> To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
> From: Koraq@yahoo.com
> Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:40:20 +0000
> Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Becoming a Magical Adept after initial play
>
>
>
> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@...> wrote:
> >
> > Here's a question for the community.
> >
> > What requirements, beyond minimum MA, do you put on characters wishing to become an Adept of a College?
> >
> > How much time and experience do you require them to put into learning their college at the minimum level?
> >
> > Experience can be basically calculated as the sum of all the general knowledge spells and rituals being learned to rank 0. How about time, beyond that required to learn the GK?
> >
> > Do you require them to spend extra time as apprentices for years before being given all their minimum training?
> >
>
> Since I'm all new to the game I wont talk from DQ experience, but I'd say you should never punish players for taking a specific path or profession. Make it just as hard to achieve as any other change or heart, like suddenly becoming a warrior.
>
> I think there was an article in Dragon Magazine, archived in the files are, about making the Warrior a bit more interesting by quantifyign magical training in EP and time. Using that as a baseline might work.
>
> /andreas
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dqn-list/
>
> <*> Your email settings:
> Individual Email | Traditional
>
> <*> To change settings online go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dqn-list/join
> (Yahoo! ID required)
>
> <*> To change settings via email:
> dqn-list-digest@yahoogroups.com
> dqn-list-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
>
> <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> dqn-list-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>

----- Original Message -----

From: Christopher Cole

To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 6:24 AM

Subject: RE: [DQN-list] Re: Becoming a Magical Adept after initial play

How about requiring a special event to awaken the magic potential in the character? Something to justify the character now spending XP to raise the MA from 5? I'd seriously consider such a requirement so that the players have to think twice about their initial choice.   Christopher Cole, The World's Tallest Dwarf --- On Thu, 1/28/10, D. Cameron King <monarchy2000@hotmail.com> wrote: From: D. Cameron King <monarchy2000@hotmail.com> Subject: RE: [DQN-list] Re: Becoming a Magical Adept after initial play To: "DQ Listserv" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com> Date: Thursday, January 28, 2010, 4:16 AM   The article was "The Warrior Alternative, " by Craig Barrett, in Dragon #86.  And it's crap.  Barrett completely fails to consider the benefit of getting to put only 5 Characteristic Points in your MA at character generation, so his estimate of the value of membership in a College of Magic is wildly inflated.   The only rule I can recall about joining a College of Magic is [34.5], which requires six months of training.  I would not require anything more than that, no XP, no money, no extra time as an apprentice, etc.   -Cameron   > To: dqn-list@yahoogroup s.com > From: Koraq@yahoo. com > Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:40:20 +0000 > Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Becoming a Magical Adept after initial play > > > > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroup s.com, "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@ ...> wrote: > > > > Here's a question for the community. > > > > What requirements, beyond minimum MA, do you put on characters wishing to become an Adept of a College? > > > > How much time and experience do you require them to put into learning their college at the minimum level? > > > > Experience can be basically calculated as the sum of all the general knowledge spells and rituals being learned to rank 0. How about time, beyond that required to learn the GK? > > > > Do you require them to spend extra time as apprentices for years before being given all their minimum training? > > > > Since I'm all new to the game I wont talk from DQ experience, but I'd say you should never punish players for taking a specific path or profession. Make it just as hard to achieve as any other change or heart, like suddenly becoming a warrior. > > I think there was an article in Dragon Magazine, archived in the files are, about making the Warrior a bit more interesting by quantifyign magical training in EP and time. Using that as a baseline might work. > > /andreas > > > > ------------ --------- --------- ------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/dqn- list/ > > <*> Your email settings: > Individual Email | Traditional > > <*> To change settings online go to: > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/dqn- list/join > (Yahoo! ID required) > > <*> To change settings via email: > dqn-list-digest@ yahoogroups. com > dqn-list-fullfeatur ed@yahoogroups. com > > <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > dqn-list-unsubscrib e@yahoogroups. com > > <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: > http://docs. yahoo.com/ info/terms/ > Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. Get it now.

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hitchens" <makofan@yahoo.com>
To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2010 6:05 AM
Subject: [DQN-list] Warrior Alternative


> IMO, Warrior Alternative is not needed. You get a boost (+30 I think?) to
> magic resistance if you do not belong to a college. With a starting
> Willpower of 15, this gives you a 45% resistance. But wait, that is better
> than you think! Just do an Active Resistance when being targetted by a
> spell. The opposing mage will have 45% subtracting from their cast chance.
> Can you say "backfire"? Also, because you are not spending gobs of XP on
> spells, you can take all the interesting classes AND boost Fatigue into
> the stratosphere (I don't think FT is capped at 25?)
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

----- Original Message -----

From: Christopher Cole

To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, January 29, 2010 2:08 PM

Subject: Re: [DQN-list] Re: Becoming a Magical Adept after initial play

Jeffery, I think you misread or misunderstood my comment. I'm suggesting something like a quest or someting similar ro allow them to start buying up their MA. Something like the old AD&D bit of a secial event needed to go into Epic-levels.   Christopher Cole The World's Tallest Dwarf --- On Thu, 1/28/10, Jeffery K. McGonagill <igmod@comcast.net> wrote: From: Jeffery K. McGonagill <igmod@comcast.net> Subject: Re: [DQN-list] Re: Becoming a Magical Adept after initial play To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, January 28, 2010, 2:38 PM    They are already spending 5000 xp per point.   ~Jeffery~ ----- Original Message ----- From: Christopher Cole To: dqn-list@yahoogroup s.com Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 6:24 AM Subject: RE: [DQN-list] Re: Becoming a Magical Adept after initial play How about requiring a special event to awaken the magic potential in the character? Something to justify the character now spending XP to raise the MA from 5? I'd seriously consider such a requirement so that the players have to think twice about their initial choice.   Christopher Cole, The World's Tallest Dwarf --- On Thu, 1/28/10, D. Cameron King <monarchy2000@ hotmail.com> wrote: From: D. Cameron King <monarchy2000@ hotmail.com> Subject: RE: [DQN-list] Re: Becoming a Magical Adept after initial play To: "DQ Listserv" <dqn-list@yahoogroup s.com> Date: Thursday, January 28, 2010, 4:16 AM   The article was "The Warrior Alternative, " by Craig Barrett, in Dragon #86.  And it's crap.  Barrett completely fails to consider the benefit of getting to put only 5 Characteristic Points in your MA at character generation, so his estimate of the value of membership in a College of Magic is wildly inflated.   The only rule I can recall about joining a College of Magic is [34.5], which requires six months of training.  I would not require anything more than that, no XP, no money, no extra time as an apprentice, etc.   -Cameron   > To: dqn-list@yahoogroup s.com > From: Koraq@yahoo. com > Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 10:40:20 +0000 > Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Becoming a Magical Adept after initial play > > > > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroup s.com, "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@ ...> wrote: > > > > Here's a question for the community. > > > > What requirements, beyond minimum MA, do you put on characters wishing to become an Adept of a College? > > > > How much time and experience do you require them to put into learning their college at the minimum level? > > > > Experience can be basically calculated as the sum of all the general knowledge spells and rituals being learned to rank 0. How about time, beyond that required to learn the GK? > > > > Do you require them to spend extra time as apprentices for years before being given all their minimum training? > > > > Since I'm all new to the game I wont talk from DQ experience, but I'd say you should never punish players for taking a specific path or profession. Make it just as hard to achieve as any other change or heart, like suddenly becoming a warrior. > > I think there was an article in Dragon Magazine, archived in the files are, about making the Warrior a bit more interesting by quantifyign magical training in EP and time. Using that as a baseline might work. > > /andreas > > > > ------------ --------- --------- ------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/dqn- list/ > > <*> Your email settings: > Individual Email | Traditional > > <*> To change settings online go to: > http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/dqn- list/join > (Yahoo! ID required) > > <*> To change settings via email: > dqn-list-digest@ yahoogroups. com > dqn-list-fullfeatur ed@yahoogroups. com > > <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > dqn-list-unsubscrib e@yahoogroups. com > > <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: > http://docs. yahoo.com/ info/terms/ > Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. Get it now.

