Messages in dqn-list group. Page 70 of 80.

Group: dqn-list Message: 3507 From: kaith_athanes Date: 3/9/2010
Subject: PDF Version of the Rules
Group: dqn-list Message: 3508 From: Ted Date: 3/10/2010
Subject: Berserkers
Group: dqn-list Message: 3509 From: Larry Freeman Date: 3/10/2010
Subject: Re: Berserkers
Group: dqn-list Message: 3510 From: Brock Date: 3/10/2010
Subject: Question about "Ritual of Magic Divination"
Group: dqn-list Message: 3511 From: alanm_1021 Date: 3/10/2010
Subject: Re: First Thread
Group: dqn-list Message: 3512 From: Ted Date: 3/10/2010
Subject: Re: Question about "Ritual of Magic Divination"
Group: dqn-list Message: 3513 From: Chris Date: 3/11/2010
Subject: Re: Berserkers
Group: dqn-list Message: 3514 From: Chris Date: 3/11/2010
Subject: Berserker correction
Group: dqn-list Message: 3515 From: Brock Date: 3/11/2010
Subject: Re: Question about "Ritual of Magic Divination"
Group: dqn-list Message: 3516 From: Jeffery K. McGonagill Date: 3/11/2010
Subject: Re: Question about "Ritual of Magic Divination"
Group: dqn-list Message: 3517 From: Ted Date: 3/11/2010
Subject: Re: PDF Version of the Rules
Group: dqn-list Message: 3518 From: Ted Date: 3/11/2010
Subject: Re: PDF Version of the Rules
Group: dqn-list Message: 3519 From: Ted Date: 3/11/2010
Subject: Re: Question about "Ritual of Magic Divination"
Group: dqn-list Message: 3520 From: kaith_athanes Date: 3/12/2010
Subject: Re: PDF Version of the Rules
Group: dqn-list Message: 3521 From: Jeffery K. McGonagill Date: 3/12/2010
Subject: Re: Question about "Ritual of Magic Divination"
Group: dqn-list Message: 3522 From: John_Rauchert Date: 3/12/2010
Subject: Re: PDF Version of the Rules
Group: dqn-list Message: 3523 From: John_Rauchert Date: 3/12/2010
Subject: Re: PDF Version of the Rules
Group: dqn-list Message: 3524 From: John_Rauchert Date: 3/12/2010
Subject: Re: Berserkers
Group: dqn-list Message: 3525 From: Jeffery K. McGonagill Date: 3/12/2010
Subject: Re: SPI's Designers (was: Re: Eric Goldberg)
Group: dqn-list Message: 3526 From: J. K. Hoffman Date: 3/13/2010
Subject: Re: PDF Version of the Rules
Group: dqn-list Message: 3527 From: Chris Date: 3/13/2010
Subject: Re: Berserkers
Group: dqn-list Message: 3528 From: John Rauchert Date: 3/13/2010
Subject: Re: Berserkers
Group: dqn-list Message: 3529 From: J. K. Hoffman Date: 3/17/2010
Subject: Re: PDF Version of the Rules
Group: dqn-list Message: 3530 From: kaith_athanes Date: 3/17/2010
Subject: Re: PDF Version of the Rules
Group: dqn-list Message: 3531 From: kakashi64 Date: 3/17/2010
Subject: SPI's Designers (was: Re: Eric Goldberg)
Group: dqn-list Message: 3532 From: kakashi64 Date: 3/17/2010
Subject: Re: If You Were Going to GM a System *Other* than DQ, What Would it
Group: dqn-list Message: 3533 From: kaith_athanes Date: 3/18/2010
Subject: Initial reactions versus long experience
Group: dqn-list Message: 3534 From: Geoff Berman Date: 3/18/2010
Subject: Re: Initial reactions versus long experience
Group: dqn-list Message: 3535 From: Ted Date: 3/18/2010
Subject: Re: Initial reactions versus long experience
Group: dqn-list Message: 3536 From: novakdb@comcast.net Date: 3/18/2010
Subject: Re: Initial reactions versus long experience
Group: dqn-list Message: 3537 From: kaith_athanes Date: 3/19/2010
Subject: Re: Initial reactions versus long experience
Group: dqn-list Message: 3538 From: kaith_athanes Date: 3/19/2010
Subject: Re: Initial reactions versus long experience
Group: dqn-list Message: 3539 From: Ted Date: 3/19/2010
Subject: Re: Initial reactions versus long experience
Group: dqn-list Message: 3540 From: kaith_athanes Date: 3/19/2010
Subject: Re: Initial reactions versus long experience
Group: dqn-list Message: 3541 From: Geoff Berman Date: 3/19/2010
Subject: Re: Initial reactions versus long experience
Group: dqn-list Message: 3542 From: Bob Date: 3/20/2010
Subject: Re: quick game balancing
Group: dqn-list Message: 3543 From: Brock Date: 3/20/2010
Subject: Re: quick game balancing
Group: dqn-list Message: 3544 From: Brock Date: 3/20/2010
Subject: Favorite Magic College?
Group: dqn-list Message: 3545 From: kaith_athanes Date: 3/21/2010
Subject: Re: Favorite Magic College?
Group: dqn-list Message: 3546 From: Andreas Davour Date: 3/21/2010
Subject: Re: quick game balancing
Group: dqn-list Message: 3547 From: John Rauchert Date: 3/21/2010
Subject: Re: Favorite Magic College?
Group: dqn-list Message: 3548 From: Bob Date: 3/21/2010
Subject: Re: Favorite Magic College?
Group: dqn-list Message: 3549 From: kaith_athanes Date: 3/21/2010
Subject: Re: Favorite Magic College?
Group: dqn-list Message: 3550 From: Don Hawthorne Date: 3/22/2010
Subject: Re: Digest Number 885
Group: dqn-list Message: 3551 From: Christopher Cole Date: 3/22/2010
Subject: Re: Digest Number 885
Group: dqn-list Message: 3552 From: takayuki.narita Date: 3/22/2010
Subject: Re: Favorite Magic College?
Group: dqn-list Message: 3553 From: Brock Date: 3/22/2010
Subject: Virtual Tabletop Services (was: Re: Anybody up for a play-by-post g
Group: dqn-list Message: 3554 From: Mark D Date: 3/22/2010
Subject: Re: Digest Number 886
Group: dqn-list Message: 3555 From: Henry Cribbs Date: 3/22/2010
Subject: Virtual Tabletop Services (was: Re: Anybody up for a play-by-post g
Group: dqn-list Message: 3556 From: John_Rauchert Date: 3/22/2010
Subject: Virtual Tabletop Services (was: Re: Anybody up for a play-by-post g



Group: dqn-list Message: 3507 From: kaith_athanes Date: 3/9/2010
Subject: PDF Version of the Rules
Does anyone know where I can find an unaltered pdf of the 2nd edition rules?
Group: dqn-list Message: 3508 From: Ted Date: 3/10/2010
Subject: Berserkers
I'm trying to come up with a good set of rules for dealing with Berserk/Blood Lusted characters. Want to have some simple characterstic and combat modifiers along with guideline for what turns em on and off, so to speak. This wouldnt be a skill to be learned but rather a condition they are prone to.

Playing around with a some simple adds to PS, EN along with some combat pluses to strike chance/damage and minus to defense. Would also assume they would not take any defensive combat action nor hide behind shields.

Anyone have any suggestions from what they have used?

Thanks much,
Ted
Group: dqn-list Message: 3509 From: Larry Freeman Date: 3/10/2010
Subject: Re: Berserkers
A group i played with had a skill called Blind Justice.

You make a check WP + (5xRank) To leave your "rage"

You have triggers that set you into the Rage usually something that you believe as a justice or a natural right to life etc.

Sorry that this is light this is all i can remember it has been a while since i played with that group.

On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Ted <tmckelvey77089@yahoo.com> wrote:
 

I'm trying to come up with a good set of rules for dealing with Berserk/Blood Lusted characters. Want to have some simple characterstic and combat modifiers along with guideline for what turns em on and off, so to speak. This wouldnt be a skill to be learned but rather a condition they are prone to.

Playing around with a some simple adds to PS, EN along with some combat pluses to strike chance/damage and minus to defense. Would also assume they would not take any defensive combat action nor hide behind shields.

Anyone have any suggestions from what they have used?

Thanks much,
Ted




--
01001001011001100010000001111001011011110111010100100000011000110110000101101110001000000111001001100101011000010110010000100000011101000110100001101001011100110010110000100000011110010110111101110101001000000110000101110010011001010010000001110000011100100110111101100010011000010110001001101100011110010010000001100001011011100010000001100101011110000111010001110010011001010110110101100101011011000111100100100000011010010110111001110100011001010110110001101100011010010110011101100101011011100111010000100000011100000110010101110010011100110110111101101110001000000110110001101001011010110110010100100000011011010111100101110011011001010110110001100110001000000110000101101110011001000010000001110011011010000110111101110101011011000110010000100000011001110110010101110100001000000111010001101111011001110110010101110100011010000110010101110010001000000111010001101111001000000110010001101001011100110110001101110101011100110111001100100000011000100111010101110011011010010110111001100101011100110111001100101110
Group: dqn-list Message: 3510 From: Brock Date: 3/10/2010
Subject: Question about "Ritual of Magic Divination"
This is ritual R-1 for the College of Naming Incantations. What does "under the effect of a spell" mean? Does having a spell invested in an object put the object "under the effect of" the spell invested?

The ritual, when successful, allows the caster to determine the exact name and college of the spell in question. This is a pretty good result for a ritual with a base chance of 40 percent and an experience multiple of 250.

A player in my campaign is trying to use this ritual to divine the nature of a spell that has been invested into an object. It seems to me that he could use the ritual on an object or person that one of the spell "charges" in the object had been cast on, but not on the object itself.

Also, the chance of the ritual working goes down over time. Is the time period measured from the time the object was invested with the spell or from the last time a spell "charge" in the object was cast?

How do you guys interpret this rule?

- Brock
Group: dqn-list Message: 3511 From: alanm_1021 Date: 3/10/2010
Subject: Re: First Thread
Some friends and I used to convert D&D and AD&D characters. Our system was pretty straight up since stats in DQ are a 5-25 range and ADD are 3-18 range. Take the ADD stat and multiply by 1.43 and round down to the nearest whole number.

Skills is where it gets to be tricky. In D&D the levels are on a experience curve whereas in DQ there are no levels and experience is awarded at a flat rate. Its really up to you but I would take the total D&D experience and bring it over either 1 to 1 or 2 to 1. You could be harsh and go 5:1 (5 DD XP = 1 DQ XP) or even 10:1. I found that 1:1 or 1:2 is not bad especially if its a high power campaign.

You need to make sure that the skills in DQ are bought to match the original character's class restrictions in D&D. So, a D&D ranger should first be required to buy half as many ranks in ranger skill as they have in D&D levels before buying anything else. Fighters have no magic skill so they cannot buy spells or learn from a college of magic (other than their racial abilities).

Weapons are tricky since D&D grants use of weapons based on class. Fighters should be allowed to pick any weapons they want but should be limited to no more ranks in any one weapon than 1/2 their D&D level up to the max ranks allowed for that weapon. Other classes should be limited to 2 or 3 melee and one missle.

Magic Users should pick a college and spend at least 75% of thier converted xp in spells ranks.

Clerics should take Healer skill to 1/2 their D&D level unless they are evil. In that case they can become members of one of the necromancy, black magics or greater summonings (perhaps rune magics or even druidic Earth Magics). Good clerics can pick one of the other magic colleges that fits the sphere of influence of their deity.



--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, Larry Freeman <larry.d.freeman@...> wrote:
>
> Bad Cameron Bad, those are dirty naughty things you should not play with...
> sorry i just had too.
>
> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 2:10 AM, D. Cameron King <monarchy2000@...>wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > No, shortly after that post I went through a major life-changing event
> > and I haven't played DQ since. When I did get back into gaming, 3rd edition
> > D&D cast a Ritual of Binding Will (37Q-1) on me, and I have been its hapless
> > slave ever since.
> >
> >
> > -Cameron
> >
> > > To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
> > > From: brockrwood@...
> > > Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 02:19:36 +0000
> >
> > > Subject: [DQN-list] Re: First Thread
> > >
> > > Scary, isn't it? :)
> > >
> > > Still running that DragonQuest campaign using Greyhawk?
> > >
> > > - Brock
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "D. Cameron King" <monarchy2000@>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Man, it feels weird to see something I wrote over 10 years ago. The
> > Internet really doesn't forget!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -Cameron
> > > >
> > > > > To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
> > > > > From: brockrwood@
> > > > > Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 21:32:31 +0000
> > > > > Subject: [DQN-list] Re: First Thread
> > > > >
> > > > > OK, here is a long-shot: I am replying to message posted to the group
> > in 1999!
> > > > >
> > > > > Like D. Cameron King (see below), I GM DragonQuest using the World of
> > Greyhawk campaign setting map. In fact, we still use original 1980 map in
> > our game play (we are careful not to spill anything on it!).
> > > > >
> > > > > I use the place names and geography from the map and everything else
> > (with a very few execeptions) is home-brewed by me.
> > > > >
> > > > > I have looked at some old Judges Guild modules that were designed to
> > work with D&D and AD&D. I would like to borrow some of the good ideas in
> > those modules, including interesting NPC's.
> > > > >
> > > > > Has anyone created a formalized system for converting a D&D or AD&D
> > character's stats to DragonQuest? Even a simple nuermical conversion table,
> > such as "an 18 strength in D&D = a 21 strength in DragonQuest" would be
> > helpful.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks in advance for any help you can render in helping me keep
> > DragonQuest alive and well!
> > > > >
> > > > > - Brock
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, Lonny Eckert <leckert@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > D. Cameron King wrote:
> > > > > > > I'm running my current campaign in the World of Greyhawk. I
> > > > > > > do not use CC2. I chose Greyhawk because I've converted a large
> > > > > > > number of old AD&D adventures for use with DQ, and rather than
> > > > > > > try to fit them into the Frontiers of Alusia, I decided to just
> > > > > > > tweak Greyhawk. It works pretty well.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Jason Winter wrote:
> > > > > > > I am also a CC2/DD2 user. Am currently working on the FR Atlas
> > project
> > > > > > > just because I had a bit of free time on my hands and it sounded
> > like a
> > > > > > > good excuse to make myself take the time to learn how to use CC2.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Well, I work with a small group of folks working on rendering
> > Greyhawk
> > > > > > maps in CC2. Both ProFantasy and WOTC/TSR are aware of our
> > existance.
> > > > > > We will have a decent start if WOTC decides to contract for a
> > Greyhawk
> > > > > > CD-ROM akin to that being done for the Forgotten Realms.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What does this have with DQ? How much interest would there be in
> > > > > > helping out in doing conversions of Greyhawk moducles and
> > accessories to
> > > > > > DQ stats? Alot of things have to fall into place for this to
> > happen.
> > > > > > This would take quite a bit of effort from individuals who have
> > Greyhawk
> > > > > > materials and can work in PDF format.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Lonny
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/dqn-list
> > > > > > Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ------------------------------------
> > > > >
> > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > _________________________________________________________________
> > > > Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service.
> > > > http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469228/direct/01/
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> > Your E-mail and More On-the-Go. Get Windows Live Hotmail Free. Sign up
> > now. <http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469229/direct/01/>
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> 01001001011001100010000001111001011011110111010100100000011000110110000101101110001000000111001001100101011000010110010000100000011101000110100001101001011100110010110000100000011110010110111101110101001000000110000101110010011001010010000001110000011100100110111101100010011000010110001001101100011110010010000001100001011011100010000001100101011110000111010001110010011001010110110101100101011011000111100100100000011010010110111001110100011001010110110001101100011010010110011101100101011011100111010000100000011100000110010101110010011100110110111101101110001000000110110001101001011010110110010100100000011011010111100101110011011001010110110001100110001000000110000101101110011001000010000001110011011010000110111101110101011011000110010000100000011001110110010101110100001000000111010001101111011001110110010101110100011010000110010101110010001000000111010001101111001000000110010001101001011100110110001101110101011100110111001100100000011000100111010101110011011010010110111001100101011100110111001100101110
>
Group: dqn-list Message: 3512 From: Ted Date: 3/10/2010
Subject: Re: Question about "Ritual of Magic Divination"
The Shaping magics ritual R-25 gives a better description of how it works. That ritual applies to stuff that is too old for this ritual and the identical one in shaping magics.

