 [mailto:david.barrass@ed.ac.uk]
Sent: 23 September 2003 10:34
To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Wizardry?


--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, Rodger Thorm <rodger_thorm@y...>
wrote:
> I've never heard a peep from anyone who had anything
> on this, and I think I've been trolling for online DQ
> stuff, begging for Newsletter submissions and the
> like, for as long as anyone has. Even when I was in
> brief contact with Chris Klug, all of his DQ stuff was
> long gone and probably never to be found.
>
> I suspect that there were only a very few copies of
> this that went to a couple of playtest campaigns, and
> that none of those players are still active in DQ.
> I'd love to see these someday, but I doubt they'll
> ever surface.
>
> --Rodger

I suppose the answer to this is to make our own :--) anybody got
some role-models?


> --- Steven Wiles <mortdemuerte@y...> wrote:
> > I was skimming through the Ares articlese that JohnR
> > has so graciously provided the group recently, and
> > was
> > stopped cold by something I saw in
> > DesignersNotesAres11.pdf:
> >
> > "A decision still must be reached as to the addition
> > of three more Colleges still in the design state -
> > Wizardry, White Magics, and Faerie Magics.
> > Blindtest
> > copies have gone out and we are awaiting the
> > results."
> >
> > First off, I find it very amusing that I have seen
> > so
> > many people do versions of a College of White Magic.

There a plenty to choose from

> > Clearly, even the original designers perceived a
> > lack.
> > Moreover, I've seen a version of Fae Magics.

These are excellent Thanks to John Kahane I tried to do my own, but
adopted this college as soon as I saw it.

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
*********************************************************************
Group: dqn-list Message: 1552 From: terryintransit Date: 9/23/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Davis, John R" <jrda@b...> wrote:
>
> Because Namers can loose counterspells
> without preparing them, they already have an advantage
> over other Adepts in combat.
>
> Can they prepare and fire a counterspell all in one pulse? where is
that
> rule hidden away? we have anamer in the party I have been GMing DQ
on and
> off to for the last 10 years...he is gonna be a tad miffed if this
rule
> exists?

Can refer to to the source, as the version of rules we use have
changed much over time, but the no prepare for conterspells is the
way we play them as well. Makes Namers pretty tough against magical
opponents (if they have the counterspell at a good rank of course)
Group: dqn-list Message: 1553 From: John Carcutt Date: 9/23/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
Re: [DQN-list] Re: More on Names and Namers
--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Davis, John R" <jrda@b...> wrote:
>
>   Because Namers can loose counterspells
> without preparing them, they already have an advantage
> over other Adepts in combat.
>
> Can they prepare and fire a counterspell all in one pulse? where is
that
> rule hidden away? we have anamer in the party I have been GMing DQ
on and
> off to for the last 10 years...he is gonna be a tad miffed if this
rule
> exists?

Can refer to to the source, as the version of rules we use have
changed much over time, but the no prepare for conterspells is the
way we play them as well. Makes Namers pretty tough against magical
opponents (if they have the counterspell at a good rank of course)

I played a Namer for a number of years. We always treated the casting of counter spell the same as any other spell according the to 2nd edition rules. If you check [31.3] you will see the rules specifically state “A counterspell is cast in exactly the same manner as any other type of spell, ...”

This makes perfect sense, as I can think of no reason why a counterspell could be exempt from preparation. Now my character did gain quite a few ranks in the investment ritual and had more than one counterspell invested in an object or two.

John (aka:Axl)

Group: dqn-list Message: 1554 From: Stephen Lister Date: 9/23/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
Rules Section 21.4, second sentence:

Namers can loose a counterspell without preparing it.

Stephen Lister

"Davis, John R" <jrda@bgs.ac.uk> wrote on 23/09/2003 18:45:00:

>
> Because Namers can loose counterspells
> without preparing them, they already have an advantage
> over other Adepts in combat.
>
> Can they prepare and fire a counterspell all in one pulse? where is that
> rule hidden away? we have anamer in the party I have been GMing DQ on
and
> off to for the last 10 years...he is gonna be a tad miffed if this rule
> exists?
>
> JohnD
>
Group: dqn-list Message: 1555 From: Bruce Probst Date: 9/24/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 10:39:04 -0400, John Carcutt <jcarcutt@bellsouth.net>
wrote:

>> This makes perfect sense, as I can think of no reason why a counterspell could
>> be exempt from preparation.

In general there is no reason. In the specific case, however, Namers are
exempt from the need to prepare counterspells before casting, rules section
[39.4] in 2nd edition onwards.

This rule was *not* present in 1st edition, so far as I can determine.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au ICQ 6563830
Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 SCA #80160
"Well there it is. Spankings all around, then."
ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ
Group: dqn-list Message: 1556 From: Stephen Lister Date: 9/24/2003
Subject: Re: More on Names and Namers
Bruce's reference is more likely right than mine - I'm working off the
heavily edited version I happen to have available here at the moment.

Stephen Lister


Bruce Probst <bprobst@netspace.net.au> wrote on 24/09/2003 16:17:43:

> On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 10:39:04 -0400, John Carcutt
<jcarcutt@bellsouth.net>
> wrote:
>
> >> This makes perfect sense, as I can think of no reason why a
> counterspell could
> >> be exempt from preparation.
>
> In general there is no reason. In the specific case, however, Namers
are
> exempt from the need to prepare counterspells before casting, rules
section
> [39.4] in 2nd edition onwards.
>
> This rule was *not* present in 1st edition, so far as I can determine.
>