----- Original Message -----
From: "shawng" <shawn4186@msn.com>
To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2010 4:03 PM
Subject: [DQN-list] Question for those who play Adepts


>I thought I would delurk for a minute and ask a question. Please do not
>take this as a critique of anyones playing style or houserules. By way of
>background let me say I have played this game off and on since 1982 and
>have rarely played a mage because I found it difficult. But as I read these
>posts I seem to see alot of people that have an entire party consisting of
>mages and/or fighter mages, so I wonder if people are taking into account
>rule 34.7 which states a character must have the Magic Aptitude to account
>for the General Knowledge spells and rituals. Once you add in the 2
>counterspells, Ritual Spell Preperation, and Ritual Purification, I have
>always thought that to get my MA high enough I would have to spread myself
>too thin in points for the other characteristics.
>
> Furthermore rule 34.6 says you can only know a number of spells and
> rituals equal to your MA at rank 5 or lower. If you want to know a number
> of spells and rituals that total more than your MA you have to get the
> ones you know to rank 6. I always thought this took to long, especially if
> you have to put exp points in spells you really don't use that much just
> to get them to rank 6, so you can start learning new spells
>
> I have not quoted those rules word for word but most people here know what
> I'm talking about.
>
> Anyway, just wanted to see what others thought about those two rules.
> Thanks...
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

>
> I thought I would delurk for a minute and ask a question. Please do not take this as a critique of anyones playing style or houserules. By way of background let me say I have played this game off and on since 1982 and have rarely played a mage because I found it difficult. But as I read these posts I seem to see alot of people that have an entire party consisting of mages and/or fighter mages, so I wonder if people are taking into account rule 34.7 which states a character must have the Magic Aptitude to account for the General Knowledge spells and rituals. Once you add in the 2 counterspells, Ritual Spell Preperation, and Ritual Purification, I have always thought that to get my MA high enough I would have to spread myself too thin in points for the other characteristics.
>
> Furthermore rule 34.6 says you can only know a number of spells and rituals equal to your MA at rank 5 or lower. If you want to know a number of spells and rituals that total more than your MA you have to get the ones you know to rank 6. I always thought this took to long, especially if you have to put exp points in spells you really don't use that much just to get them to rank 6, so you can start learning new spells
>
> I have not quoted those rules word for word but most people here know what I'm talking about.
>
> Anyway, just wanted to see what others thought about those two rules.
> Thanks...
>

>
>
>
> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "shawng" <shawn4186@> wrote:
> >
> > I thought I would delurk for a minute and ask a question. Please do not take this as a critique of anyones playing style or houserules. By way of background let me say I have played this game off and on since 1982 and have rarely played a mage because I found it difficult. But as I read these posts I seem to see alot of people that have an entire party consisting of mages and/or fighter mages, so I wonder if people are taking into account rule 34.7 which states a character must have the Magic Aptitude to account for the General Knowledge spells and rituals. Once you add in the 2 counterspells, Ritual Spell Preperation, and Ritual Purification, I have always thought that to get my MA high enough I would have to spread myself too thin in points for the other characteristics.
> >
> > Furthermore rule 34.6 says you can only know a number of spells and rituals equal to your MA at rank 5 or lower. If you want to know a number of spells and rituals that total more than your MA you have to get the ones you know to rank 6. I always thought this took to long, especially if you have to put exp points in spells you really don't use that much just to get them to rank 6, so you can start learning new spells
> >
> > I have not quoted those rules word for word but most people here know what I'm talking about.
> >
> > Anyway, just wanted to see what others thought about those two rules.
> > Thanks...
> >
>
> The entire recent discussion is SO strange to me. I've NEVER played or GM'ed a game of DQ in which any characters were NOT in some College. It always seemed to me and my friends that what made DQ stand out, especially from D&D, was the lack of classes. What other FRPG lets you role-play a merchant or a spy? And if you just want to play a Grunt, why play DQ? DragonQuest is the game you play when you want depth, not when you think of your characters as The Fighter or The Adept or The Thief.
> Sorry if this offends anyone, but I just can't believe what I'm hearing in a DQ forum.
>

On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 10:37 AM, bobconstans <bobconstans@yahoo.ca> wrote:

 

--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "shawng" <shawn4186@...> wrote:
>
> I thought I would delurk for a minute and ask a question. Please do not take this as a critique of anyones playing style or houserules. By way of background let me say I have played this game off and on since 1982 and have rarely played a mage because I found it difficult. But as I read these posts I seem to see alot of people that have an entire party consisting of mages and/or fighter mages, so I wonder if people are taking into account rule 34.7 which states a character must have the Magic Aptitude to account for the General Knowledge spells and rituals. Once you add in the 2 counterspells, Ritual Spell Preperation, and Ritual Purification, I have always thought that to get my MA high enough I would have to spread myself too thin in points for the other characteristics.
>
> Furthermore rule 34.6 says you can only know a number of spells and rituals equal to your MA at rank 5 or lower. If you want to know a number of spells and rituals that total more than your MA you have to get the ones you know to rank 6. I always thought this took to long, especially if you have to put exp points in spells you really don't use that much just to get them to rank 6, so you can start learning new spells
>
> I have not quoted those rules word for word but most people here know what I'm talking about.
>
> Anyway, just wanted to see what others thought about those two rules.
> Thanks...
>

The entire recent discussion is SO strange to me. I've NEVER played or GM'ed a game of DQ in which any characters were NOT in some College. It always seemed to me and my friends that what made DQ stand out, especially from D&D, was the lack of classes. What other FRPG lets you role-play a merchant or a spy? And if you just want to play a Grunt, why play DQ? DragonQuest is the game you play when you want depth, not when you think of your characters as The Fighter or The Adept or The Thief.
Sorry if this offends anyone, but I just can't believe what I'm hearing in a DQ forum.

----- Original Message -----
From: "J" <jmattheweiler@yahoo.com>
To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2010 5:56 PM
Subject: [DQN-list] Restrictions on mages


> I've always ignored the three major restrictions on mages:
> (1) Spell ranks cost the base cost per rank rather than (new rankxbase
> cost). This is the only way I can see how a mage can get to decent
> success chances without outrageous amounts of experience.
>
> (2) You can learn as many spells as you want to burn EXP on, whatever your
> MA might be (assuming its high enough to be a mage at all).
>
> (3) You can learn spells from other colleges - your college just provides
> your 'home base' of concentrated expertise when the character is
> generated.
>
> I am sure some people will be mortified by this because it sounds so
> unbalancing. But, I have never had a player who bothered being a munchkin
> about it, and the rules as written just felt un-necessarily restrictive.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

>

> (3) You can learn spells from other colleges - your college just
> provides your 'home base' of concentrated expertise when the character
> is generated.
>

> I am sure some people will be mortified by this because it sounds so
> unbalancing. But, I have never had a player who bothered being a
> munchkin about it, and the rules as written just felt un-necessarily
> restrictive.

--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, Lev Lafayette <lev@...> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2010-02-01 at 01:56 +0000, J wrote:
> >
>
> > (3) You can learn spells from other colleges - your college just
> > provides your 'home base' of concentrated expertise when the character
> > is generated.
> >
>
> Good work. It's always been like saying you can't take a double major.
>
> > I am sure some people will be mortified by this because it sounds so
> > unbalancing. But, I have never had a player who bothered being a
> > munchkin about it, and the rules as written just felt un-necessarily
> > restrictive.
>
> If PCs have access to it, so do NPCs...
>

>
> I've always ignored the three major restrictions on mages:
> (1) Spell ranks cost the base cost per rank rather than (new rankxbase cost). This is the only way I can see how a mage can get to decent success chances without outrageous amounts of experience.
>

> (2) You can learn as many spells as you want to burn EXP on, whatever your MA might be (assuming its high enough to be a mage at all).
>
> (3) You can learn spells from other colleges - your college just provides your 'home base' of concentrated expertise when the character is generated.
>

> I am sure some people will be mortified by this because it sounds so unbalancing. But, I have never had a player who bothered being a munchkin about it, and the rules as written just felt un-necessarily restrictive.
>

----- Original Message -----
From: "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@yahoo.com>
To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 4:05 PM
Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Restrictions on mages