While it doesn't say explicitly that it covers invested items, it does say it works for enchantments on items, so...I've always assumed that having the investment ritual done on it qualifies it for this. The clock starts running as soon as it is invested, so whether or not a charge is used it can quickly become impossible for the ritual to work on it. At that point you have to go to a shaper and get their R-25 done on it. If its beyond that you'd better hope somebody wrote it down in a book a hundred years ago or something.



--- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Brock" <brockrwood@...> wrote:
>
> This is ritual R-1 for the College of Naming Incantations. What does "under the effect of a spell" mean? Does having a spell invested in an object put the object "under the effect of" the spell invested?
>
> The ritual, when successful, allows the caster to determine the exact name and college of the spell in question. This is a pretty good result for a ritual with a base chance of 40 percent and an experience multiple of 250.
>
> A player in my campaign is trying to use this ritual to divine the nature of a spell that has been invested into an object. It seems to me that he could use the ritual on an object or person that one of the spell "charges" in the object had been cast on, but not on the object itself.
>
> Also, the chance of the ritual working goes down over time. Is the time period measured from the time the object was invested with the spell or from the last time a spell "charge" in the object was cast?
>
> How do you guys interpret this rule?
>
> - Brock
>
Group: dqn-list Message: 3513 From: Chris Date: 3/11/2010
Subject: Re: Berserkers
Attachments :
    Here's the rules for a berserker used by my group

    107. Berserker

       Berserkers are characters who are able to summon a Battle Frenzy.  Once controlled by this frenzy the berserker will have increased strength and be incredibly difficult to kill. 

       Berserkers are usually recognized by their unkempt look [they take little notice of their appearance], their lack of armour & their screams whilst in battle.

    [107.1] A character with the berserker skill must have a WP of 15 or higher.

    [107.2] A character with the Berserker skill gains certain deductions to the experience point cost.

    Racial: Human (Barbarian) = 10% deduction

    Willpower: 20 and up = 10% deduction 

    [107.3] A berserker may summon his Battle Frenzy.

       A berserker’s chance of summoning his Battle Frenzy is equal to the berserker’s WP + (4 x Rank) %.  It takes 12 Pulses [-1 Pulse per Rank] for a berserker to summon his Battle Frenzy.  One Pulse is also subtracted from the time taken to summon the Battle Frenzy for every -5% which is voluntarily subtracted from the success chance.  Once the required amount of time has passed a roll may be made each Pulse until a successful roll is achieved and the Berserker has summoned his Battle Frenzy.  He may engage in combat whilst he is attempting to summon the Frenzy.

       The type of activity a berserker is performing whilst trying to summon his Battle Frenzy will modify his chance as follows:

    ·          Gnawing on shield                  +5%

    ·          Ripping out hair

            [-1 PB for 1 month]                 +10%

    ·          Putting out an eye                          +100%

    ·          Being cornered                  +10%

    ·          For each friend killed                    +5%

    ·          For each Pulse after

    the first                                   +5%

    ·          For each previous use

    of the skill that day                       -10%

    Note: All modifiers are cumulative.

       A Battle Frenzy is extremely tiring.  The Berserker must expend 1 point of FT [EN when FT is exhausted] for each Pulse his Battle Frenzy lasts.

       If a berserker wishes to end his Battle Frenzy he must roll ([5 x WP] + [2 x Rank] – 5% for each Pulse after the 1st Pulse [+1 additional Pulse per Rank]).

    e.g. At Rank 10 Erik the berserker subtracts his first point of FT after 12 Pulses in Battle Frenzy mode and will continue to subtract 1 point of FT each Pulse after that.

    [107.4] Whilst in the grip of his Battle Frenzy the Berserker has the following advantages:

    a) Increased Strength: A berserker gains 5 points of strength (at Rank 0) + 1 point per Rank thereafter.

    b) Natural Armour: A berserker adds 1 x Rank to his Natural Armour against “A” and “B” class weapons.  

    c) Immunity to Natural Fire: The berserker is immune to natural fire.

    d) Suppress Pain: Berserkers are immune to pain.  They cannot be tortured or stunned. 

    e) Fearsome:  Because of the fearsome aspect of the berserker’s screams during battle, opponents must roll under ([4 x WP] – [2 x Rank of Berserker]) or they will experience difficulty attacking the berserker. If the roll is failed the opponents have -20% subtracted from their strike chance & -5 subtracted from their IV to strike the berserker.   Rolls are made at the beginning of combat with each opponent and last until the combat is ended or a successful roll is made.  Once successfully rolled an opponent is immune to the fear effect from this particular Berserker.

    f) Mind over body: The berserker may temporarily sacrifice WP to restore lost FT & EN.  For every point of WP temporarily sacrificed in such a manner a berserker will gain 1 point of FT or EN [player’s choice].   These points may only be used to bring the Berserker up to his starting value.

    g) Delay Death: By rolling under 3 x WP a berserker may delay death until the end of combat or until his EN reaches -8.  Damage from a Grievous Injury will still slay the Berserker however.

    h) Resistance to Magic: A berserker adds +5% to his Magic Resistance.

    [107.5] A Berserker also has the following disadvantages:

    a)  A Berserker may not use any type of armour except fur.

    b) A Berserker once having successfully summoned a Battle Frenzy must charge the first being he sees and engage him in Melee combat.  The Berserker cannot withdraw or cease fighting until his foe is dead or his Battle Frenzy is over.  Once his opponent is dead, if still in the grip of his Battle Frenzy, the Berserker will attack the next closest being still alive, friend or foe.

    c) If a Berserker is about to attack a fellow adventurer the Berserker may avoid this by rolling 2 x WP or less.  A successful roll immediately ends the Battle Frenzy.

    d) If the Berserker is knocked out, comes within 10 feet of an Elf, or is touched by a holy symbol wielded by a Priest or Cleric his Battle Frenzy will instantly end.

    e) Once a Berserker has reached 40 years of age a roll of 4 x EN or less must be made after the ending of each Battle Frenzy (-10% for each 5 years after 40) or suffer a heart attack.

    f) If magic is seen by the Berserker or he engages in Melee combat he must make an involuntary check for Battle Frenzy.

     

    Experience Point Cost

    Berserker

    500

    200

    600

    1400

    2400

    3600

    5000

    6600

    8400

    10400

    12600

     

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: Ted
    Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 9:10 AM
    Subject: [DQN-list] Berserkers

     

    I'm trying to come up with a good set of rules for dealing with Berserk/Blood Lusted characters. Want to have some simple characterstic and combat modifiers along with guideline for what turns em on and off, so to speak. This wouldnt be a skill to be learned but rather a condition they are prone to.

    Playing around with a some simple adds to PS, EN along with some combat pluses to strike chance/damage and minus to defense. Would also assume they would not take any defensive combat action nor hide behind shields.

    Anyone have any suggestions from what they have used?

    Thanks much,
    Ted



    No virus found in this incoming message.
    Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
    Version: 8.5.436 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2735 - Release Date: 03/10/10 19:33:00

    Group: dqn-list Message: 3514 From: Chris Date: 3/11/2010
    Subject: Berserker correction
    Attachments :
      The explanatory note at the end of 107.3 should read:
      At Rank 10 Erik the berserker subtracts -5% from the success chance to end his Battle Frenzy after 12 Pulses in Battle Frenzy mode and will continue to subtract -5% each Pulse after that.
      Group: dqn-list Message: 3515 From: Brock Date: 3/11/2010
      Subject: Re: Question about "Ritual of Magic Divination"
      That was what I was thinking.

      My player has another option available to him to figure out the nature of the spell charges invested in the object (it's a ring). Per the ritual, he can simply run the ritual on a person that was recently under the effects of the spell loosed from the ring. There is such a person available to him for the ritual.

      Thanks for the reply!

      - Brock


      --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@...> wrote:
      >
      > The Shaping magics ritual R-25 gives a better description of how it works. That ritual applies to stuff that is too old for this ritual and the identical one in shaping magics.
      >
      > While it doesn't say explicitly that it covers invested items, it does say it works for enchantments on items, so...I've always assumed that having the investment ritual done on it qualifies it for this. The clock starts running as soon as it is invested, so whether or not a charge is used it can quickly become impossible for the ritual to work on it. At that point you have to go to a shaper and get their R-25 done on it. If its beyond that you'd better hope somebody wrote it down in a book a hundred years ago or something.
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Brock" <brockrwood@> wrote:
      > >
      > > This is ritual R-1 for the College of Naming Incantations. What does "under the effect of a spell" mean? Does having a spell invested in an object put the object "under the effect of" the spell invested?
      > >
      > > The ritual, when successful, allows the caster to determine the exact name and college of the spell in question. This is a pretty good result for a ritual with a base chance of 40 percent and an experience multiple of 250.
      > >
      > > A player in my campaign is trying to use this ritual to divine the nature of a spell that has been invested into an object. It seems to me that he could use the ritual on an object or person that one of the spell "charges" in the object had been cast on, but not on the object itself.
      > >
      > > Also, the chance of the ritual working goes down over time. Is the time period measured from the time the object was invested with the spell or from the last time a spell "charge" in the object was cast?
      > >
      > > How do you guys interpret this rule?
      > >
      > > - Brock
      > >
      >
      Group: dqn-list Message: 3516 From: Jeffery K. McGonagill Date: 3/11/2010
      Subject: Re: Question about "Ritual of Magic Divination"
      He could also do a Detect Aura on said person.

      ~Jeffery~

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Brock" <brockrwood@eurekais.com>
      To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 11:25 AM
      Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Question about "Ritual of Magic Divination"


      > That was what I was thinking.
      >
      > My player has another option available to him to figure out the nature of
      > the spell charges invested in the object (it's a ring). Per the ritual,
      > he can simply run the ritual on a person that was recently under the
      > effects of the spell loosed from the ring. There is such a person
      > available to him for the ritual.
      >
      > Thanks for the reply!
      >
      > - Brock
      >
      >
      > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@...> wrote:
      >>
      >> The Shaping magics ritual R-25 gives a better description of how it
      >> works. That ritual applies to stuff that is too old for this ritual and
      >> the identical one in shaping magics.
      >>
      >> While it doesn't say explicitly that it covers invested items, it does
      >> say it works for enchantments on items, so...I've always assumed that
      >> having the investment ritual done on it qualifies it for this. The clock
      >> starts running as soon as it is invested, so whether or not a charge is
      >> used it can quickly become impossible for the ritual to work on it. At
      >> that point you have to go to a shaper and get their R-25 done on it. If
      >> its beyond that you'd better hope somebody wrote it down in a book a
      >> hundred years ago or something.
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Brock" <brockrwood@> wrote:
      >> >
      >> > This is ritual R-1 for the College of Naming Incantations. What does
      >> > "under the effect of a spell" mean? Does having a spell invested in an
      >> > object put the object "under the effect of" the spell invested?
      >> >
      >> > The ritual, when successful, allows the caster to determine the exact
      >> > name and college of the spell in question. This is a pretty good
      >> > result for a ritual with a base chance of 40 percent and an experience
      >> > multiple of 250.
      >> >
      >> > A player in my campaign is trying to use this ritual to divine the
      >> > nature of a spell that has been invested into an object. It seems to
      >> > me that he could use the ritual on an object or person that one of the
      >> > spell "charges" in the object had been cast on, but not on the object
      >> > itself.
      >> >
      >> > Also, the chance of the ritual working goes down over time. Is the
      >> > time period measured from the time the object was invested with the
      >> > spell or from the last time a spell "charge" in the object was cast?
      >> >
      >> > How do you guys interpret this rule?
      >> >
      >> > - Brock
      >> >
      >>
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      Group: dqn-list Message: 3517 From: Ted Date: 3/11/2010
      Subject: Re: PDF Version of the Rules
      --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@...> wrote:
      >
      > Does anyone know where I can find an unaltered pdf of the 2nd edition rules?
      >

      Try the "dragonquestfiles" yahoo group. They have em broken into 7 pdf files. I believe those are straight scans.
      Group: dqn-list Message: 3518 From: Ted Date: 3/11/2010
      Subject: Re: PDF Version of the Rules
      Try the "dragonquestfiles" yahoo group. They have the Bantam set broken into 7 pdf files. I believe those are straight scans.