>
>
> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "J" <jmattheweiler@...> wrote:
>>
>> I've always ignored the three major restrictions on mages:
>> (1) Spell ranks cost the base cost per rank rather than (new rankxbase
>> cost). This is the only way I can see how a mage can get to decent
>> success chances without outrageous amounts of experience.
>>
>
> I've GMed several campaigns that lasted more than 50 sessions. In these
> campaigns I've never seen an adept have trouble raising spells with the
> bc*rank rule. Since it only takes 1 day * rank to train the spell, the
> mages always have time to generate EPs by practicing while the non-mages
> are spending 2 weeks * rank training up weapons.
>
> While one character is training to gain rank 6 in a weapon, an adept at
> mercenary level can generate 1170 experience points -and- have time to
> train rank 6 in a spell. That's practically as much experience as for a
> successful gaming session.
>
>> (2) You can learn as many spells as you want to burn EXP on, whatever
>> your MA might be (assuming its high enough to be a mage at all).
>>
>> (3) You can learn spells from other colleges - your college just provides
>> your 'home base' of concentrated expertise when the character is
>> generated.
>>
>
> The group I game with, regardless which of us GMs, has always enforced the
> rank 6 rule. Most of the munchkinism tended to center around mind college
> adepts with MA scores of 11.
>
> If we had allowed cherry-picking of spells, though, I think the problem
> would ... no, I KNOW one of the players in particular would have always
> played a Namer. Learn spells from any college -and- be able to cast all
> counterspells without preparation? And able to start with an MA as low as
> 5 if he really wanted to give himself the stats for a really good weapon?
> Yeah. That house rule would have been abused in the extreme in our group.
>
>> I am sure some people will be mortified by this because it sounds so
>> unbalancing. But, I have never had a player who bothered being a munchkin
>> about it, and the rules as written just felt un-necessarily restrictive.
>>
>
> That's why they make chocolate ice cream, because not everyone likes
> vanilla. Instead of finding the rules restrictive, I found they allowed
> each adept in the group to fill a distinct role instead of all of them
> just being thought of generically as mages.
>
> I did use the Thieves' World variant rules for magic in the games I GMed,
> which allows for learning more than one college. I never had a player
> seriously focus on trying to gain that second college, though.
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "koraq" <Koraq@...> wrote:
>
>
> Is there a summary of all the changes somewhere? There seem to be a few in that Bantam edition.
>
> -andreas
>

>
>
>
> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "shawng" <shawn4186@> wrote:
> >
> > I thought I would delurk for a minute and ask a question. Please do not take this as a critique of anyones playing style or houserules. By way of background let me say I have played this game off and on since 1982 and have rarely played a mage because I found it difficult. But as I read these posts I seem to see alot of people that have an entire party consisting of mages and/or fighter mages, so I wonder if people are taking into account rule 34.7 which states a character must have the Magic Aptitude to account for the General Knowledge spells and rituals. Once you add in the 2 counterspells, Ritual Spell Preperation, and Ritual Purification, I have always thought that to get my MA high enough I would have to spread myself too thin in points for the other characteristics.
> >
> > Furthermore rule 34.6 says you can only know a number of spells and rituals equal to your MA at rank 5 or lower. If you want to know a number of spells and rituals that total more than your MA you have to get the ones you know to rank 6. I always thought this took to long, especially if you have to put exp points in spells you really don't use that much just to get them to rank 6, so you can start learning new spells
> >
> > I have not quoted those rules word for word but most people here know what I'm talking about.
> >
> > Anyway, just wanted to see what others thought about those two rules.
> > Thanks...
> >
>
> The entire recent discussion is SO strange to me. I've NEVER played or GM'ed a game of DQ in which any characters were NOT in some College. It always seemed to me and my friends that what made DQ stand out, especially from D&D, was the lack of classes. What other FRPG lets you role-play a merchant or a spy? And if you just want to play a Grunt, why play DQ? DragonQuest is the game you play when you want depth, not when you think of your characters as The Fighter or The Adept or The Thief.
> Sorry if this offends anyone, but I just can't believe what I'm hearing in a DQ forum.
>

--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "dbarrass_2000" <david.barrass@...> wrote:
>
> I allow multiple colleges with restrictions
>
> 1) the colleges are just ways of teaching magic, so if you can find someone to teach you spells of a different college that's fine
>
> 2) The differences between alignments of magic are intrinsic, you can't have spells from different alignments
>
> 3) In Elementals you can't have spells from the opposing college, so for example no fire and water combinations
>
> David
>
> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, Lev Lafayette <lev@> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 2010-02-01 at 01:56 +0000, J wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > (3) You can learn spells from other colleges - your college just
> > > provides your 'home base' of concentrated expertise when the character
> > > is generated.
> > >
> >
> > Good work. It's always been like saying you can't take a double major.
> >
> > > I am sure some people will be mortified by this because it sounds so
> > > unbalancing. But, I have never had a player who bothered being a
> > > munchkin about it, and the rules as written just felt un-necessarily
> > > restrictive.
> >
> > If PCs have access to it, so do NPCs...
> >
>

--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffery K. McGonagill" <igmod@...> wrote:
>
> As a follow up to an earlier post I made.
>
> As a Hero it takes only two adventures to have enough experience points to
> take a 250 multiple spell to Rank 6. Charging only the base cost at each
> rank, the same experience points will take the same spell to Rank 20.
>
> ~Jeffery~
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@...>
> To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 4:05 PM
> Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Restrictions on mages
>
>
> >
> >
> > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "J" <jmattheweiler@> wrote:
> >>
> >> I've always ignored the three major restrictions on mages:
> >> (1) Spell ranks cost the base cost per rank rather than (new rankxbase
> >> cost). This is the only way I can see how a mage can get to decent
> >> success chances without outrageous amounts of experience.
> >>
> >
> > I've GMed several campaigns that lasted more than 50 sessions. In these
> > campaigns I've never seen an adept have trouble raising spells with the
> > bc*rank rule. Since it only takes 1 day * rank to train the spell, the
> > mages always have time to generate EPs by practicing while the non-mages
> > are spending 2 weeks * rank training up weapons.
> >
> > While one character is training to gain rank 6 in a weapon, an adept at
> > mercenary level can generate 1170 experience points -and- have time to
> > train rank 6 in a spell. That's practically as much experience as for a
> > successful gaming session.
> >
> >> (2) You can learn as many spells as you want to burn EXP on, whatever
> >> your MA might be (assuming its high enough to be a mage at all).
> >>
> >> (3) You can learn spells from other colleges - your college just provides
> >> your 'home base' of concentrated expertise when the character is
> >> generated.
> >>
> >
> > The group I game with, regardless which of us GMs, has always enforced the
> > rank 6 rule. Most of the munchkinism tended to center around mind college
> > adepts with MA scores of 11.
> >
> > If we had allowed cherry-picking of spells, though, I think the problem
> > would ... no, I KNOW one of the players in particular would have always
> > played a Namer. Learn spells from any college -and- be able to cast all
> > counterspells without preparation? And able to start with an MA as low as
> > 5 if he really wanted to give himself the stats for a really good weapon?
> > Yeah. That house rule would have been abused in the extreme in our group.
> >
> >> I am sure some people will be mortified by this because it sounds so
> >> unbalancing. But, I have never had a player who bothered being a munchkin
> >> about it, and the rules as written just felt un-necessarily restrictive.
> >>
> >
> > That's why they make chocolate ice cream, because not everyone likes
> > vanilla. Instead of finding the rules restrictive, I found they allowed
> > each adept in the group to fill a distinct role instead of all of them
> > just being thought of generically as mages.
> >
> > I did use the Thieves' World variant rules for magic in the games I GMed,
> > which allows for learning more than one college. I never had a player
> > seriously focus on trying to gain that second college, though.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hitchens" <makofan@yahoo.com>
To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 10:53 AM
Subject: [DQN-list] Mage restrictions


> One of the problems with mage training is I believe that you must have
> attempted to cast a spell at least once, each time you want to train a
> rank in it - from 161.1
>
> "A
> character must have attempted an ability or skill on the adventure
> previous to
> a gain in Rank in that ability or skill.". With many spells having low
> base chances (1%, 5%, 20%) the chance of a backfire is great. Sooner or
> later all my mages have rolled a 96-100 (I think that' s it) on the
> backfire table and permanently fried their brains. And that happens
> eventually, even if you allow the mage 10 hours of concentration before
> casting the spell
>
> For MA needed for a College, there are also the two General Knowledge
> Rituals: Ritual of Purification, Spell Preparation Ritual, and the two
> General Knowledge Counterspells (Counterspell General and Counterspell
> Special) that need to be added to the qualifications.
>
> Another drawback of magic is you can not kill somebody with one shot. If
> you blast somebody with a forcebolt and get triple damage on a lucky
> strike chance, you may do more damage than their fatigue and endurance
> combined, but by rule you can't affect both fatigue and endurance with a
> magic spell
>
> Please let me know if I have been misinterpreting these all these years!
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

----- Original Message -----
From: "roznoz" <roznoz@yahoo.com>
To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 2:58 PM
Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Restrictions on mages


> I've found that acquiring the appropriate experience points was only half
> the battle. The real limiting factor was successfully casting the spell
> in action before raising rank.
>
> I think the longest lasting group of characters I've ever been a part of
> might have played 15 adventures tops, and that number is probably high;
> usually they slink off into retirement after 8 or 10 adventures. As such,
> we rarely had adepts surpassing rank 10 in any particular spell; rank 20
> was never a consideration. PC adepts in our world have generally just
> been dabblers in the magical arts; truly powerful adepts are solely
> NPCs... and are always deranged.
>
> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffery K. McGonagill" <igmod@...>
> wrote:
>>
>> As a follow up to an earlier post I made.
>>
>> As a Hero it takes only two adventures to have enough experience points
>> to
>> take a 250 multiple spell to Rank 6. Charging only the base cost at each
>> rank, the same experience points will take the same spell to Rank 20.
>>
>> ~Jeffery~
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@...>
>> To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 4:05 PM
>> Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Restrictions on mages
>>
>>
>> >
>> >
>> > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "J" <jmattheweiler@> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I've always ignored the three major restrictions on mages:
>> >> (1) Spell ranks cost the base cost per rank rather than (new rankxbase
>> >> cost). This is the only way I can see how a mage can get to decent
>> >> success chances without outrageous amounts of experience.
>> >>
>> >
>> > I've GMed several campaigns that lasted more than 50 sessions. In these
>> > campaigns I've never seen an adept have trouble raising spells with the
>> > bc*rank rule. Since it only takes 1 day * rank to train the spell, the
>> > mages always have time to generate EPs by practicing while the
>> > non-mages
>> > are spending 2 weeks * rank training up weapons.
>> >
>> > While one character is training to gain rank 6 in a weapon, an adept at
>> > mercenary level can generate 1170 experience points -and- have time to
>> > train rank 6 in a spell. That's practically as much experience as for a
>> > successful gaming session.
>> >
>> >> (2) You can learn as many spells as you want to burn EXP on, whatever
>> >> your MA might be (assuming its high enough to be a mage at all).
>> >>
>> >> (3) You can learn spells from other colleges - your college just
>> >> provides
>> >> your 'home base' of concentrated expertise when the character is
>> >> generated.
>> >>
>> >
>> > The group I game with, regardless which of us GMs, has always enforced
>> > the
>> > rank 6 rule. Most of the munchkinism tended to center around mind
>> > college
>> > adepts with MA scores of 11.
>> >
>> > If we had allowed cherry-picking of spells, though, I think the problem
>> > would ... no, I KNOW one of the players in particular would have always
>> > played a Namer. Learn spells from any college -and- be able to cast all
>> > counterspells without preparation? And able to start with an MA as low
>> > as
>> > 5 if he really wanted to give himself the stats for a really good
>> > weapon?
>> > Yeah. That house rule would have been abused in the extreme in our
>> > group.
>> >
>> >> I am sure some people will be mortified by this because it sounds so
>> >> unbalancing. But, I have never had a player who bothered being a
>> >> munchkin
>> >> about it, and the rules as written just felt un-necessarily
>> >> restrictive.
>> >>
>> >
>> > That's why they make chocolate ice cream, because not everyone likes
>> > vanilla. Instead of finding the rules restrictive, I found they allowed
>> > each adept in the group to fill a distinct role instead of all of them
>> > just being thought of generically as mages.
>> >
>> > I did use the Thieves' World variant rules for magic in the games I
>> > GMed,
>> > which allows for learning more than one college. I never had a player
>> > seriously focus on trying to gain that second college, though.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ------------------------------------
>> >
>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "roznoz" <roznoz@...> wrote:
>
> I've found that acquiring the appropriate experience points was only half the battle. The real limiting factor was successfully casting the spell in action before raising rank.
>

> The entire recent discussion is SO strange to me. I've NEVER played
> or GM'ed a game of DQ in which any characters were NOT in some
> College.

--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, John Hitchens <makofan@...> wrote:
>
> One of the problems with mage training is I believe that you must have attempted to cast a spell at least once, each time you want to train a rank in it - from 161.1
>
> "A
> character must have attempted an ability or skill on the adventure previous to
> a gain in Rank in that ability or skill.". With many spells having low base chances (1%, 5%, 20%) the chance of a backfire is great. Sooner or later all my mages have rolled a 96-100 (I think that' s it) on the backfire table and permanently fried their brains. And that happens eventually, even if you allow the mage 10 hours of concentration before casting the spell
>
> For MA needed for a College, there are also the two General Knowledge Rituals: Ritual of Purification, Spell Preparation Ritual, and the two General Knowledge Counterspells (Counterspell General and Counterspell Special) that need to be added to the qualifications.
>
> Another drawback of magic is you can not kill somebody with one shot. If you blast somebody with a forcebolt and get triple damage on a lucky strike chance, you may do more damage than their fatigue and endurance combined, but by rule you can't affect both fatigue and endurance with a magic spell
>
> Please let me know if I have been misinterpreting these all these years!
>

----- Original Message -----
From: "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@yahoo.com>
To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 8:35 AM
Subject: [DQN-list] Adept and non-adept balance.


> There was some discussion earlier about the Warrior Alternative article
> and whether it is needed. Purely by the book, I think they are fairly
> balanced and the extra experience points at creation for a non-adept are
> not needed. I say "fairly" instead of "entirely" because it is a bit
> harder for a non-adept to reach adventurer and hero, and because of a lot
> of experience with what my group used to refer to as Mindless Mages. A
> mindless mage is an adept of the college of sorceries of the mind with the
> bare minimum MA to join the college, a mediocre (at best) WP, a two handed
> class B weapon and very little focus on improving his spells. In melee
> they tend to overshadow the non-adept warriors.
>
> Another issue is the phrase "by the book." I don't think I've ever played
> in a campaign, regardless of RPG system, that did not have house rules. In
> our DQ campaigns, we've always used a house rule that allows adepts to use
> extra fatigue to boost their cast chances. In some campaigns it was +5%
> for each extra point of fatigue with the adept not being able to use more
> fatigue than it would take to stun him if he took that much damage from an
> attack. In some games, it was the Thieves World rule where each extra
> fatigue adds 15% to cast chance, but the adept MUST spend enough fatigue
> to push the cast chance to 100%. If he doesn't have enough fatigue to do
> that, any failure is a backfire. These house rules break the balance
> between adepts and non-adepts further. They don't shatter it or annihilate
> it because adepts now run out of fatigue faster. Also, backfire results
> 01 - 25 become much, much more dangerous. All in all, the rules do make
> adepts more powerful, though.
>
> I added a Warrior skill for my campaigns to attempt to bring things back
> into balance. I can dig it out and post it later if anyone wishes, but I
> can summarize the main points, now.
>
> While you can normally train two things at the same time, warrior skill
> training is intensive and exhausting enough that nothing else can be
> trained at the same time. Much of the training involves the use of
> weapons. As part of the trade off, it then only takes half as long to
> train up weapon skills as normal, as long as the ranks being learned are
> not higher than the character's warrior rank. This helps with the time it
> takes to reach adventurer/hero.
>
> The warrior increases the amount of damage it takes to stun him by 1 per
> rank. This helps offset those min-max mind adepts.
>
> The warrior gains 2 per rank to his strike chance and 1 per rank to his
> defense (2 per rank when evading). Additionally, he increases his damage
> with all weapons by 1 point at rank 4 and another point at rank 8, in
> addition to any extra damage he gains from rank in the weapon itself. This
> helps offset the increased power adepts gain from using extra fatigue to
> boost cast chance.
>
> I'm definitely forgetting a few of the features, but that is the gist.
> Whether it is balanced is a matter of opinion, but it passes my test for
> such things. It's not so weak that my players don't bother wasting
> experience to get it and it's not so strong that the adepts complain about
> it.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

----- Original Message -----
From: "darkislephil" <phergus@gmail.com>
To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 5:37 PM
Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Question for those who play Adepts


> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "bobconstans" <bobconstans@...> wrote:
>> The entire recent discussion is SO strange to me. I've NEVER played
>> or GM'ed a game of DQ in which any characters were NOT in some
>> College.
>
> I've played DQ since the first edition and the vast majority of characters
> in the games I've GM'ed or played in were not adepts.
>
> We had lots of groups with no adepts at all.
>
> I can't imagine why you would want to play in a world where every
> character was an adept.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

----- Original Message -----
From: "darkislephil" <phergus@gmail.com>
To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 5:48 PM
Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Mage restrictions


> You're doing it exactly as it is stated in the rules. Always sucks to get
> that backfire and then roll one of the really debilitating backfire
> results just as the party gets to the point of no return in the adventure.
>
> I think you'll find that in campaigns that are adept-heavy they have
> tossed out the rules that inconvenience adepts.
>
>
> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, John Hitchens <makofan@...> wrote:
>>
>> One of the problems with mage training is I believe that you must have
>> attempted to cast a spell at least once, each time you want to train a
>> rank in it - from 161.1
>>
>> "A
>> character must have attempted an ability or skill on the adventure
>> previous to
>> a gain in Rank in that ability or skill.". With many spells having low
>> base chances (1%, 5%, 20%) the chance of a backfire is great. Sooner or
>> later all my mages have rolled a 96-100 (I think that' s it) on the
>> backfire table and permanently fried their brains. And that happens
>> eventually, even if you allow the mage 10 hours of concentration before
>> casting the spell
>>
>> For MA needed for a College, there are also the two General Knowledge
>> Rituals: Ritual of Purification, Spell Preparation Ritual, and the two
>> General Knowledge Counterspells (Counterspell General and Counterspell
>> Special) that need to be added to the qualifications.
>>
>> Another drawback of magic is you can not kill somebody with one shot. If
>> you blast somebody with a forcebolt and get triple damage on a lucky
>> strike chance, you may do more damage than their fatigue and endurance
>> combined, but by rule you can't affect both fatigue and endurance with a
>> magic spell
>>
>> Please let me know if I have been misinterpreting these all these years!
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffery K. McGonagill" <igmod@...> wrote:
>
> One of my first characters was strictly a fighter/warrior focusing on
> weapons skills and Military Science. The character was R10 in Military
> Science before raising MA enough to acquire Fire Magicks then dropping it
> and turning to Mind. With high Endurance and armor protection it was rare
> my character was ever stunned in fighting prior to learning mind magicks.
>
> ~Jeffery~
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@...>
> To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 8:35 AM
> Subject: [DQN-list] Adept and non-adept balance.
>
>
> > There was some discussion earlier about the Warrior Alternative article
> > and whether it is needed. Purely by the book, I think they are fairly
> > balanced and the extra experience points at creation for a non-adept are
> > not needed. I say "fairly" instead of "entirely" because it is a bit
> > harder for a non-adept to reach adventurer and hero, and because of a lot
> > of experience with what my group used to refer to as Mindless Mages. A
> > mindless mage is an adept of the college of sorceries of the mind with the
> > bare minimum MA to join the college, a mediocre (at best) WP, a two handed
> > class B weapon and very little focus on improving his spells. In melee
> > they tend to overshadow the non-adept warriors.
> >
> > Another issue is the phrase "by the book." I don't think I've ever played
> > in a campaign, regardless of RPG system, that did not have house rules. In
> > our DQ campaigns, we've always used a house rule that allows adepts to use
> > extra fatigue to boost their cast chances. In some campaigns it was +5%
> > for each extra point of fatigue with the adept not being able to use more
> > fatigue than it would take to stun him if he took that much damage from an
> > attack. In some games, it was the Thieves World rule where each extra
> > fatigue adds 15% to cast chance, but the adept MUST spend enough fatigue
> > to push the cast chance to 100%. If he doesn't have enough fatigue to do
> > that, any failure is a backfire. These house rules break the balance
> > between adepts and non-adepts further. They don't shatter it or annihilate
> > it because adepts now run out of fatigue faster. Also, backfire results
> > 01 - 25 become much, much more dangerous. All in all, the rules do make
> > adepts more powerful, though.
> >
> > I added a Warrior skill for my campaigns to attempt to bring things back
> > into balance. I can dig it out and post it later if anyone wishes, but I
> > can summarize the main points, now.
> >
> > While you can normally train two things at the same time, warrior skill
> > training is intensive and exhausting enough that nothing else can be
> > trained at the same time. Much of the training involves the use of
> > weapons. As part of the trade off, it then only takes half as long to
> > train up weapon skills as normal, as long as the ranks being learned are
> > not higher than the character's warrior rank. This helps with the time it
> > takes to reach adventurer/hero.
> >
> > The warrior increases the amount of damage it takes to stun him by 1 per
> > rank. This helps offset those min-max mind adepts.
> >
> > The warrior gains 2 per rank to his strike chance and 1 per rank to his
> > defense (2 per rank when evading). Additionally, he increases his damage
> > with all weapons by 1 point at rank 4 and another point at rank 8, in
> > addition to any extra damage he gains from rank in the weapon itself. This
> > helps offset the increased power adepts gain from using extra fatigue to
> > boost cast chance.
> >
> > I'm definitely forgetting a few of the features, but that is the gist.
> > Whether it is balanced is a matter of opinion, but it passes my test for
> > such things. It's not so weak that my players don't bother wasting
> > experience to get it and it's not so strong that the adepts complain about
> > it.
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>

>
> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "bobconstans" <bobconstans@> wrote:
> > The entire recent discussion is SO strange to me. I've NEVER played
> > or GM'ed a game of DQ in which any characters were NOT in some
> > College.
>
> I've played DQ since the first edition and the vast majority of characters in the games I've GM'ed or played in were not adepts.
>
> We had lots of groups with no adepts at all.
>
> I can't imagine why you would want to play in a world where every character was an adept.
>

----- Original Message -----
From: "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@yahoo.com>
To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 8:50 PM
Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Adept and non-adept balance.


> The games I've GMed have always lasted longer than the games I've played
> in. My longest campaign I played in, however, my character was a non-adept
> mil sci. By the time it ended, I had raised endurance to 25 and mil sci to
> 8. I didn't get stunned often, but I wouldn't call it rare even with 8
> point armor. Most of my stuns came from spells or endurance shots where
> the armor wasn't a factor, anyway. The mind adept in the party didn't
> min-max, though, so I never felt overshadowed. He didn't get stunned, but
> I could take more punishment and was definitely stronger offensively.
>
> If we had not used the rule for extra fatigue boosting cast chances, I
> probably would not have been hit with as many spells and my stunning might
> have been characterized as rare, too. Again, I don't think there are
> glaring balance issues without house rules. As for my bias against
> mindless prestidigitators... the college has some really great spells and
> it has always irked me to see someone take it purely for the stun
> immunity.
>
> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffery K. McGonagill" <igmod@...>
> wrote:
>>
>> One of my first characters was strictly a fighter/warrior focusing on
>> weapons skills and Military Science. The character was R10 in Military
>> Science before raising MA enough to acquire Fire Magicks then dropping it
>> and turning to Mind. With high Endurance and armor protection it was
>> rare
>> my character was ever stunned in fighting prior to learning mind magicks.
>>
>> ~Jeffery~
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@...>
>> To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 8:35 AM
>> Subject: [DQN-list] Adept and non-adept balance.
>>
>>
>> > There was some discussion earlier about the Warrior Alternative article
>> > and whether it is needed. Purely by the book, I think they are fairly
>> > balanced and the extra experience points at creation for a non-adept
>> > are
>> > not needed. I say "fairly" instead of "entirely" because it is a bit
>> > harder for a non-adept to reach adventurer and hero, and because of a
>> > lot
>> > of experience with what my group used to refer to as Mindless Mages. A
>> > mindless mage is an adept of the college of sorceries of the mind with
>> > the
>> > bare minimum MA to join the college, a mediocre (at best) WP, a two
>> > handed
>> > class B weapon and very little focus on improving his spells. In melee
>> > they tend to overshadow the non-adept warriors.
>> >
>> > Another issue is the phrase "by the book." I don't think I've ever
>> > played
>> > in a campaign, regardless of RPG system, that did not have house rules.
>> > In
>> > our DQ campaigns, we've always used a house rule that allows adepts to
>> > use
>> > extra fatigue to boost their cast chances. In some campaigns it was +5%
>> > for each extra point of fatigue with the adept not being able to use
>> > more
>> > fatigue than it would take to stun him if he took that much damage from
>> > an
>> > attack. In some games, it was the Thieves World rule where each extra
>> > fatigue adds 15% to cast chance, but the adept MUST spend enough
>> > fatigue
>> > to push the cast chance to 100%. If he doesn't have enough fatigue to
>> > do
>> > that, any failure is a backfire. These house rules break the balance
>> > between adepts and non-adepts further. They don't shatter it or
>> > annihilate
>> > it because adepts now run out of fatigue faster. Also, backfire results
>> > 01 - 25 become much, much more dangerous. All in all, the rules do make
>> > adepts more powerful, though.
>> >
>> > I added a Warrior skill for my campaigns to attempt to bring things
>> > back
>> > into balance. I can dig it out and post it later if anyone wishes, but
>> > I
>> > can summarize the main points, now.
>> >
>> > While you can normally train two things at the same time, warrior skill
>> > training is intensive and exhausting enough that nothing else can be
>> > trained at the same time. Much of the training involves the use of
>> > weapons. As part of the trade off, it then only takes half as long to
>> > train up weapon skills as normal, as long as the ranks being learned
>> > are
>> > not higher than the character's warrior rank. This helps with the time
>> > it
>> > takes to reach adventurer/hero.
>> >
>> > The warrior increases the amount of damage it takes to stun him by 1
>> > per
>> > rank. This helps offset those min-max mind adepts.
>> >
>> > The warrior gains 2 per rank to his strike chance and 1 per rank to his
>> > defense (2 per rank when evading). Additionally, he increases his
>> > damage
>> > with all weapons by 1 point at rank 4 and another point at rank 8, in
>> > addition to any extra damage he gains from rank in the weapon itself.
>> > This
>> > helps offset the increased power adepts gain from using extra fatigue
>> > to
>> > boost cast chance.
>> >
>> > I'm definitely forgetting a few of the features, but that is the gist.
>> > Whether it is balanced is a matter of opinion, but it passes my test
>> > for
>> > such things. It's not so weak that my players don't bother wasting
>> > experience to get it and it's not so strong that the adepts complain
>> > about
>> > it.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ------------------------------------
>> >
>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "koraq" <Koraq@...> wrote:
>
> I have decided to try to make a character for DQ, having finally read through all of my DQ2 book.
>
> In paragraph 5.4 it says "A character's Perception begins at 5". Now, am I supposed to spend my points for primary stats on that as well? 5 seem to be awfully low, and having to spend points on it makes it impossible for my test character to have more than two stats above 10!
>
> Am I missing something obvious? It looks kind of expensive to use EP to raise that stat...
>
> /andreas
>