      --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@...> wrote:
      >
      > Does anyone know where I can find an unaltered pdf of the 2nd edition rules?
      >
      Group: dqn-list Message: 3519 From: Ted Date: 3/11/2010
      Subject: Re: Question about "Ritual of Magic Divination"
      yup, although if he's trying to figure out how many charges are left on the ring I'm not sure the detect aura would show that...

      --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffery K. McGonagill" <igmod@...> wrote:
      >
      > He could also do a Detect Aura on said person.
      >
      > ~Jeffery~
      >
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: "Brock" <brockrwood@...>
      > To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
      > Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 11:25 AM
      > Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Question about "Ritual of Magic Divination"
      >
      >
      > > That was what I was thinking.
      > >
      > > My player has another option available to him to figure out the nature of
      > > the spell charges invested in the object (it's a ring). Per the ritual,
      > > he can simply run the ritual on a person that was recently under the
      > > effects of the spell loosed from the ring. There is such a person
      > > available to him for the ritual.
      > >
      > > Thanks for the reply!
      > >
      > > - Brock
      > >
      > >
      > > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@> wrote:
      > >>
      > >> The Shaping magics ritual R-25 gives a better description of how it
      > >> works. That ritual applies to stuff that is too old for this ritual and
      > >> the identical one in shaping magics.
      > >>
      > >> While it doesn't say explicitly that it covers invested items, it does
      > >> say it works for enchantments on items, so...I've always assumed that
      > >> having the investment ritual done on it qualifies it for this. The clock
      > >> starts running as soon as it is invested, so whether or not a charge is
      > >> used it can quickly become impossible for the ritual to work on it. At
      > >> that point you have to go to a shaper and get their R-25 done on it. If
      > >> its beyond that you'd better hope somebody wrote it down in a book a
      > >> hundred years ago or something.
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Brock" <brockrwood@> wrote:
      > >> >
      > >> > This is ritual R-1 for the College of Naming Incantations. What does
      > >> > "under the effect of a spell" mean? Does having a spell invested in an
      > >> > object put the object "under the effect of" the spell invested?
      > >> >
      > >> > The ritual, when successful, allows the caster to determine the exact
      > >> > name and college of the spell in question. This is a pretty good
      > >> > result for a ritual with a base chance of 40 percent and an experience
      > >> > multiple of 250.
      > >> >
      > >> > A player in my campaign is trying to use this ritual to divine the
      > >> > nature of a spell that has been invested into an object. It seems to
      > >> > me that he could use the ritual on an object or person that one of the
      > >> > spell "charges" in the object had been cast on, but not on the object
      > >> > itself.
      > >> >
      > >> > Also, the chance of the ritual working goes down over time. Is the
      > >> > time period measured from the time the object was invested with the
      > >> > spell or from the last time a spell "charge" in the object was cast?
      > >> >
      > >> > How do you guys interpret this rule?
      > >> >
      > >> > - Brock
      > >> >
      > >>
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ------------------------------------
      > >
      > > Yahoo! Groups Links
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
      Group: dqn-list Message: 3520 From: kaith_athanes Date: 3/12/2010
      Subject: Re: PDF Version of the Rules
      I checked. There are changes to the creation rules for giants. Didn't look further to see if anything else had been changed. Thanks for the tip, though.

      --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@> wrote:
      > >
      > > Does anyone know where I can find an unaltered pdf of the 2nd edition rules?
      > >
      >
      > Try the "dragonquestfiles" yahoo group. They have em broken into 7 pdf files. I believe those are straight scans.
      >
      Group: dqn-list Message: 3521 From: Jeffery K. McGonagill Date: 3/12/2010
      Subject: Re: Question about "Ritual of Magic Divination"
      True.

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@yahoo.com>
      To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 8:48 PM
      Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Question about "Ritual of Magic Divination"


      >
      > yup, although if he's trying to figure out how many charges are left on
      > the ring I'm not sure the detect aura would show that...
      >
      > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffery K. McGonagill" <igmod@...>
      > wrote:
      >>
      >> He could also do a Detect Aura on said person.
      >>
      >> ~Jeffery~
      >>
      >> ----- Original Message -----
      >> From: "Brock" <brockrwood@...>
      >> To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
      >> Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 11:25 AM
      >> Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Question about "Ritual of Magic Divination"
      >>
      >>
      >> > That was what I was thinking.
      >> >
      >> > My player has another option available to him to figure out the nature
      >> > of
      >> > the spell charges invested in the object (it's a ring). Per the
      >> > ritual,
      >> > he can simply run the ritual on a person that was recently under the
      >> > effects of the spell loosed from the ring. There is such a person
      >> > available to him for the ritual.
      >> >
      >> > Thanks for the reply!
      >> >
      >> > - Brock
      >> >
      >> >
      >> > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@> wrote:
      >> >>
      >> >> The Shaping magics ritual R-25 gives a better description of how it
      >> >> works. That ritual applies to stuff that is too old for this ritual
      >> >> and
      >> >> the identical one in shaping magics.
      >> >>
      >> >> While it doesn't say explicitly that it covers invested items, it does
      >> >> say it works for enchantments on items, so...I've always assumed that
      >> >> having the investment ritual done on it qualifies it for this. The
      >> >> clock
      >> >> starts running as soon as it is invested, so whether or not a charge
      >> >> is
      >> >> used it can quickly become impossible for the ritual to work on it. At
      >> >> that point you have to go to a shaper and get their R-25 done on it.
      >> >> If
      >> >> its beyond that you'd better hope somebody wrote it down in a book a
      >> >> hundred years ago or something.
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Brock" <brockrwood@> wrote:
      >> >> >
      >> >> > This is ritual R-1 for the College of Naming Incantations. What
      >> >> > does
      >> >> > "under the effect of a spell" mean? Does having a spell invested in
      >> >> > an
      >> >> > object put the object "under the effect of" the spell invested?
      >> >> >
      >> >> > The ritual, when successful, allows the caster to determine the
      >> >> > exact
      >> >> > name and college of the spell in question. This is a pretty good
      >> >> > result for a ritual with a base chance of 40 percent and an
      >> >> > experience
      >> >> > multiple of 250.
      >> >> >
      >> >> > A player in my campaign is trying to use this ritual to divine the
      >> >> > nature of a spell that has been invested into an object. It seems
      >> >> > to
      >> >> > me that he could use the ritual on an object or person that one of
      >> >> > the
      >> >> > spell "charges" in the object had been cast on, but not on the
      >> >> > object
      >> >> > itself.
      >> >> >
      >> >> > Also, the chance of the ritual working goes down over time. Is the
      >> >> > time period measured from the time the object was invested with the
      >> >> > spell or from the last time a spell "charge" in the object was cast?
      >> >> >
      >> >> > How do you guys interpret this rule?
      >> >> >
      >> >> > - Brock
      >> >> >
      >> >>
      >> >
      >> >
      >> >
      >> >
      >> > ------------------------------------
      >> >
      >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >> >
      >> >
      >> >
      >> >
      >>
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      Group: dqn-list Message: 3522 From: John_Rauchert Date: 3/12/2010
      Subject: Re: PDF Version of the Rules
      Although I haven't gone through it line by line the PDFs in the DQN-list files/Archive/ are as accurate a version of the Bantam Edition that I have come across.

      JohnR

      --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@...> wrote:
      >
      > I checked. There are changes to the creation rules for giants. Didn't look further to see if anything else had been changed. Thanks for the tip, though.
      >
      > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@> wrote:
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > Does anyone know where I can find an unaltered pdf of the 2nd edition rules?
      > > >
      > >
      > > Try the "dragonquestfiles" yahoo group. They have em broken into 7 pdf files. I believe those are straight scans.
      > >
      >
      Group: dqn-list Message: 3523 From: John_Rauchert Date: 3/12/2010
      Subject: Re: PDF Version of the Rules
      The PDFs in the Dragonquestfiles group are NOT straight scans. House Rules have been added (though I don't know to what extent, but I did go through the first book a long time ago).

      Another obvious change is the removal of the Main Gauche Rules:

      "Note: Main Gauche rules have been removed to protect the innocent."

      So you can check your versions just by looking for changes to Giants and the note above.

      JohnR

      --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@...> wrote:
      >
      > Try the "dragonquestfiles" yahoo group. They have the Bantam set broken into 7 pdf files. I believe those are straight scans.
      >
      > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@> wrote:
      > >
      > > Does anyone know where I can find an unaltered pdf of the 2nd edition rules?
      > >
      >
      Group: dqn-list Message: 3524 From: John_Rauchert Date: 3/12/2010
      Subject: Re: Berserkers
      Sounds like a fairly accurate representation (I haven't look to see if the rules are balanced) of the original Norse Berserker concept.

      According to Wikipedia:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berserker

      "This fury, which was called berserkergang, occurred not only in the heat of battle, but also during laborious work. Men who were thus seized performed things which otherwise seemed impossible for human power. This condition is said to have begun with shivering, chattering of the teeth, and chill in the body, and then the face swelled and changed its colour. With this was connected a great hot-headedness, which at last gave over into a great rage, under which they howled as wild animals, bit the edge of their shields, and cut down everything they met without discriminating between friend or foe. When this condition ceased, a great dulling of the mind and feebleness followed, which could last for one or several days.[6]"

      It would be interesting to work in the concept of applying Berserkergang to feats of strength a bit more.

      It would suck to put your eye out and then get a 13 on the Grievous Injury Table :)

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAe3NLbaZfU

      JohnR
      Group: dqn-list Message: 3525 From: Jeffery K. McGonagill Date: 3/12/2010
      Subject: Re: SPI's Designers (was: Re: Eric Goldberg)
      Decision Games (http://www.decisiongames.com/) owns a lot of the rights to SPI games.  Wikipedia has a partial list of their games (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulations_Publications,_Inc.).  You can also find connections to sites for SPI games at http://grognard.com/board.html and if you own ADC2 (http://www.hpssims.com/) then http://67.203.151.166/ will be useful.
       
      ~Jeffery~
      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 8:53 PM
      Subject: Re: [DQN-list] SPI's Designers (was: Re: Eric Goldberg)

      Being young, i dont know anything else by SPI what are some and links or something so i can check them out. Please

      On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 10:49 PM, Jeffery K. McGonagill <igmod@comcast.net> wrote:
       
      Group: dqn-list Message: 3526 From: J. K. Hoffman Date: 3/13/2010
      Subject: Re: PDF Version of the Rules
      I'm not sure if I'm the one who provided those modified PDFs or not, but
      they are the only ones I seem to have at them moment. A number of years
      ago, I had an exact scan I made from a softback copy which I had taken
      to someone who removed the spine for me for easy scanning. I still have
      that and will run them through the scanner at the office again to get an
      exact, unmodified scan of that and possibly some more stuff. When I do,
      I'll post a link to it and someone can verify it for vintage and then we
      can insert it into the Yahoo groups.

      Thanks!
      Jim

      dqn-list@yahoogroups.com wrote:
      Re: PDF Version of the Rules
      > Posted by: "John_Rauchert" jfrauchert@shaw.ca John_Rauchert
      > Date: Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:17 am ((PST))
      >
      > The PDFs in the Dragonquestfiles group are NOT straight scans. House
      Rules have been added (though I don't know to what extent, but I did go
      through the first book a long time ago).
      >
      > Another obvious change is the removal of the Main Gauche Rules:
      >
      > "Note: Main Gauche rules have been removed to protect the innocent."
      >
      > So you can check your versions just by looking for changes to Giants
      and the note above.
      >
      > JohnR
      >


      ----------
      Quote of the day:
      "It is a cardinal sin to bore the reader."
      - Larry Niven
      -----
      Group: dqn-list Message: 3527 From: Chris Date: 3/13/2010
      Subject: Re: Berserkers
      Attachments :
        @ JohnR
         
        You wrote "It would be interesting to work in the concept of applying Berserkergang to feats of strength a bit more."
         
        That would make an interesting addition to the skill.  Any further ideas about this addition?  What form would these feats of strength take, etc?
        Chris
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2010 5:47 AM
        Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Berserkers

         

        Sounds like a fairly accurate representation (I haven't look to see if the rules are balanced) of the original Norse Berserker concept.

        It would be interesting to work in the concept of applying Berserkergang to feats of strength a bit more.


        JohnR



        No virus found in this incoming message.
        Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
        Version: 8.5.436 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2739 - Release Date: 03/11/10 21:50:00

        Group: dqn-list Message: 3528 From: John Rauchert Date: 3/13/2010
        Subject: Re: Berserkers

        Here is sort of what I was thinking (not refined of course).

         

        A Berserker may enter a similar state as Battle Frenzy in non-combat situations (particularly if magic is involved).

         

        Life of friend is threatened

        Life of self is threatened

        Number of unsuccessful attempts made in presence of companions

        Being cornered

        For each friend killed

         

        Abilities Gained:

         

        a) Increased Strength: A berserker gains 5 points of strength (at Rank 0) + 1 point per Rank thereafter.

         

        b) Natural Armour: A berserker adds 1 x Rank to his Natural Armour against “A” and “B” class weapons.  

         

        c) Immunity to Natural Fire: The berserker is immune to natural fire.

         

        d) Suppress Pain: Berserkers are immune to pain.  They cannot be tortured or stunned. 

         

        f) Mind over body: The berserker may temporarily sacrifice WP to restore lost FT & EN.  For every point of WP temporarily sacrificed in such a manner a berserker will gain 1 point of FT or EN [player’s choice].   These points may only be used to bring the Berserker up to his starting value.

         

        g) Delay Death: By rolling under 3 x WP a berserker may delay death until the end of a frenzy or until his EN reaches -8.  Damage from a Grievous Injury will still slay the Berserker however.

         

        h) Resistance to Magic: A berserker adds +5% to his Magic Resistance.