>
> One of the problems with mage training is I believe that you must have attempted to cast a spell at least once, each time you want to train a rank in it - from 161.1
>
> "A character must have attempted an ability or skill on the
> adventure previous to a gain in Rank in that ability or skill.".

--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffery K. McGonagill" <igmod@...> wrote:
>
> All the Mind Mages I've seen played like it particularly for the Healing
> spell.
>
> ~Jeffery~
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@...>
> To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 8:50 PM
> Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Adept and non-adept balance.
>
>
> > The games I've GMed have always lasted longer than the games I've played
> > in. My longest campaign I played in, however, my character was a non-adept
> > mil sci. By the time it ended, I had raised endurance to 25 and mil sci to
> > 8. I didn't get stunned often, but I wouldn't call it rare even with 8
> > point armor. Most of my stuns came from spells or endurance shots where
> > the armor wasn't a factor, anyway. The mind adept in the party didn't
> > min-max, though, so I never felt overshadowed. He didn't get stunned, but
> > I could take more punishment and was definitely stronger offensively.
> >
> > If we had not used the rule for extra fatigue boosting cast chances, I
> > probably would not have been hit with as many spells and my stunning might
> > have been characterized as rare, too. Again, I don't think there are
> > glaring balance issues without house rules. As for my bias against
> > mindless prestidigitators... the college has some really great spells and
> > it has always irked me to see someone take it purely for the stun
> > immunity.
> >
> > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffery K. McGonagill" <igmod@>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> One of my first characters was strictly a fighter/warrior focusing on
> >> weapons skills and Military Science. The character was R10 in Military
> >> Science before raising MA enough to acquire Fire Magicks then dropping it
> >> and turning to Mind. With high Endurance and armor protection it was
> >> rare
> >> my character was ever stunned in fighting prior to learning mind magicks.
> >>
> >> ~Jeffery~
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@>
> >> To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
> >> Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 8:35 AM
> >> Subject: [DQN-list] Adept and non-adept balance.
> >>
> >>
> >> > There was some discussion earlier about the Warrior Alternative article
> >> > and whether it is needed. Purely by the book, I think they are fairly
> >> > balanced and the extra experience points at creation for a non-adept
> >> > are
> >> > not needed. I say "fairly" instead of "entirely" because it is a bit
> >> > harder for a non-adept to reach adventurer and hero, and because of a
> >> > lot
> >> > of experience with what my group used to refer to as Mindless Mages. A
> >> > mindless mage is an adept of the college of sorceries of the mind with
> >> > the
> >> > bare minimum MA to join the college, a mediocre (at best) WP, a two
> >> > handed
> >> > class B weapon and very little focus on improving his spells. In melee
> >> > they tend to overshadow the non-adept warriors.
> >> >
> >> > Another issue is the phrase "by the book." I don't think I've ever
> >> > played
> >> > in a campaign, regardless of RPG system, that did not have house rules.
> >> > In
> >> > our DQ campaigns, we've always used a house rule that allows adepts to
> >> > use
> >> > extra fatigue to boost their cast chances. In some campaigns it was +5%
> >> > for each extra point of fatigue with the adept not being able to use
> >> > more
> >> > fatigue than it would take to stun him if he took that much damage from
> >> > an
> >> > attack. In some games, it was the Thieves World rule where each extra
> >> > fatigue adds 15% to cast chance, but the adept MUST spend enough
> >> > fatigue
> >> > to push the cast chance to 100%. If he doesn't have enough fatigue to
> >> > do
> >> > that, any failure is a backfire. These house rules break the balance
> >> > between adepts and non-adepts further. They don't shatter it or
> >> > annihilate
> >> > it because adepts now run out of fatigue faster. Also, backfire results
> >> > 01 - 25 become much, much more dangerous. All in all, the rules do make
> >> > adepts more powerful, though.
> >> >
> >> > I added a Warrior skill for my campaigns to attempt to bring things
> >> > back
> >> > into balance. I can dig it out and post it later if anyone wishes, but
> >> > I
> >> > can summarize the main points, now.
> >> >
> >> > While you can normally train two things at the same time, warrior skill
> >> > training is intensive and exhausting enough that nothing else can be
> >> > trained at the same time. Much of the training involves the use of
> >> > weapons. As part of the trade off, it then only takes half as long to
> >> > train up weapon skills as normal, as long as the ranks being learned
> >> > are
> >> > not higher than the character's warrior rank. This helps with the time
> >> > it
> >> > takes to reach adventurer/hero.
> >> >
> >> > The warrior increases the amount of damage it takes to stun him by 1
> >> > per
> >> > rank. This helps offset those min-max mind adepts.
> >> >
> >> > The warrior gains 2 per rank to his strike chance and 1 per rank to his
> >> > defense (2 per rank when evading). Additionally, he increases his
> >> > damage
> >> > with all weapons by 1 point at rank 4 and another point at rank 8, in
> >> > addition to any extra damage he gains from rank in the weapon itself.
> >> > This
> >> > helps offset the increased power adepts gain from using extra fatigue
> >> > to
> >> > boost cast chance.
> >> >
> >> > I'm definitely forgetting a few of the features, but that is the gist.
> >> > Whether it is balanced is a matter of opinion, but it passes my test
> >> > for
> >> > such things. It's not so weak that my players don't bother wasting
> >> > experience to get it and it's not so strong that the adepts complain
> >> > about
> >> > it.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ------------------------------------
> >> >
> >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "kakashi64" <dantalion64@...> wrote:
>
> And the few I played with did it for purposes of subterfuge (Mind Mage + Thief/Spy or Mind Mage + Assassin combo).
>
> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffery K. McGonagill" <igmod@> wrote:
> >
> > All the Mind Mages I've seen played like it particularly for the Healing
> > spell.
> >
> > ~Jeffery~
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@>
> > To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 8:50 PM
> > Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Adept and non-adept balance.
> >
> >
> > > The games I've GMed have always lasted longer than the games I've played
> > > in. My longest campaign I played in, however, my character was a non-adept
> > > mil sci. By the time it ended, I had raised endurance to 25 and mil sci to
> > > 8. I didn't get stunned often, but I wouldn't call it rare even with 8
> > > point armor. Most of my stuns came from spells or endurance shots where
> > > the armor wasn't a factor, anyway. The mind adept in the party didn't
> > > min-max, though, so I never felt overshadowed. He didn't get stunned, but
> > > I could take more punishment and was definitely stronger offensively.
> > >
> > > If we had not used the rule for extra fatigue boosting cast chances, I
> > > probably would not have been hit with as many spells and my stunning might
> > > have been characterized as rare, too. Again, I don't think there are
> > > glaring balance issues without house rules. As for my bias against
> > > mindless prestidigitators... the college has some really great spells and
> > > it has always irked me to see someone take it purely for the stun
> > > immunity.
> > >
> > > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffery K. McGonagill" <igmod@>
> > > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> One of my first characters was strictly a fighter/warrior focusing on
> > >> weapons skills and Military Science. The character was R10 in Military
> > >> Science before raising MA enough to acquire Fire Magicks then dropping it
> > >> and turning to Mind. With high Endurance and armor protection it was
> > >> rare
> > >> my character was ever stunned in fighting prior to learning mind magicks.
> > >>
> > >> ~Jeffery~
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > >> From: "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@>
> > >> To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
> > >> Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 8:35 AM
> > >> Subject: [DQN-list] Adept and non-adept balance.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> > There was some discussion earlier about the Warrior Alternative article
> > >> > and whether it is needed. Purely by the book, I think they are fairly
> > >> > balanced and the extra experience points at creation for a non-adept
> > >> > are
> > >> > not needed. I say "fairly" instead of "entirely" because it is a bit
> > >> > harder for a non-adept to reach adventurer and hero, and because of a
> > >> > lot
> > >> > of experience with what my group used to refer to as Mindless Mages. A
> > >> > mindless mage is an adept of the college of sorceries of the mind with
> > >> > the
> > >> > bare minimum MA to join the college, a mediocre (at best) WP, a two
> > >> > handed
> > >> > class B weapon and very little focus on improving his spells. In melee
> > >> > they tend to overshadow the non-adept warriors.
> > >> >
> > >> > Another issue is the phrase "by the book." I don't think I've ever
> > >> > played
> > >> > in a campaign, regardless of RPG system, that did not have house rules.
> > >> > In
> > >> > our DQ campaigns, we've always used a house rule that allows adepts to
> > >> > use
> > >> > extra fatigue to boost their cast chances. In some campaigns it was +5%
> > >> > for each extra point of fatigue with the adept not being able to use
> > >> > more
> > >> > fatigue than it would take to stun him if he took that much damage from
> > >> > an
> > >> > attack. In some games, it was the Thieves World rule where each extra
> > >> > fatigue adds 15% to cast chance, but the adept MUST spend enough
> > >> > fatigue
> > >> > to push the cast chance to 100%. If he doesn't have enough fatigue to
> > >> > do
> > >> > that, any failure is a backfire. These house rules break the balance
> > >> > between adepts and non-adepts further. They don't shatter it or
> > >> > annihilate
> > >> > it because adepts now run out of fatigue faster. Also, backfire results
> > >> > 01 - 25 become much, much more dangerous. All in all, the rules do make
> > >> > adepts more powerful, though.
> > >> >
> > >> > I added a Warrior skill for my campaigns to attempt to bring things
> > >> > back
> > >> > into balance. I can dig it out and post it later if anyone wishes, but
> > >> > I
> > >> > can summarize the main points, now.
> > >> >
> > >> > While you can normally train two things at the same time, warrior skill
> > >> > training is intensive and exhausting enough that nothing else can be
> > >> > trained at the same time. Much of the training involves the use of
> > >> > weapons. As part of the trade off, it then only takes half as long to
> > >> > train up weapon skills as normal, as long as the ranks being learned
> > >> > are
> > >> > not higher than the character's warrior rank. This helps with the time
> > >> > it
> > >> > takes to reach adventurer/hero.
> > >> >
> > >> > The warrior increases the amount of damage it takes to stun him by 1
> > >> > per
> > >> > rank. This helps offset those min-max mind adepts.
> > >> >
> > >> > The warrior gains 2 per rank to his strike chance and 1 per rank to his
> > >> > defense (2 per rank when evading). Additionally, he increases his
> > >> > damage
> > >> > with all weapons by 1 point at rank 4 and another point at rank 8, in
> > >> > addition to any extra damage he gains from rank in the weapon itself.
> > >> > This
> > >> > helps offset the increased power adepts gain from using extra fatigue
> > >> > to
> > >> > boost cast chance.
> > >> >
> > >> > I'm definitely forgetting a few of the features, but that is the gist.
> > >> > Whether it is balanced is a matter of opinion, but it passes my test
> > >> > for
> > >> > such things. It's not so weak that my players don't bother wasting
> > >> > experience to get it and it's not so strong that the adepts complain
> > >> > about
> > >> > it.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > ------------------------------------
> > >> >
> > >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