         

        While in non-combat frenzy the Berserker may perform feats of strength (particularly destructive ones) and endurance at the level of ability of their increased stats and without regard of their own personal injury.

         

        See [4.1] for examples

         

        The non-combat frenzy is similar to combat except the Berserker will not attack friends while in this frenzy but they may continue to attack/destory any objects in line of sight until the frenzy over.

         

        So basically it involves stuff like lifting a fallen tree trunk off of young child’s leg, breaking down the magically locked door that has foiled your battering ram with your bare hands, running through fire to rescue the chieftain’s daughter, or swimming through icy waters to save drowning companion.

         

        JohnR

         


        From: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com [mailto: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Chris
        Sent: March 13, 2010 5:55 PM
        To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [DQN-list] Re: Berserkers

         

         

        @ JohnR

         

        You wrote "It would be interesting to work in the concept of applying Berserkergang to feats of strength a bit more."

         

        That would make an interesting addition to the skill.  Any further ideas about this addition?  What form would these feats of strength take, etc?

        Chris

        Group: dqn-list Message: 3529 From: J. K. Hoffman Date: 3/17/2010
        Subject: Re: PDF Version of the Rules
        Try http://www.fantasist.net/dragonquest.shtml See if those are better,
        more accurate. There's also some other stuff there, too.

        Enjoy!
        Jim

        dqn-list@yahoogroups.com wrote:
        2b. Re: PDF Version of the Rules
        Posted by: "John_Rauchert" jfrauchert@shaw.ca John_Rauchert
        Date: Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:17 am ((PST))

        The PDFs in the Dragonquestfiles group are NOT straight scans. House
        Rules have been added (though I don't know to what extent, but I did go
        through the first book a long time ago).

        Another obvious change is the removal of the Main Gauche Rules:

        "Note: Main Gauche rules have been removed to protect the innocent."

        So you can check your versions just by looking for changes to Giants and
        the note above.

        JohnR

        ----------
        Quote of the day:
        Are you a Network Geek? Then, check out my blog at
        http://www.ryumaou.com/hoffman/netgeek/

        More into fantasy and science-fiction? Then, try my other blog at
        http://www.fantasist.net/scroll/
        -----
        Group: dqn-list Message: 3530 From: kaith_athanes Date: 3/17/2010
        Subject: Re: PDF Version of the Rules
        Thank you. That is exactly what I was looking for.

        --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "J. K. Hoffman" <ryumaou@...> wrote:
        >
        > Try http://www.fantasist.net/dragonquest.shtml See if those are better,
        > more accurate. There's also some other stuff there, too.
        >
        > Enjoy!
        > Jim
        >
        > dqn-list@yahoogroups.com wrote:
        > 2b. Re: PDF Version of the Rules
        > Posted by: "John_Rauchert" jfrauchert@... John_Rauchert
        > Date: Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:17 am ((PST))
        >
        > The PDFs in the Dragonquestfiles group are NOT straight scans. House
        > Rules have been added (though I don't know to what extent, but I did go
        > through the first book a long time ago).
        >
        > Another obvious change is the removal of the Main Gauche Rules:
        >
        > "Note: Main Gauche rules have been removed to protect the innocent."
        >
        > So you can check your versions just by looking for changes to Giants and
        > the note above.
        >
        > JohnR
        >
        > ----------
        > Quote of the day:
        > Are you a Network Geek? Then, check out my blog at
        > http://www.ryumaou.com/hoffman/netgeek/
        >
        > More into fantasy and science-fiction? Then, try my other blog at
        > http://www.fantasist.net/scroll/
        > -----
        >
        Group: dqn-list Message: 3531 From: kakashi64 Date: 3/17/2010
        Subject: SPI's Designers (was: Re: Eric Goldberg)
        Good ol' SPI!

        I really enjoyed Wreck of the Pandora. That was in Ares, wasn't it? I also had Great Medieval Battles (very simple system, but some of the battles are kind of one-sided regardless of tactics); Great Sieges (not sure if that's the right name), War of the Rings – a UK copy I later sold on eBay for about $160!; everything using the Ney vs. Wellington system, still my favorite Napoleonic tactical system (and yes, I really have spread out ALL the maps and counters to Waterloo and played it through!); TimeTripper, a very silly but fun game; Age of Sail (have to say I prefer AH's Wooden Ships and Iron Men); Blue & Gray quad games; the Napoleon quad set; Kaiser's War (or Kaiser's Battle?), about the 1918 German offensive; and all the mini games from S&T. Man, I miss those days…


        --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Brock" <brockrwood@...> wrote:
        >
        > I also loved many of those old SPI games mentioned by Jeffery. What a trip down memory lane!
        >
        > A couple of other SPI games I was fond of: "Invasion: America" and "Battlefleet Mars".
        >
        > In particular I remember spending many an enjoyable night playing "Swords and Sorcery." The game was based on the exploits of the designers' D&D characters, no? The flavor of the game was often "tongue in cheek" from what I remember. I recall a magical object or place in the game called the "Rex Rotary" that created tyrannosaurus rexs for you!
        >
        > Here is a link to the game at Boardgamegeek.com:
        >
        > http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/2464/swords-sorcery
        >
        > I enjoyed playing the "War of the Ring" SPI game. I remember that, in one game, we discarded the standard rules in favor of a free-for-all clash in the middle of the map using all of the available armies. That was fun!
        >
        > http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/2228/war-of-the-ring
        >
        > - Brock
        >
        >
        > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffery K. McGonagill" <igmod@> wrote:
        > >
        > > War in Europe and War in the Pacific were my favorites.
        > >
        > > Fantasy Games: Sword and Sorcery, Sorcerer, Ragarok, War of the Ring,
        > > Albion, John Carter Warlord of Mars, Barbarian Kings.
        > >
        > > History Games: Highway to the Reich, Atlantic Wall, Austerlitz: Battle of
        > > the Three Emperors, various Blue&Gray games, PRESTAGS Masterpack.
        > >
        > > Sci-Fi: Creature That Ate Sheboygan, Starforce: Alpha Centauri, Outreach,
        > > Wreck of the B.S.M. Pandora, Voyage of the B.S.M. Pandora.
        > >
        > > All of these are part of my collection. I lost a few games in a divorce,
        > > gave my nephews some.
        > >
        > > ~Jeffery~
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > From: "shawng" <shawn4186@>
        > > To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
        > > Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 6:02 PM
        > > Subject: [DQN-list] SPI's Designers (was: Re: Eric Goldberg)
        > >
        > >
        > > > Yes - excellent point. The surveys in the back of ARES gave alot of info
        > > > on what they were think about doing and what could have been.
        > > > This from ARES #5 November 1980 relating to DQ:
        > > > - Creating wilderness adventure
        > > > - Creating urban adventures
        > > > - Randomized Dungeon kit
        > > > - Handbook of advanced skills
        > > > - Castle building and estate management
        > > > if you want the full description I can type them up.
        > > > I don't dont remember there being anything in Moves magazine, which was
        > > > more about historical "real life" wars and battles, but sometimes they had
        > > > some extra stuff about fantasy - I know I have two Moves magazines where
        > > > they talked about Death Maze and Citadel of blood.
        > > >
        > > > By the way what other SPI games did you play?
        > > >
        > > > Anyone ever play Air War?
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffery K. McGonagill" <igmod@>
        > > > wrote:
        > > >>
        > > >> Back in the day I was a SPI fan. In one of their magazine surveys they
        > > >> asked if anyone was interested in an army combat simulation (aka game)
        > > >> for
        > > >> DQ. I don't know if any research had been done on the idea.
        > > >>
        > > >> ~Jeffery~
        > > >>
        > > >> ----- Original Message -----
        > > >> From: "Bob" <bobconstans@>
        > > >> To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
        > > >> Sent: Friday, March 05, 2010 11:05 AM
        > > >> Subject: [DQN-list] SPI's Designers (was: Re: Eric Goldberg)
        > > >>
        > > >>
        > > >> I seem to recall hearing somewhere that everything that could be leaked &
        > > >> scrounged up by the designers in regards to DQ had been "set free" some
        > > >> time
        > > >> after SPI fell to TSR - not so much as a revenge but as a courtesy to the
        > > >> gamers and with pride by the designers. They were universally regarded as
        > > >> the top designers in the field and respected as such. A great bunch of
        > > >> guys
        > > >> happy to encourage any "afterlife" of DQ. But who knows - there could be
        > > >> more turned up with time or memory. As Geoff says, Absolutely can't hurt
        > > >> to
        > > >> ask. If nothing else, they'd probably appreciate kowing that they still
        > > >> have
        > > >> fans.
        > > >>
        > > >> --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, Geoff Berman <geoffberman2000@> wrote:
        > > >> >
        > > >> > Any chance you could ask him? :-) and I'd willing to take scans or
        > > >> > copies
        > > >> > :-D lol
        > > >> >
        > > >> > --- On Sun, 2/28/10, viktor.haag@ <viktor.haag@> wrote:
        > > >> >
        > > >> > From: viktor.haag@ <viktor.haag@>
        > > >> > Subject: Re: [DQN-list] SPI's Designers (was: Re: Eric Goldberg)
        > > >> > To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
        > > >> > Date: Sunday, February 28, 2010, 2:28 PM
        > > >> >
        > > >> > But I have no idea whether he still has any DQ materials, or if he did,
        > > >> > whether he has any interest in relinquishing them.
        > > >> >
        > > >> > V.
        > > >> > -----Original Message-----
        > > >> > From: viktor.haag@
        > > >> > Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 20:27:41
        > > >> > To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
        > > >> > Subject: Re: [DQN-list] SPI's Designers (was: Re: Eric Goldberg)
        > > >> >
        > > >> > Neil Randall who did some playtesting of DQ (I believe) and later
        > > >> > development for the James Bond RPG and GMT wargames is Prof Neil
        > > >> > Randall
        > > >> > at the University of Waterloo in Ontario, Canada.
        > > >> >
        > > >> > V.
        > > >> > -----Original Message-----
        > > >> > From: Rodger Thorm <rthorm@>
        > > >> > Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 14:06:57
        > > >> > To: <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
        > > >> > Subject: [DQN-list] SPI's Designers (was: Re: Eric Goldberg)
        > > >> >
        > > >> > We had some contact with Gerald Klug (who now goes by 'Chris' although
        > > >> > he's not the snowboarding Chris Klug) for the DragonQuest Newsletter.
        > > >> > And, there have been other accounts of other groups getting in touch
        > > >> > with members of the DQ team that are similar in describing their
        > > >> > accessibility and graciousness. I think they were a good group, and
        > > >> > it's too bad they haven't received more recognition.
        > > >> >
        > > >> > It can seem a bit odd to be a fanboy of someone else's work, but,
        > > >> > having
        > > >> > received a couple of congratulations for my non-pseudonymous work out
        > > >> > in
        > > >> > the real world, I can say from my own perspective that it's wonderful
        > > >> > to
        > > >> > have someone appreciate work you have done, and I expect they are
        > > >> > heartened by the occasional ping from one of us reminding them that
        > > >> > some
        > > >> > of us still love work they produced over a quarter century ago.
        > > >> >
        > > >> > -- Rodger
        > > >> >
        > > >> >
        > > >> > ------------------------------------
        > > >> >
        > > >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
        > > >> >
        > > >> >
        > > >> >
        > > >> >
        > > >> >
        > > >> > ------------------------------------
        > > >> >
        > > >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
        > > >> >
        > > >>
        > > >>
        > > >>
        > > >>
        > > >> ------------------------------------
        > > >>
        > > >> Yahoo! Groups Links
        > > >>
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > ------------------------------------
        > > >
        > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > >
        >
        Group: dqn-list Message: 3532 From: kakashi64 Date: 3/17/2010
        Subject: Re: If You Were Going to GM a System *Other* than DQ, What Would it
        I recently tried Warriors and Warlocks, the "comic-book fantasy fiction RPG" supplement to Green Ronin's Mutants and Masterminds super-hero RPG. Pretty awesome. I ran a fast-and-loose game with minimal prep and a pulp-fantasy feel, and it worked really well. It's not for everyone, but it dispenses with a lot of the dead weight I've come to dislike about many RPG's – counting money, for example – and with just a few tweaks the system could well be applied to other genres.

        --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Brock" <brockrwood@...> wrote:
        >
        > I know that this is speaking heresy, but I am genuinely curious.
        >
        > Is there another system that has some of the positive qualities we like in DragonQuest that you have GMed or would consider GMing? If so, what is it?
        >
        > The Palladium Fantasy Role-Playing Game?
        >
        > GURPS?
        >
        > Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay?
        >
        > HERO System?
        >
        > RuneQuest or "Basic Roleplaying"?
        >
        > Unisystem?
        >
        > Tunnels and Trolls?
        >
        > Bunnies and Burrows?
        >
        > Something else?
        >
        > - Brock
        >
        Group: dqn-list Message: 3533 From: kaith_athanes Date: 3/18/2010
        Subject: Initial reactions versus long experience
        I am always amused when someone -- usually a player new to the system -- tells me that fire magics is too powerful. Whenever someone tells me this, they always point to the spell of dragon flames. My long experience with the game tells me otherwise.

        First off, it is S-10 and compared to many other spells that deep into the special knowledge of a college, it really isn't that bad. Telekinetic Rage, Sinking Doom, Dwarf Star are all around the S-10 mark.

        Next, perhaps my attitude is colored by the type of campaigns I have run and played in. They are usually Thieves' World or something similar to the Hyborian age with most of the combats being against humans or similar. Against a platoon of Rankan soldiers or a horde of orcs, Ice Projectiles and Freezing Winds are much more devastating than Dragon Flames and come earlier in their college. Against a single human sized target, Enchanted Sleep (a general knowledge spell) and Mental Attack (S-1) are easily as powerful as Dragon Flames. Against a roc or a tribe of giants, then maybe fire gets the edge over air magics. I've seen those situations too rarely to be positive.

        Third, a fire mage can do little else but burn things. Even then, he's only -really- good at hurting one thing at a time. His area of effect spells are either low damage or very low base chance. What he brings to a party is single target sniping and protection against other fire mages. Oh, that's another thing. A single general knowledge spell can render a fire mage's magic useless. An air mage can damage lots of targets at once and can control the battlefield by placing zones of freezing winds to disrupt or constrict enemy movement. Celestial mages and necromancers can control the battlefield with wall spells. A fire mage's wall spell is concentration; he can't use it and then cast other spells. An enchanter's buff spells can turn a party of heroes into a party of super heroes(aside from the obvious stuff, the combination of enhance enchantment and enchanting weapon is just sick damage). A mind mage can kick back on his front porch and knock out everyone in the house two doors down, then go invisible, walk in, and slit all their throats.

        And last, dragon flames is what I refer to as a replacement spell. Fire magics has a few of these. He learns bolt of fire, but pretty much stops using it once he learns imploding fireball. He stops using imploding fireball once he gets good at dragon flames. Demonic firebolt... no reason to even learn it if you already have imploders. An air mage has no reason to retire ice projectiles or freezing winds just because he learns lightning bolt. A high end fire mage carries around a lot of ranks of spells that are no longer of value to him. A lot of spent experience that no longer adds to his effectiveness. With an enchanter or mind mage at the same level of experience, all the spells they've learned still matter.

        Don't get me wrong. I do not in any way think fire magics is weak. I think it is balanced. It fills a specific role and does so very well. It can't smash a platoon in a single casting the way air magics can, but it can start hitting that platoon a LOT further away and is much more effective against single high endurance or high resistance targets.

        All of this is based on the assumption that the GM somewhat limits access to high end special knowledge spells. If you let players get their spells whenever and in whatever order they choose, then the balance thing goes straight out the window.

        Anyway, those are my somewhat rambling thoughts. What are your opinions and experiences in the matter?
        Group: dqn-list Message: 3534 From: Geoff Berman Date: 3/18/2010
        Subject: Re: Initial reactions versus long experience
        To be honest, this is the first time, I've ever even heard of learning spells in order, and I've been playing the game since the 80s. Although in my groups, it was sometimes hard just finding a mage with a S spell to learn from, so maybe thats how the GM was limiting abuse.

        --- On Thu, 3/18/10, kaith_athanes <kaith_athanes@yahoo.com> wrote:

        From: kaith_athanes <kaith_athanes@yahoo.com>
        Subject: [DQN-list] Initial reactions versus long experience
        To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Thursday, March 18, 2010, 6:05 PM

        I am always amused when someone -- usually a player new to the system -- tells me that fire magics is too powerful. Whenever someone tells me this, they always point to the spell of dragon flames. My long experience with the game tells me otherwise.

        First off, it is S-10 and compared to many other spells that deep into the special knowledge of a college, it really isn't that bad. Telekinetic Rage, Sinking Doom, Dwarf Star are all around the S-10 mark.

        Next, perhaps my attitude is colored by the type of campaigns I have run and played in. They are usually Thieves' World or something similar to the Hyborian age with most of the combats being against humans or similar. Against a platoon of Rankan soldiers or a horde of orcs, Ice Projectiles and Freezing Winds are much more devastating than Dragon Flames and come earlier in their college. Against a single human sized target, Enchanted Sleep (a general knowledge spell) and Mental Attack (S-1) are easily as powerful as Dragon Flames. Against a roc or a tribe of giants, then maybe fire gets the edge over air magics. I've seen those situations too rarely to be positive.

        Third, a fire mage can do little else but burn things. Even then, he's only -really- good at hurting one thing at a time. His area of effect spells are either low damage or very low base chance. What he brings to a party is single target sniping and protection against other fire mages. Oh, that's another thing. A single general knowledge spell can render a fire mage's magic useless. An air mage can damage lots of targets at once and can control the battlefield by placing zones of freezing winds to disrupt or constrict enemy movement. Celestial mages and necromancers can control the battlefield with wall spells. A fire mage's wall spell is concentration; he can't use it and then cast other spells. An enchanter's buff spells can turn a party of heroes into a party of super heroes(aside from the obvious stuff, the combination of enhance enchantment and enchanting weapon is just sick damage). A mind mage can kick back on his front porch and knock out everyone in the house two doors down, then go invisible, walk in, and slit all their throats.

        And last, dragon flames is what I refer to as a replacement spell. Fire magics has a few of these. He learns bolt of fire, but pretty much stops using it once he learns imploding fireball. He stops using imploding fireball once he gets good at dragon flames. Demonic firebolt... no reason to even learn it if you already have imploders. An air mage has no reason to retire ice projectiles or freezing winds just because he learns lightning bolt. A high end fire mage carries around a lot of ranks of spells that are no longer of value to him. A lot of spent experience that no longer adds to his effectiveness. With an enchanter or mind mage at the same level of experience, all the spells they've learned still matter.

        Don't get me wrong. I do not in any way think fire magics is weak. I think it is balanced. It fills a specific role and does so very well. It can't smash a platoon in a single casting the way air magics can, but it can start hitting that platoon a LOT further away and is much more effective against single high endurance or high resistance targets.

        All of this is based on the assumption that the GM somewhat limits access to high end special knowledge spells. If you let players get their spells whenever and in whatever order they choose, then the balance thing goes straight out the window.

        Anyway, those are my somewhat rambling thoughts. What are your opinions and experiences in the matter?



        ------------------------------------

        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/


        Group: dqn-list Message: 3535 From: Ted Date: 3/18/2010
        Subject: Re: Initial reactions versus long experience
        I've also never kept to requiring, or even allowing, the special knowledge spells to be learned in any particular order. My players usually feel lucky to have found an adept who is a) willing to teach them and b) has a particular spell they are looking for. It never actually occurred to me to require players to learn them in ordinal number order, like prerequisites. That's odd since i've been playing since 1st edition...i love how these boards make me think about stuff from different points of view. Rules dont say one way or the other. I've always tended to control how much Special Knowledge gets loose and how quickly as kind of a game balance thing.

        As for fire magics being overpowered, I agree with you that its fine. It does tend to have more damage producing spells earlier (as in they are available as General Knowledge) than alot of other colleges. But they all have their strengths. What makes Fire so attractive is that it doesnt require a huge amount of imagination to get the basics of how and when to use it, especially in combat situations. Other colleges aren't nearly as straightforward in this respect and require some preplanning to be used to full effect. For instance an illusionist or lesser summoner has very few off the cuff options in combat.

        I'm assuming that from your statements about earlier spells being disused once a more powerful one is learned, you're refering to damage output upon succesful cast. i've found that the other spells still get used, especially when their base chance is much better or there is a particular application that doesnt come down to brute strength damage (like using a scalpel rather than a machete)

        --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@...> wrote:
        >
        > I am always amused when someone -- usually a player new to the system -- tells me that fire magics is too powerful. Whenever someone tells me this, they always point to the spell of dragon flames. My long experience with the game tells me otherwise.
        >
        > First off, it is S-10 and compared to many other spells that deep into the special knowledge of a college, it really isn't that bad. Telekinetic Rage, Sinking Doom, Dwarf Star are all around the S-10 mark.
        >
        > Next, perhaps my attitude is colored by the type of campaigns I have run and played in. They are usually Thieves' World or something similar to the Hyborian age with most of the combats being against humans or similar. Against a platoon of Rankan soldiers or a horde of orcs, Ice Projectiles and Freezing Winds are much more devastating than Dragon Flames and come earlier in their college. Against a single human sized target, Enchanted Sleep (a general knowledge spell) and Mental Attack (S-1) are easily as powerful as Dragon Flames. Against a roc or a tribe of giants, then maybe fire gets the edge over air magics. I've seen those situations too rarely to be positive.
        >
        > Third, a fire mage can do little else but burn things. Even then, he's only -really- good at hurting one thing at a time. His area of effect spells are either low damage or very low base chance. What he brings to a party is single target sniping and protection against other fire mages. Oh, that's another thing. A single general knowledge spell can render a fire mage's magic useless. An air mage can damage lots of targets at once and can control the battlefield by placing zones of freezing winds to disrupt or constrict enemy movement. Celestial mages and necromancers can control the battlefield with wall spells. A fire mage's wall spell is concentration; he can't use it and then cast other spells. An enchanter's buff spells can turn a party of heroes into a party of super heroes(aside from the obvious stuff, the combination of enhance enchantment and enchanting weapon is just sick damage). A mind mage can kick back on his front porch and knock out everyone in the house two doors down, then go invisible, walk in, and slit all their throats.
        >
        > And last, dragon flames is what I refer to as a replacement spell. Fire magics has a few of these. He learns bolt of fire, but pretty much stops using it once he learns imploding fireball. He stops using imploding fireball once he gets good at dragon flames. Demonic firebolt... no reason to even learn it if you already have imploders. An air mage has no reason to retire ice projectiles or freezing winds just because he learns lightning bolt. A high end fire mage carries around a lot of ranks of spells that are no longer of value to him. A lot of spent experience that no longer adds to his effectiveness. With an enchanter or mind mage at the same level of experience, all the spells they've learned still matter.
        >
        > Don't get me wrong. I do not in any way think fire magics is weak. I think it is balanced. It fills a specific role and does so very well. It can't smash a platoon in a single casting the way air magics can, but it can start hitting that platoon a LOT further away and is much more effective against single high endurance or high resistance targets.
        >
        > All of this is based on the assumption that the GM somewhat limits access to high end special knowledge spells. If you let players get their spells whenever and in whatever order they choose, then the balance thing goes straight out the window.
        >
        > Anyway, those are my somewhat rambling thoughts. What are your opinions and experiences in the matter?
        >
        Group: dqn-list Message: 3536 From: novakdb@comcast.net Date: 3/18/2010
        Subject: Re: Initial reactions versus long experience
        Interesting topic.

        The College that I found to be the most difficult to GM "against" was Lesser Summoning.  The general knowledge has the Spell of Binding Lesser Beasts can control multiple monsters without concentration and has range in the miles and the Summon Energy Spell can both damage the opponent and heal the adept.  In Special Knowledge, Bodily Possession makes for interesting combat and throw in Communication with Greater Sentients and you get a telepathic radio.  That said, the MA needed for the College is high and there are a fair number of spells with EXM's over 399.  The GM just needs to be a little more creative in what faces the character (plus careful since if the Lesser Summoners fails their binding of 10 nasties, the party can get overrun).





        ----- "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@yahoo.com> wrote:
        > From: "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@yahoo.com>
        > To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
        > Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2010 6:45:58 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
        > Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Initial reactions versus long experience
        >
        >
         
        >
        >
        >

        I've also never kept to requiring, or even allowing, the special knowledge spells to be learned in any particular order. My players usually feel lucky to have found an adept who is a) willing to teach them and b) has a particular spell they are looking for. It never actually occurred to me to require players to learn them in ordinal number order, like prerequisites. That's odd since i've been playing since 1st edition...i love how these boards make me think about stuff from different points of view. Rules dont say one way or the other. I've always tended to control how much Special Knowledge gets loose and how quickly as kind of a game balance thing.

        >
        >
        As for fire magics being overpowered, I agree with you that its fine. It does tend to have more damage producing spells earlier (as in they are available as General Knowledge) than alot of other colleges. But they all have their strengths. What makes Fire so attractive is that it doesnt require a huge amount of imagination to get the basics of how and when to use it, especially in combat situations. Other colleges aren't nearly as straightforward in this respect and require some preplanning to be used to full effect. For instance an illusionist or lesser summoner has very few off the cuff options in combat.
        >
        >
        I'm assuming that from your statements about earlier spells being disused once a more powerful one is learned, you're refering to damage output upon succesful cast. i've found that the other spells still get used, especially when their base chance is much better or there is a particular application that doesnt come down to brute strength damage (like using a scalpel rather than a machete)
        >
        > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@...> wrote:
        > >
        > > I am always amused when someone -- usually a player new to the system -- tells me that fire magics is too powerful. Whenever someone tells me this, they always point to the spell of dragon flames. My long experience with the game tells me otherwise.
        > >
        > > First off, it is S-10 and compared to many other spells that deep into the special knowledge of a college, it really isn't that bad. Telekinetic Rage, Sinking Doom, Dwarf Star are all around the S-10 mark.
        > >
        > > Next, perhaps my attitude is colored by the type of campaigns I have run and played in. They are usually Thieves' World or something similar to the Hyborian age with most of the combats being against humans or similar. Against a platoon of Rankan soldiers or a horde of orcs, Ice Projectiles and Freezing Winds are much more devastating than Dragon Flames and come earlier in their college. Against a single human sized target, Enchanted Sleep (a general knowledge spell) and Mental Attack (S-1) are easily as powerful as Dragon Flames. Against a roc or a tribe of giants, then maybe fire gets the edge over air magics. I've seen those situations too rarely to be positive.
        > >
        > > Third, a fire mage can do little else but burn things. Even then, he's only -really- good at hurting one thing at a time. His area of effect spells are either low damage or very low base chance. What he brings to a party is single target sniping and protection against other fire mages. Oh, that's another thing. A single general knowledge spell can render a fire mage's magic useless. An air mage can damage lots of targets at once and can control the battlefield by placing zones of freezing winds to disrupt or constrict enemy movement. Celestial mages and necromancers can control the battlefield with wall spells. A fire mage's wall spell is concentration; he can't use it and then cast other spells. An enchanter's buff spells can turn a party of heroes into a party of super heroes(aside from the obvious stuff, the combination of enhance enchantment and enchanting weapon is just sick damage). A mind mage can kick back on his front porch and knock out everyone in the house two doors down, then go invisible, walk in, and slit all their throats.
        > >
        > > And last, dragon flames is what I refer to as a replacement spell. Fire magics has a few of these. He learns bolt of fire, but pretty much stops using it once he learns imploding fireball. He stops using imploding fireball once he gets good at dragon flames. Demonic firebolt... no reason to even learn it if you already have imploders. An air mage has no reason to retire ice projectiles or freezing winds just because he learns lightning bolt. A high end fire mage carries around a lot of ranks of spells that are no longer of value to him. A lot of spent experience that no longer adds to his effectiveness. With an enchanter or mind mage at the same level of experience, all the spells they've learned still matter.
        > >
        > > Don't get me wrong. I do not in any way think fire magics is weak. I think it is balanced. It fills a specific role and does so very well. It can't smash a platoon in a single casting the way air magics can, but it can start hitting that platoon a LOT further away and is much more effective against single high endurance or high resistance targets.
        > >
        > > All of this is based on the assumption that the GM somewhat limits access to high end special knowledge spells. If you let players get their spells whenever and in whatever order they choose, then the balance thing goes straight out the window.
        > >
        > > Anyway, those are my somewhat rambling thoughts. What are your opinions and experiences in the matter?
        > >
        >
        >

        >
        Group: dqn-list Message: 3537 From: kaith_athanes Date: 3/19/2010
        Subject: Re: Initial reactions versus long experience
        --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@...> wrote:
        >
        > I've also never kept to requiring, or even allowing, the special knowledge spells to be learned in any particular order. My players usually feel lucky to have found an adept who is a) willing to teach them and b) has a particular spell they are looking for. It never actually occurred to me to require players to learn them in ordinal number order, like prerequisites. That's odd since i've been playing since 1st edition...i love how these boards make me think about stuff from different points of view. Rules dont say one way or the other. I've always tended to control how much Special Knowledge gets loose and how quickly as kind of a game balance thing.
        >

        We have never had it as an arbitrary game rule that they -must- be learned in order, but more an in character socially enforced rule. That is, if the character buys the spell training from a mage's guild, the guild teaches them in order. Finding an independent adept who would teach something to you that the guild wouldn't could be difficult and likely much more expensive than 200 * ordinal number silver. Although it did happen a few times that a bribe to a clerk in the guild would let a player skip a spell. Occasionally if there were a spell that I (as GM) needed the players to get sooner than the ordinal number would make convenient, it would show up as treasure in a grimoire. In this case, the spell was almost always used against them first by the person they had to kill to get it.