----- Original Message -----
From: "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@yahoo.com>
To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2010 10:25 AM
Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Adept and non-adept balance.


> Now that wouldn't bother me. The college has so much coolness to it aside
> from the resist pain talent. Arguably the best healing and invisibility
> spells in the game, the telepathy/mental attack combo that lets you take
> people out from inside the next building over, telepathy just by itself,
> empathy at high ranks becomes a ranged healing spell, ESP is almost like
> having radar. I think that's why the 11 MA mind adepts irk me so much. In
> all the time i've played and run DQ, I've only ever seen one mind adept
> that didn't take a class b two handed weapon. I'm glad your experiences
> have been otherwise.
>
> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "kakashi64" <dantalion64@...> wrote:
>>
>> And the few I played with did it for purposes of subterfuge (Mind Mage +
>> Thief/Spy or Mind Mage + Assassin combo).
>>
>> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffery K. McGonagill" <igmod@> wrote:
>> >
>> > All the Mind Mages I've seen played like it particularly for the
>> > Healing
>> > spell.
>> >
>> > ~Jeffery~
>> >
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@>
>> > To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
>> > Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 8:50 PM
>> > Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Adept and non-adept balance.
>> >
>> >
>> > > The games I've GMed have always lasted longer than the games I've
>> > > played
>> > > in. My longest campaign I played in, however, my character was a
>> > > non-adept
>> > > mil sci. By the time it ended, I had raised endurance to 25 and mil
>> > > sci to
>> > > 8. I didn't get stunned often, but I wouldn't call it rare even with
>> > > 8
>> > > point armor. Most of my stuns came from spells or endurance shots
>> > > where
>> > > the armor wasn't a factor, anyway. The mind adept in the party didn't
>> > > min-max, though, so I never felt overshadowed. He didn't get stunned,
>> > > but
>> > > I could take more punishment and was definitely stronger offensively.
>> > >
>> > > If we had not used the rule for extra fatigue boosting cast chances,
>> > > I
>> > > probably would not have been hit with as many spells and my stunning
>> > > might
>> > > have been characterized as rare, too. Again, I don't think there are
>> > > glaring balance issues without house rules. As for my bias against
>> > > mindless prestidigitators... the college has some really great spells
>> > > and
>> > > it has always irked me to see someone take it purely for the stun
>> > > immunity.
>> > >
>> > > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffery K. McGonagill" <igmod@>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> One of my first characters was strictly a fighter/warrior focusing
>> > >> on
>> > >> weapons skills and Military Science. The character was R10 in
>> > >> Military
>> > >> Science before raising MA enough to acquire Fire Magicks then
>> > >> dropping it
>> > >> and turning to Mind. With high Endurance and armor protection it
>> > >> was
>> > >> rare
>> > >> my character was ever stunned in fighting prior to learning mind
>> > >> magicks.
>> > >>
>> > >> ~Jeffery~
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> ----- Original Message -----
>> > >> From: "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@>
>> > >> To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
>> > >> Sent: Monday, February 08, 2010 8:35 AM
>> > >> Subject: [DQN-list] Adept and non-adept balance.
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> > There was some discussion earlier about the Warrior Alternative
>> > >> > article
>> > >> > and whether it is needed. Purely by the book, I think they are
>> > >> > fairly
>> > >> > balanced and the extra experience points at creation for a
>> > >> > non-adept
>> > >> > are
>> > >> > not needed. I say "fairly" instead of "entirely" because it is a
>> > >> > bit
>> > >> > harder for a non-adept to reach adventurer and hero, and because
>> > >> > of a
>> > >> > lot
>> > >> > of experience with what my group used to refer to as Mindless
>> > >> > Mages. A
>> > >> > mindless mage is an adept of the college of sorceries of the mind
>> > >> > with
>> > >> > the
>> > >> > bare minimum MA to join the college, a mediocre (at best) WP, a
>> > >> > two
>> > >> > handed
>> > >> > class B weapon and very little focus on improving his spells. In
>> > >> > melee
>> > >> > they tend to overshadow the non-adept warriors.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Another issue is the phrase "by the book." I don't think I've ever
>> > >> > played
>> > >> > in a campaign, regardless of RPG system, that did not have house
>> > >> > rules.
>> > >> > In
>> > >> > our DQ campaigns, we've always used a house rule that allows
>> > >> > adepts to
>> > >> > use
>> > >> > extra fatigue to boost their cast chances. In some campaigns it
>> > >> > was +5%
>> > >> > for each extra point of fatigue with the adept not being able to
>> > >> > use
>> > >> > more
>> > >> > fatigue than it would take to stun him if he took that much damage
>> > >> > from
>> > >> > an
>> > >> > attack. In some games, it was the Thieves World rule where each
>> > >> > extra
>> > >> > fatigue adds 15% to cast chance, but the adept MUST spend enough
>> > >> > fatigue
>> > >> > to push the cast chance to 100%. If he doesn't have enough fatigue
>> > >> > to
>> > >> > do
>> > >> > that, any failure is a backfire. These house rules break the
>> > >> > balance
>> > >> > between adepts and non-adepts further. They don't shatter it or
>> > >> > annihilate
>> > >> > it because adepts now run out of fatigue faster. Also, backfire
>> > >> > results
>> > >> > 01 - 25 become much, much more dangerous. All in all, the rules do
>> > >> > make
>> > >> > adepts more powerful, though.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > I added a Warrior skill for my campaigns to attempt to bring
>> > >> > things
>> > >> > back
>> > >> > into balance. I can dig it out and post it later if anyone wishes,
>> > >> > but
>> > >> > I
>> > >> > can summarize the main points, now.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > While you can normally train two things at the same time, warrior
>> > >> > skill
>> > >> > training is intensive and exhausting enough that nothing else can
>> > >> > be
>> > >> > trained at the same time. Much of the training involves the use of
>> > >> > weapons. As part of the trade off, it then only takes half as long
>> > >> > to
>> > >> > train up weapon skills as normal, as long as the ranks being
>> > >> > learned
>> > >> > are
>> > >> > not higher than the character's warrior rank. This helps with the
>> > >> > time
>> > >> > it
>> > >> > takes to reach adventurer/hero.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > The warrior increases the amount of damage it takes to stun him by
>> > >> > 1
>> > >> > per
>> > >> > rank. This helps offset those min-max mind adepts.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > The warrior gains 2 per rank to his strike chance and 1 per rank
>> > >> > to his
>> > >> > defense (2 per rank when evading). Additionally, he increases his
>> > >> > damage
>> > >> > with all weapons by 1 point at rank 4 and another point at rank 8,
>> > >> > in
>> > >> > addition to any extra damage he gains from rank in the weapon
>> > >> > itself.
>> > >> > This
>> > >> > helps offset the increased power adepts gain from using extra
>> > >> > fatigue
>> > >> > to
>> > >> > boost cast chance.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > I'm definitely forgetting a few of the features, but that is the
>> > >> > gist.
>> > >> > Whether it is balanced is a matter of opinion, but it passes my
>> > >> > test
>> > >> > for
>> > >> > such things. It's not so weak that my players don't bother wasting
>> > >> > experience to get it and it's not so strong that the adepts
>> > >> > complain
>> > >> > about
>> > >> > it.
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > ------------------------------------
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > ------------------------------------
>> > >
>> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "kakashi64" <dantalion64@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, John Hitchens <makofan@> wrote:
> >
> > One of the problems with mage training is I believe that you must have attempted to cast a spell at least once, each time you want to train a rank in it - from 161.1
> >
> > "A character must have attempted an ability or skill on the
> > adventure previous to a gain in Rank in that ability or skill.".
>
> And one hilariously problematic result of this rule is trying to increase ranks in the Ritual of Becoming Undead! You have to try to re-become undead over and over again if you want to become a wraith rather than a wight.
>

> Are there other skill based games that dont require that abilities be attempted before being raised?
>

> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "kakashi64" <dantalion64@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, John Hitchens <makofan@> wrote:
> > >
> > > One of the problems with mage training is I believe that you must have attempted to cast a spell at least once, each time you want to train a rank in it - from 161.1
> > >
> > > "A character must have attempted an ability or skill on the
> > > adventure previous to a gain in Rank in that ability or skill.".
> >
> > And one hilariously problematic result of this rule is trying to increase ranks in the Ritual of Becoming Undead! You have to try to re-become undead over and over again if you want to become a wraith rather than a wight.
> >
>

--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@...> wrote:
>
> Actually, that's not true. In 45 R-3 The adept's rank with the ritual determines whether or not its a wight or wraith that is created from the murdered victim in the process. This undead is either contained or released depending upon the success of the ritual. Any success in the ritual means the adept becomes the Greater Undead of his choice, regardless of his rank with the ritual. Hopefully this wont be a ritual that most necromancers have much rank in...for their own sake, considering all the undead that will be lurking around waiting to take revenge for their murders.
>
> I've never considered it a problem to require adepts to have made an attempt at a spell or ritual before training it up, just like any other skill/talent/weapon. 87.1 (DQ 2nd Edition) only requires that they attempt it, not succeed. Adepts still tend to be the quickest to advance. Yes they risk backfires but their ultimate power is more than worth the risk. Allowing them to train it up without attempting it first is likely to cause a game imbalance in my experience.
>
> Are there other skill based games that dont require that abilities be attempted before being raised?
>
> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "kakashi64" <dantalion64@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, John Hitchens <makofan@> wrote:
> > >
> > > One of the problems with mage training is I believe that you must have attempted to cast a spell at least once, each time you want to train a rank in it - from 161.1
> > >
> > > "A character must have attempted an ability or skill on the
> > > adventure previous to a gain in Rank in that ability or skill.".
> >
> > And one hilariously problematic result of this rule is trying to increase ranks in the Ritual of Becoming Undead! You have to try to re-become undead over and over again if you want to become a wraith rather than a wight.
> >
>

--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "kakashi64" <dantalion64@...> wrote:
>
> Holy crap, you're right! It's been awhile since I really read the details.
>
> But this begs another question about the silliness of this ritual: *how* does someone attain rank in this ritual, and *why* would anyone bother doing so? Once you're undead, you're undead, and it can't be undone.
>
> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@> wrote:
> >
> > Actually, that's not true. In 45 R-3 The adept's rank with the ritual determines whether or not its a wight or wraith that is created from the murdered victim in the process. This undead is either contained or released depending upon the success of the ritual. Any success in the ritual means the adept becomes the Greater Undead of his choice, regardless of his rank with the ritual. Hopefully this wont be a ritual that most necromancers have much rank in...for their own sake, considering all the undead that will be lurking around waiting to take revenge for their murders.
> >
> > I've never considered it a problem to require adepts to have made an attempt at a spell or ritual before training it up, just like any other skill/talent/weapon. 87.1 (DQ 2nd Edition) only requires that they attempt it, not succeed. Adepts still tend to be the quickest to advance. Yes they risk backfires but their ultimate power is more than worth the risk. Allowing them to train it up without attempting it first is likely to cause a game imbalance in my experience.
> >
> > Are there other skill based games that dont require that abilities be attempted before being raised?
> >
> > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "kakashi64" <dantalion64@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, John Hitchens <makofan@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > One of the problems with mage training is I believe that you must have attempted to cast a spell at least once, each time you want to train a rank in it - from 161.1
> > > >
> > > > "A character must have attempted an ability or skill on the
> > > > adventure previous to a gain in Rank in that ability or skill.".
> > >
> > > And one hilariously problematic result of this rule is trying to increase ranks in the Ritual of Becoming Undead! You have to try to re-become undead over and over again if you want to become a wraith rather than a wight.
> > >
> >
>