        > As for fire magics being overpowered, I agree with you that its fine. It does tend to have more damage producing spells earlier (as in they are available as General Knowledge) than alot of other colleges. But they all have their strengths. What makes Fire so attractive is that it doesnt require a huge amount of imagination to get the basics of how and when to use it, especially in combat situations. Other colleges aren't nearly as straightforward in this respect and require some preplanning to be used to full effect. For instance an illusionist or lesser summoner has very few off the cuff options in combat.
        >

        I'm currently in the character creation phase of a new campaign that I'll be running online using maptools. One of the players is planning on taking fire magics specifically because of the point you just made. He has caught a lot of ribbing over the years for being the most tactically unsound player in the group, so he decided to go with a very straightforward college to make it easier for him to avoid boneheaded moves.

        > I'm assuming that from your statements about earlier spells being disused once a more powerful one is learned, you're refering to damage output upon succesful cast. i've found that the other spells still get used, especially when their base chance is much better or there is a particular application that doesnt come down to brute strength damage (like using a scalpel rather than a machete)
        >
        > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@> wrote:
        > >
        > > I am always amused when someone -- usually a player new to the system -- tells me that fire magics is too powerful. Whenever someone tells me this, they always point to the spell of dragon flames. My long experience with the game tells me otherwise.
        > >
        > > First off, it is S-10 and compared to many other spells that deep into the special knowledge of a college, it really isn't that bad. Telekinetic Rage, Sinking Doom, Dwarf Star are all around the S-10 mark.
        > >
        > > Next, perhaps my attitude is colored by the type of campaigns I have run and played in. They are usually Thieves' World or something similar to the Hyborian age with most of the combats being against humans or similar. Against a platoon of Rankan soldiers or a horde of orcs, Ice Projectiles and Freezing Winds are much more devastating than Dragon Flames and come earlier in their college. Against a single human sized target, Enchanted Sleep (a general knowledge spell) and Mental Attack (S-1) are easily as powerful as Dragon Flames. Against a roc or a tribe of giants, then maybe fire gets the edge over air magics. I've seen those situations too rarely to be positive.
        > >
        > > Third, a fire mage can do little else but burn things. Even then, he's only -really- good at hurting one thing at a time. His area of effect spells are either low damage or very low base chance. What he brings to a party is single target sniping and protection against other fire mages. Oh, that's another thing. A single general knowledge spell can render a fire mage's magic useless. An air mage can damage lots of targets at once and can control the battlefield by placing zones of freezing winds to disrupt or constrict enemy movement. Celestial mages and necromancers can control the battlefield with wall spells. A fire mage's wall spell is concentration; he can't use it and then cast other spells. An enchanter's buff spells can turn a party of heroes into a party of super heroes(aside from the obvious stuff, the combination of enhance enchantment and enchanting weapon is just sick damage). A mind mage can kick back on his front porch and knock out everyone in the house two doors down, then go invisible, walk in, and slit all their throats.
        > >
        > > And last, dragon flames is what I refer to as a replacement spell. Fire magics has a few of these. He learns bolt of fire, but pretty much stops using it once he learns imploding fireball. He stops using imploding fireball once he gets good at dragon flames. Demonic firebolt... no reason to even learn it if you already have imploders. An air mage has no reason to retire ice projectiles or freezing winds just because he learns lightning bolt. A high end fire mage carries around a lot of ranks of spells that are no longer of value to him. A lot of spent experience that no longer adds to his effectiveness. With an enchanter or mind mage at the same level of experience, all the spells they've learned still matter.
        > >
        > > Don't get me wrong. I do not in any way think fire magics is weak. I think it is balanced. It fills a specific role and does so very well. It can't smash a platoon in a single casting the way air magics can, but it can start hitting that platoon a LOT further away and is much more effective against single high endurance or high resistance targets.
        > >
        > > All of this is based on the assumption that the GM somewhat limits access to high end special knowledge spells. If you let players get their spells whenever and in whatever order they choose, then the balance thing goes straight out the window.
        > >
        > > Anyway, those are my somewhat rambling thoughts. What are your opinions and experiences in the matter?
        > >
        >
        Group: dqn-list Message: 3538 From: kaith_athanes Date: 3/19/2010
        Subject: Re: Initial reactions versus long experience
        I've never GM'd with someone in the party using one of the colleges from Arcane Wisdom. Only once as a player have I been in the same group with one, and that was a shaper. So I have never seen lesser summonings in practice. I did play a Greater Summoner, though. ... actually, that reminds me of something that did seriously warp game balance:

        My Greater Summoning character commissioned a weapon from the local Shaper's guild. Their policy was pretty much "you pays your money and you takes your chances." You paid up front and if the ritual botched, you were just s.o.l. The item I commissioned was a dagger that added 6 ranks to my dagger skill. The ritual did not go off as planned. There is a result on the shaping accidents chart that can multiply the effectiveness of the enchantment by 1d5. My result was a 4. I found myself the proud new owner of a dagger that added 24 ranks to my skill. Pretty much automatic riposte any time I evaded and since we used the rule about an extra point of damage for each 4 ranks, it hit as hard as a great axe. The bastards at the Shaper's Guild bragged about the item they had made and leaked very accurate information about the purchaser(me). The campaign turned into us being hunted down by people who wanted the dagger. I managed to hang onto the accursed thing for 4 or 5 sessions against some pretty determined treasure hunters before we were finally taken down by a group of 4 air mages who ambushed us with sleep gas and dumped us in the middle of a desert in another world, naked and with iron collars around our necks. There were also no lions in that world, which put an end to my rituals (no lion skin girdle) until we discovered that the world DID have sphinxes. I think the GM -really- had it in for me ;)

        --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, novakdb@... wrote:
        >
        > Interesting topic.
        >
        > The College that I found to be the most difficult to GM "against" was Lesser Summoning. The general knowledge has the Spell of Binding Lesser Beasts can control multiple monsters without concentration and has range in the miles and the Summon Energy Spell can both damage the opponent and heal the adept. In Special Knowledge, Bodily Possession makes for interesting combat and throw in Communication with Greater Sentients and you get a telepathic radio. That said, the MA needed for the College is high and there are a fair number of spells with EXM's over 399. The GM just needs to be a little more creative in what faces the character (plus careful since if the Lesser Summoners fails their binding of 10 nasties, the party can get overrun).
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > ----- "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@...> wrote:
        > > From: "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@...>
        > > To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
        > > Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2010 6:45:58 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
        > > Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Initial reactions versus long experience
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        > I've also never kept to requiring, or even allowing, the special knowledge spells to be learned in any particular order. My players usually feel lucky to have found an adept who is a) willing to teach them and b) has a particular spell they are looking for. It never actually occurred to me to require players to learn them in ordinal number order, like prerequisites. That's odd since i've been playing since 1st edition...i love how these boards make me think about stuff from different points of view. Rules dont say one way or the other. I've always tended to control how much Special Knowledge gets loose and how quickly as kind of a game balance thing.
        > >
        > > As for fire magics being overpowered, I agree with you that its fine. It does tend to have more damage producing spells earlier (as in they are available as General Knowledge) than alot of other colleges. But they all have their strengths. What makes Fire so attractive is that it doesnt require a huge amount of imagination to get the basics of how and when to use it, especially in combat situations. Other colleges aren't nearly as straightforward in this respect and require some preplanning to be used to full effect. For instance an illusionist or lesser summoner has very few off the cuff options in combat.
        > >
        > > I'm assuming that from your statements about earlier spells being disused once a more powerful one is learned, you're refering to damage output upon succesful cast. i've found that the other spells still get used, especially when their base chance is much better or there is a particular application that doesnt come down to brute strength damage (like using a scalpel rather than a machete)
        > >
        > > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com , "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@> wrote:
        > > >
        > > > I am always amused when someone -- usually a player new to the system -- tells me that fire magics is too powerful. Whenever someone tells me this, they always point to the spell of dragon flames. My long experience with the game tells me otherwise.
        > > >
        > > > First off, it is S-10 and compared to many other spells that deep into the special knowledge of a college, it really isn't that bad. Telekinetic Rage, Sinking Doom, Dwarf Star are all around the S-10 mark.
        > > >
        > > > Next, perhaps my attitude is colored by the type of campaigns I have run and played in. They are usually Thieves' World or something similar to the Hyborian age with most of the combats being against humans or similar. Against a platoon of Rankan soldiers or a horde of orcs, Ice Projectiles and Freezing Winds are much more devastating than Dragon Flames and come earlier in their college. Against a single human sized target, Enchanted Sleep (a general knowledge spell) and Mental Attack (S-1) are easily as powerful as Dragon Flames. Against a roc or a tribe of giants, then maybe fire gets the edge over air magics. I've seen those situations too rarely to be positive.
        > > >
        > > > Third, a fire mage can do little else but burn things. Even then, he's only -really- good at hurting one thing at a time. His area of effect spells are either low damage or very low base chance. What he brings to a party is single target sniping and protection against other fire mages. Oh, that's another thing. A single general knowledge spell can render a fire mage's magic useless. An air mage can damage lots of targets at once and can control the battlefield by placing zones of freezing winds to disrupt or constrict enemy movement. Celestial mages and necromancers can control the battlefield with wall spells. A fire mage's wall spell is concentration; he can't use it and then cast other spells. An enchanter's buff spells can turn a party of heroes into a party of super heroes(aside from the obvious stuff, the combination of enhance enchantment and enchanting weapon is just sick damage). A mind mage can kick back on his front porch and knock out everyone in the house two doors down, then go invisible, walk in, and slit all their throats.
        > > >
        > > > And last, dragon flames is what I refer to as a replacement spell. Fire magics has a few of these. He learns bolt of fire, but pretty much stops using it once he learns imploding fireball. He stops using imploding fireball once he gets good at dragon flames. Demonic firebolt... no reason to even learn it if you already have imploders. An air mage has no reason to retire ice projectiles or freezing winds just because he learns lightning bolt. A high end fire mage carries around a lot of ranks of spells that are no longer of value to him. A lot of spent experience that no longer adds to his effectiveness. With an enchanter or mind mage at the same level of experience, all the spells they've learned still matter.
        > > >
        > > > Don't get me wrong. I do not in any way think fire magics is weak. I think it is balanced. It fills a specific role and does so very well. It can't smash a platoon in a single casting the way air magics can, but it can start hitting that platoon a LOT further away and is much more effective against single high endurance or high resistance targets.
        > > >
        > > > All of this is based on the assumption that the GM somewhat limits access to high end special knowledge spells. If you let players get their spells whenever and in whatever order they choose, then the balance thing goes straight out the window.
        > > >
        > > > Anyway, those are my somewhat rambling thoughts. What are your opinions and experiences in the matter?
        > > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        Group: dqn-list Message: 3539 From: Ted Date: 3/19/2010
        Subject: Re: Initial reactions versus long experience
        Wow, sounds like your GM was having to do some quick game balancing after he let that dagger out.

        course in general, Greater Summoners can be unbalancing anyway.

        Did you guys use the original Arcane Wisdom for your shaping magics? Thats one of the things i prefer the 3rd edition rules for over the Arcane. There is a difference in the Shaping Q-4 text between them in regards to weapon ranks shaped into an item. Arcane uses a simple cumulative rule ...ie if you are rank 5 with dagger and pick up a +24 rank dagger you are rank 29 in dagger. 3rd edition changes that rule to something more in line with the other shaping rules. In 3rd edition the weapon skill enchanted into the weapon is used if its greater than your own skill. If your skill is greater than the weapon enchantment then you simply add 1 to your skill regardless of what the weapon enchantment is. So in my example a character with a rank 5 dagger skill who picks up a +24 rank dagger would use it at rank 24 dagger skill instead of 29. if the dagger had been +4 rank then he/she would use the dagger at rank 6.

        Course those shaping accidents results are dangerous things. I believe i'd have been tempted to reroll that result or substitute something else for the +24 rank skill.

        --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@...> wrote:
        >
        > I've never GM'd with someone in the party using one of the colleges from Arcane Wisdom. Only once as a player have I been in the same group with one, and that was a shaper. So I have never seen lesser summonings in practice. I did play a Greater Summoner, though. ... actually, that reminds me of something that did seriously warp game balance:
        >
        > My Greater Summoning character commissioned a weapon from the local Shaper's guild. Their policy was pretty much "you pays your money and you takes your chances." You paid up front and if the ritual botched, you were just s.o.l. The item I commissioned was a dagger that added 6 ranks to my dagger skill. The ritual did not go off as planned. There is a result on the shaping accidents chart that can multiply the effectiveness of the enchantment by 1d5. My result was a 4. I found myself the proud new owner of a dagger that added 24 ranks to my skill. Pretty much automatic riposte any time I evaded and since we used the rule about an extra point of damage for each 4 ranks, it hit as hard as a great axe. The bastards at the Shaper's Guild bragged about the item they had made and leaked very accurate information about the purchaser(me). The campaign turned into us being hunted down by people who wanted the dagger. I managed to hang onto the accursed thing for 4 or 5 sessions against some pretty determined treasure hunters before we were finally taken down by a group of 4 air mages who ambushed us with sleep gas and dumped us in the middle of a desert in another world, naked and with iron collars around our necks. There were also no lions in that world, which put an end to my rituals (no lion skin girdle) until we discovered that the world DID have sphinxes. I think the GM -really- had it in for me ;)
        >
        > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, novakdb@ wrote:
        > >
        > > Interesting topic.
        > >
        > > The College that I found to be the most difficult to GM "against" was Lesser Summoning. The general knowledge has the Spell of Binding Lesser Beasts can control multiple monsters without concentration and has range in the miles and the Summon Energy Spell can both damage the opponent and heal the adept. In Special Knowledge, Bodily Possession makes for interesting combat and throw in Communication with Greater Sentients and you get a telepathic radio. That said, the MA needed for the College is high and there are a fair number of spells with EXM's over 399. The GM just needs to be a little more creative in what faces the character (plus careful since if the Lesser Summoners fails their binding of 10 nasties, the party can get overrun).
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > ----- "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@> wrote:
        > > > From: "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@>
        > > > To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
        > > > Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2010 6:45:58 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
        > > > Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Initial reactions versus long experience
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > >
        > > I've also never kept to requiring, or even allowing, the special knowledge spells to be learned in any particular order. My players usually feel lucky to have found an adept who is a) willing to teach them and b) has a particular spell they are looking for. It never actually occurred to me to require players to learn them in ordinal number order, like prerequisites. That's odd since i've been playing since 1st edition...i love how these boards make me think about stuff from different points of view. Rules dont say one way or the other. I've always tended to control how much Special Knowledge gets loose and how quickly as kind of a game balance thing.
        > > >
        > > > As for fire magics being overpowered, I agree with you that its fine. It does tend to have more damage producing spells earlier (as in they are available as General Knowledge) than alot of other colleges. But they all have their strengths. What makes Fire so attractive is that it doesnt require a huge amount of imagination to get the basics of how and when to use it, especially in combat situations. Other colleges aren't nearly as straightforward in this respect and require some preplanning to be used to full effect. For instance an illusionist or lesser summoner has very few off the cuff options in combat.
        > > >
        > > > I'm assuming that from your statements about earlier spells being disused once a more powerful one is learned, you're refering to damage output upon succesful cast. i've found that the other spells still get used, especially when their base chance is much better or there is a particular application that doesnt come down to brute strength damage (like using a scalpel rather than a machete)
        > > >
        > > > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com , "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@> wrote:
        > > > >
        > > > > I am always amused when someone -- usually a player new to the system -- tells me that fire magics is too powerful. Whenever someone tells me this, they always point to the spell of dragon flames. My long experience with the game tells me otherwise.
        > > > >
        > > > > First off, it is S-10 and compared to many other spells that deep into the special knowledge of a college, it really isn't that bad. Telekinetic Rage, Sinking Doom, Dwarf Star are all around the S-10 mark.
        > > > >
        > > > > Next, perhaps my attitude is colored by the type of campaigns I have run and played in. They are usually Thieves' World or something similar to the Hyborian age with most of the combats being against humans or similar. Against a platoon of Rankan soldiers or a horde of orcs, Ice Projectiles and Freezing Winds are much more devastating than Dragon Flames and come earlier in their college. Against a single human sized target, Enchanted Sleep (a general knowledge spell) and Mental Attack (S-1) are easily as powerful as Dragon Flames. Against a roc or a tribe of giants, then maybe fire gets the edge over air magics. I've seen those situations too rarely to be positive.
        > > > >
        > > > > Third, a fire mage can do little else but burn things. Even then, he's only -really- good at hurting one thing at a time. His area of effect spells are either low damage or very low base chance. What he brings to a party is single target sniping and protection against other fire mages. Oh, that's another thing. A single general knowledge spell can render a fire mage's magic useless. An air mage can damage lots of targets at once and can control the battlefield by placing zones of freezing winds to disrupt or constrict enemy movement. Celestial mages and necromancers can control the battlefield with wall spells. A fire mage's wall spell is concentration; he can't use it and then cast other spells. An enchanter's buff spells can turn a party of heroes into a party of super heroes(aside from the obvious stuff, the combination of enhance enchantment and enchanting weapon is just sick damage). A mind mage can kick back on his front porch and knock out everyone in the house two doors down, then go invisible, walk in, and slit all their throats.
        > > > >
        > > > > And last, dragon flames is what I refer to as a replacement spell. Fire magics has a few of these. He learns bolt of fire, but pretty much stops using it once he learns imploding fireball. He stops using imploding fireball once he gets good at dragon flames. Demonic firebolt... no reason to even learn it if you already have imploders. An air mage has no reason to retire ice projectiles or freezing winds just because he learns lightning bolt. A high end fire mage carries around a lot of ranks of spells that are no longer of value to him. A lot of spent experience that no longer adds to his effectiveness. With an enchanter or mind mage at the same level of experience, all the spells they've learned still matter.
        > > > >
        > > > > Don't get me wrong. I do not in any way think fire magics is weak. I think it is balanced. It fills a specific role and does so very well. It can't smash a platoon in a single casting the way air magics can, but it can start hitting that platoon a LOT further away and is much more effective against single high endurance or high resistance targets.
        > > > >
        > > > > All of this is based on the assumption that the GM somewhat limits access to high end special knowledge spells. If you let players get their spells whenever and in whatever order they choose, then the balance thing goes straight out the window.
        > > > >
        > > > > Anyway, those are my somewhat rambling thoughts. What are your opinions and experiences in the matter?
        > > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > >
        >
        Group: dqn-list Message: 3540 From: kaith_athanes Date: 3/19/2010
        Subject: Re: Initial reactions versus long experience
        We used the version where the shaped item adds to your own weapon rank. So for a time I was walking around with rank 28 in dagger.

        --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@...> wrote:
        >
        > Wow, sounds like your GM was having to do some quick game balancing after he let that dagger out.
        >
        > course in general, Greater Summoners can be unbalancing anyway.
        >
        > Did you guys use the original Arcane Wisdom for your shaping magics? Thats one of the things i prefer the 3rd edition rules for over the Arcane. There is a difference in the Shaping Q-4 text between them in regards to weapon ranks shaped into an item. Arcane uses a simple cumulative rule ...ie if you are rank 5 with dagger and pick up a +24 rank dagger you are rank 29 in dagger. 3rd edition changes that rule to something more in line with the other shaping rules. In 3rd edition the weapon skill enchanted into the weapon is used if its greater than your own skill. If your skill is greater than the weapon enchantment then you simply add 1 to your skill regardless of what the weapon enchantment is. So in my example a character with a rank 5 dagger skill who picks up a +24 rank dagger would use it at rank 24 dagger skill instead of 29. if the dagger had been +4 rank then he/she would use the dagger at rank 6.
        >
        > Course those shaping accidents results are dangerous things. I believe i'd have been tempted to reroll that result or substitute something else for the +24 rank skill.
        >
        > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@> wrote:
        > >
        > > I've never GM'd with someone in the party using one of the colleges from Arcane Wisdom. Only once as a player have I been in the same group with one, and that was a shaper. So I have never seen lesser summonings in practice. I did play a Greater Summoner, though. ... actually, that reminds me of something that did seriously warp game balance:
        > >
        > > My Greater Summoning character commissioned a weapon from the local Shaper's guild. Their policy was pretty much "you pays your money and you takes your chances." You paid up front and if the ritual botched, you were just s.o.l. The item I commissioned was a dagger that added 6 ranks to my dagger skill. The ritual did not go off as planned. There is a result on the shaping accidents chart that can multiply the effectiveness of the enchantment by 1d5. My result was a 4. I found myself the proud new owner of a dagger that added 24 ranks to my skill. Pretty much automatic riposte any time I evaded and since we used the rule about an extra point of damage for each 4 ranks, it hit as hard as a great axe. The bastards at the Shaper's Guild bragged about the item they had made and leaked very accurate information about the purchaser(me). The campaign turned into us being hunted down by people who wanted the dagger. I managed to hang onto the accursed thing for 4 or 5 sessions against some pretty determined treasure hunters before we were finally taken down by a group of 4 air mages who ambushed us with sleep gas and dumped us in the middle of a desert in another world, naked and with iron collars around our necks. There were also no lions in that world, which put an end to my rituals (no lion skin girdle) until we discovered that the world DID have sphinxes. I think the GM -really- had it in for me ;)
        > >
        > > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, novakdb@ wrote:
        > > >
        > > > Interesting topic.
        > > >
        > > > The College that I found to be the most difficult to GM "against" was Lesser Summoning. The general knowledge has the Spell of Binding Lesser Beasts can control multiple monsters without concentration and has range in the miles and the Summon Energy Spell can both damage the opponent and heal the adept. In Special Knowledge, Bodily Possession makes for interesting combat and throw in Communication with Greater Sentients and you get a telepathic radio. That said, the MA needed for the College is high and there are a fair number of spells with EXM's over 399. The GM just needs to be a little more creative in what faces the character (plus careful since if the Lesser Summoners fails their binding of 10 nasties, the party can get overrun).
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > ----- "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@> wrote:
        > > > > From: "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@>
        > > > > To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
        > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2010 6:45:58 PM GMT -08:00 US/Canada Pacific
        > > > > Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Initial reactions versus long experience
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > >
        > > > I've also never kept to requiring, or even allowing, the special knowledge spells to be learned in any particular order. My players usually feel lucky to have found an adept who is a) willing to teach them and b) has a particular spell they are looking for. It never actually occurred to me to require players to learn them in ordinal number order, like prerequisites. That's odd since i've been playing since 1st edition...i love how these boards make me think about stuff from different points of view. Rules dont say one way or the other. I've always tended to control how much Special Knowledge gets loose and how quickly as kind of a game balance thing.
        > > > >
        > > > > As for fire magics being overpowered, I agree with you that its fine. It does tend to have more damage producing spells earlier (as in they are available as General Knowledge) than alot of other colleges. But they all have their strengths. What makes Fire so attractive is that it doesnt require a huge amount of imagination to get the basics of how and when to use it, especially in combat situations. Other colleges aren't nearly as straightforward in this respect and require some preplanning to be used to full effect. For instance an illusionist or lesser summoner has very few off the cuff options in combat.
        > > > >
        > > > > I'm assuming that from your statements about earlier spells being disused once a more powerful one is learned, you're refering to damage output upon succesful cast. i've found that the other spells still get used, especially when their base chance is much better or there is a particular application that doesnt come down to brute strength damage (like using a scalpel rather than a machete)
        > > > >
        > > > > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com , "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@> wrote:
        > > > > >
        > > > > > I am always amused when someone -- usually a player new to the system -- tells me that fire magics is too powerful. Whenever someone tells me this, they always point to the spell of dragon flames. My long experience with the game tells me otherwise.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > First off, it is S-10 and compared to many other spells that deep into the special knowledge of a college, it really isn't that bad. Telekinetic Rage, Sinking Doom, Dwarf Star are all around the S-10 mark.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Next, perhaps my attitude is colored by the type of campaigns I have run and played in. They are usually Thieves' World or something similar to the Hyborian age with most of the combats being against humans or similar. Against a platoon of Rankan soldiers or a horde of orcs, Ice Projectiles and Freezing Winds are much more devastating than Dragon Flames and come earlier in their college. Against a single human sized target, Enchanted Sleep (a general knowledge spell) and Mental Attack (S-1) are easily as powerful as Dragon Flames. Against a roc or a tribe of giants, then maybe fire gets the edge over air magics. I've seen those situations too rarely to be positive.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Third, a fire mage can do little else but burn things. Even then, he's only -really- good at hurting one thing at a time. His area of effect spells are either low damage or very low base chance. What he brings to a party is single target sniping and protection against other fire mages. Oh, that's another thing. A single general knowledge spell can render a fire mage's magic useless. An air mage can damage lots of targets at once and can control the battlefield by placing zones of freezing winds to disrupt or constrict enemy movement. Celestial mages and necromancers can control the battlefield with wall spells. A fire mage's wall spell is concentration; he can't use it and then cast other spells. An enchanter's buff spells can turn a party of heroes into a party of super heroes(aside from the obvious stuff, the combination of enhance enchantment and enchanting weapon is just sick damage). A mind mage can kick back on his front porch and knock out everyone in the house two doors down, then go invisible, walk in, and slit all their throats.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > And last, dragon flames is what I refer to as a replacement spell. Fire magics has a few of these. He learns bolt of fire, but pretty much stops using it once he learns imploding fireball. He stops using imploding fireball once he gets good at dragon flames. Demonic firebolt... no reason to even learn it if you already have imploders. An air mage has no reason to retire ice projectiles or freezing winds just because he learns lightning bolt. A high end fire mage carries around a lot of ranks of spells that are no longer of value to him. A lot of spent experience that no longer adds to his effectiveness. With an enchanter or mind mage at the same level of experience, all the spells they've learned still matter.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Don't get me wrong. I do not in any way think fire magics is weak. I think it is balanced. It fills a specific role and does so very well. It can't smash a platoon in a single casting the way air magics can, but it can start hitting that platoon a LOT further away and is much more effective against single high endurance or high resistance targets.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > All of this is based on the assumption that the GM somewhat limits access to high end special knowledge spells. If you let players get their spells whenever and in whatever order they choose, then the balance thing goes straight out the window.
        > > > > >
        > > > > > Anyway, those are my somewhat rambling thoughts. What are your opinions and experiences in the matter?
        > > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > > >
        > > >
        > >
        >
        Group: dqn-list Message: 3541 From: Geoff Berman Date: 3/19/2010
        Subject: Re: Initial reactions versus long experience
        reminds me of one of my players that used illusions to fantastic use in chasing a badguy. The other players were chasing the bad guy, the illusionist realized the badguy would be coming out onto the balcony, so he rushed outside and made the balcony look 5 feet longer than it was, the guy ran out farther than it actually was, fell and was stunned long enough for them to capture him.

        --- On Thu, 3/18/10, Ted <tmckelvey77089@yahoo.com> wrote:

        From: Ted <tmckelvey77089@yahoo.com>
        Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Initial reactions versus long experience
        To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Thursday, March 18, 2010, 8:45 PM

        I've also never kept to requiring, or even allowing, the special knowledge spells to be learned in any particular order.  My players usually feel lucky to have found an adept who is a) willing to teach them and b) has a particular spell they are looking for.  It never actually occurred to me to require players to learn them in ordinal number order, like prerequisites.  That's odd since i've been playing since 1st edition...i love how these boards make me think about stuff from different points of view.  Rules dont say one way or the other.  I've always tended to control how much Special Knowledge gets loose and how quickly as kind of a game balance thing.

        As for fire magics being overpowered, I agree with you that its fine.  It does tend to have more damage producing spells earlier (as in they are available as General Knowledge) than alot of other colleges. But they all have their strengths.  What makes Fire so attractive is that it doesnt require a huge amount of imagination to get the basics of how and when to use it, especially in combat situations.  Other colleges aren't nearly as straightforward in this respect and require some preplanning to be used to full effect.  For instance an illusionist or lesser summoner has very few off the cuff options in combat.

        I'm assuming that from your statements about earlier spells being disused once a more powerful one is learned, you're refering to damage output upon succesful cast.  i've found that the other spells still get used, especially when their base chance is much better or there is a particular application that doesnt come down to brute strength damage (like using a scalpel rather than a machete)

        --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "kaith_athanes" <kaith_athanes@...> wrote:
        >
        > I am always amused when someone -- usually a player new to the system -- tells me that fire magics is too powerful. Whenever someone tells me this, they always point to the spell of dragon flames. My long experience with the game tells me otherwise.
        >
        > First off, it is S-10 and compared to many other spells that deep into the special knowledge of a college, it really isn't that bad. Telekinetic Rage, Sinking Doom, Dwarf Star are all around the S-10 mark.
        >
        > Next, perhaps my attitude is colored by the type of campaigns I have run and played in. They are usually Thieves' World or something similar to the Hyborian age with most of the combats being against humans or similar. Against a platoon of Rankan soldiers or a horde of orcs, Ice Projectiles and Freezing Winds are much more devastating than Dragon Flames and come earlier in their college. Against a single human sized target, Enchanted Sleep (a general knowledge spell) and Mental Attack (S-1) are easily as powerful as Dragon Flames. Against a roc or a tribe of giants, then maybe fire gets the edge over air magics. I've seen those situations too rarely to be positive.
        >
        > Third, a fire mage can do little else but burn things. Even then, he's only -really- good at hurting one thing at a time. His area of effect spells are either low damage or very low base chance. What he brings to a party is single target sniping and protection against other fire mages. Oh, that's another thing. A single general knowledge spell can render a fire mage's magic useless. An air mage can damage lots of targets at once and can control the battlefield by placing zones of freezing winds to disrupt or constrict enemy movement. Celestial mages and necromancers can control the battlefield with wall spells. A fire mage's wall spell is concentration; he can't use it and then cast other spells. An enchanter's buff spells can turn a party of heroes into a party of super heroes(aside from the obvious stuff, the combination of enhance enchantment and enchanting weapon is just sick damage). A mind mage can kick back on his front porch and knock out everyone in the house two doors down, then go invisible, walk in, and slit all their throats.
        >
        > And last, dragon flames is what I refer to as a replacement spell. Fire magics has a few of these. He learns bolt of fire, but pretty much stops using it once he learns imploding fireball. He stops using imploding fireball once he gets good at dragon flames. Demonic firebolt... no reason to even learn it if you already have imploders. An air mage has no reason to retire ice projectiles or freezing winds just because he learns lightning bolt. A high end fire mage carries around a lot of ranks of spells that are no longer of value to him. A lot of spent experience that no longer adds to his effectiveness. With an enchanter or mind mage at the same level of experience, all the spells they've learned still matter.
        >
        > Don't get me wrong. I do not in any way think fire magics is weak. I think it is balanced. It fills a specific role and does so very well. It can't smash a platoon in a single casting the way air magics can, but it can start hitting that platoon a LOT further away and is much more effective against single high endurance or high resistance targets.
        >
        > All of this is based on the assumption that the GM somewhat limits access to high end special knowledge spells. If you let players get their spells whenever and in whatever order they choose, then the balance thing goes straight out the window.
        >
        > Anyway, those are my somewhat rambling thoughts. What are your opinions and experiences in the matter?
        >




        ------------------------------------

        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/


        Group: dqn-list Message: 3542 From: Bob Date: 3/20/2010
        Subject: Re: quick game balancing
        I had a VERY difficult time after my players figured out just how much that damned solid gold statue from the Palace Of Ontocle was worth. They pretty much decided that it was the only treasure they needed and no matter what difficulties I threw in their way, they managed to get it home. It ended up being quite the challenge for me to "Conan" it away from them in a legitimate fashion - culminating in a battle-of wits between them and the Thieves Guild (me) and a chase across the open sea. It did make for a very memorable between-adventures adventure and after devaluing the gold, they had just enough to blow it all on a new home and the Shaper's Guild. Whew!

        --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@...> wrote:
        >
        > Wow, sounds like your GM was having to do some quick game balancing after he let that dagger out.
        >
        Group: dqn-list Message: 3543 From: Brock Date: 3/20/2010
        Subject: Re: quick game balancing
        The most game imbalancing spell in my current campaign is "Spell of Enchanted Sleep" (G-3, Ensorcelments and Enchantments). The player who is using this spell has gotten his success chance up to about 34 percent. He has also invested the spell into everything he can lay his hands on.

        The player is no dummy. He uses the spell on the toughest opponent in each set of opposing NPC's until it works. It doesn't matter how powerful the NPC opponent is - if he/she doesn't resist, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

        Personally, I don't sweat the "game imbalancing" issues too much. I just keep increasing the toughness of the opponents until the "fear" factor returns!

        I also, don't worry too much about "minmaxer" players. I appreciate minmaxers because it usually means that they are really getting into the game and enjoying the campaign.

        - Brock


        --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Bob" <bobconstans@...> wrote:
        >
        > I had a VERY difficult time after my players figured out just how much that damned solid gold statue from the Palace Of Ontocle was worth. They pretty much decided that it was the only treasure they needed and no matter what difficulties I threw in their way, they managed to get it home. It ended up being quite the challenge for me to "Conan" it away from them in a legitimate fashion - culminating in a battle-of wits between them and the Thieves Guild (me) and a chase across the open sea. It did make for a very memorable between-adventures adventure and after devaluing the gold, they had just enough to blow it all on a new home and the Shaper's Guild. Whew!
        >
        > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@> wrote:
        > >
        > > Wow, sounds like your GM was having to do some quick game balancing after he let that dagger out.
        > >
        >
        Group: dqn-list Message: 3544 From: Brock Date: 3/20/2010
        Subject: Favorite Magic College?
        What is your favorite magic college in DragonQuest?

        I like "Sorceries of the Mind." You are not just sending jets of flame, or ice, or wind, or whatnot, at your enemy - you are messing with his head!

        Also, this college was inspired by Katherine Kurtz's Deryni novels, which I very much enjoyed reading.

        - Brock
        Group: dqn-list Message: 3545 From: kaith_athanes Date: 3/21/2010
        Subject: Re: Favorite Magic College?
        Ensorcelments and Enchantments, Air Magics, Celestial Dark Magics. Very difficult for me to choose. I love all three both for the flavor and the tactics.

        --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Brock" <brockrwood@...> wrote:
        >
        > What is your favorite magic college in DragonQuest?
        >
        > I like "Sorceries of the Mind." You are not just sending jets of flame, or ice, or wind, or whatnot, at your enemy - you are messing with his head!
        >
        > Also, this college was inspired by Katherine Kurtz's Deryni novels, which I very much enjoyed reading.
        >
        > - Brock
        >
        Group: dqn-list Message: 3546 From: Andreas Davour Date: 3/21/2010
        Subject: Re: quick game balancing
        --- On Sun, 3/21/10, Brock <brockrwood@eurekais.com> wrote:

        > The most game imbalancing spell in my
        > current campaign is "Spell of Enchanted Sleep" (G-3,
        > Ensorcelments and Enchantments).  The player who is
        > using this spell has gotten his success chance up to about
        > 34 percent.  He has also invested the spell into
        > everything he can lay his hands on.
        >
        > The player is no dummy.  He uses the spell on the
        > toughest opponent in each set of opposing NPC's until it
        > works.  It doesn't matter how powerful the NPC opponent
        > is - if he/she doesn't resist, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!
        >
        > Personally, I don't sweat the "game imbalancing" issues too
        > much.  I just keep increasing the toughness of the
        > opponents until the "fear" factor returns!

        Hey, I'd say you are spot on. Balancing is impossible anyway, and just reduce the game to uninspired dross. Give the players rope to hang themselves. Give the players the tools to be creative, bold and adventurous. It's supposed to be a game where you all invent cool shit. If you're not surprised by your players at least once per session it would be a boring game, I think.

        /andreas
        Group: dqn-list Message: 3547 From: John Rauchert Date: 3/21/2010
        Subject: Re: Favorite Magic College?

        I have a soft spot in my heart for the College of Necromantic Conjurations as my first DQ character was a Death Aspected Necromancer.

         

        The College of Naming Incantations , of course, is based on Ursula K. Le Guin’s Earthsea Cycle.

         

        JohnR


        From: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com [mailto: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Brock
        Sent: March 20, 2010 10:43 PM
        To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [DQN-list] Favorite Magic College ?

         

         

        What is your favorite magic college in DragonQuest?

        I like "Sorceries of the Mind." You are not just sending jets of flame, or ice, or wind, or whatnot, at your enemy - you are messing with his head!

        Also, this college was inspired by Katherine Kurtz's Deryni novels, which I very much enjoyed reading.

        Group: dqn-list Message: 3548 From: Bob Date: 3/21/2010
        Subject: Re: Favorite Magic College?
        Celestial immediately came to mind, and thinking about what Colleges I took advantage of being able to play, I realized that that pretty much defines which other ones I favor as well - Naming, Shaping, Lesser Summoning... -you just don't get to play those anywhere else. And of course I get the desire to play them from favorite series - Earthsea (Naming) for instance.

        --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Brock" <brockrwood@...> wrote:
        >
        > What is your favorite magic college in DragonQuest?
        >
        > I like "Sorceries of the Mind." You are not just sending jets of flame, or ice, or wind, or whatnot, at your enemy - you are messing with his head!
        >
        > Also, this college was inspired by Katherine Kurtz's Deryni novels, which I very much enjoyed reading.
        >
        > - Brock
        >
        Group: dqn-list Message: 3549 From: kaith_athanes Date: 3/21/2010
        Subject: Re: Favorite Magic College?
        For bad guys or even evil players, I think Mind Magics has more potential for raw evil than Black or Necro can even dream of.

        --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Brock" <brockrwood@...> wrote:
        >
        > What is your favorite magic college in DragonQuest?
        >
        > I like "Sorceries of the Mind." You are not just sending jets of flame, or ice, or wind, or whatnot, at your enemy - you are messing with his head!
        >
        > Also, this college was inspired by Katherine Kurtz's Deryni novels, which I very much enjoyed reading.
        >
        > - Brock
        >
        Group: dqn-list Message: 3550 From: Don Hawthorne Date: 3/22/2010
        Subject: Re: Digest Number 885
        DragonQuest Newsletter List
        To anyone who's ever had troubles with items of surpassing value passing into players' hands, I recommend reading John Steinbeck's "The Pearl".
         
        Well, I recommend reading it anyway, it's a great American novel.
         
        Just remember that anything you've given your players must never be taken away without them having a chance to hang onto it; preferably in a stand-up fight... you can make their lives miserable while they have it, and even as a direct result of their having it, but once something is given, you just have to live with it, because there is no way to take it back without losing your players' trust that you will deal with them fairly(no matter how "unfair" the item may seem toward you as the GM).
         
        We once had players all captured and thrown into the goblin mines as slaves... secondary characters went in the next session to rescue them and THEY were captured. Naked and half-starved, they managed to work out an escape by doing what they had not bothered to do beffore: Thinking before acting! The surviving characters grew into legendary heroes and heroines.
         
        I have NEVER worried about "balance" in any game. When players wandered into a Hydra lair during their explorations, they complained that, at their skill levels, they couldn't hope to survive a Hydra, let alone defeat it. "Then I guess you'd better run." They did, and came back many skill levels later and purged the land of the Hydra scourge. They had a long-term goal based on a frustration they brought on themselves; no one was to blame, the ruin they wanted to loot just happened to be where the Hydra lived.
         
        I spend a lot of time developing labyrinthine plots for players to deal witth; it's only fair that I should have to do the same when things go their way.  :-)
         
        Don Hawthorne
         
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2010 1:06 PM
        Subject: [DQN-list] Digest Number 885

        Messages In This Digest (5 Messages)

        1a.
        Re: quick game balancing From: Bob
        1b.
        Re: quick game balancing From: Brock
        1c.
        Re: quick game balancing From: Andreas Davour
        2a.
        Favorite Magic College? From: Brock
        2b.
        Re: Favorite Magic College? From: kaith_athanes

        Messages

        1a.

        Re: quick game balancing

        Posted by: "Bob" bobconstans@yahoo.ca   bobconstans

        Sat Mar 20, 2010 6:01 pm (PDT)



        I had a VERY difficult time after my players figured out just how much that damned solid gold statue from the Palace Of Ontocle was worth. They pretty much decided that it was the only treasure they needed and no matter what difficulties I threw in their way, they managed to get it home. It ended up being quite the challenge for me to "Conan" it away from them in a legitimate fashion - culminating in a battle-of wits between them and the Thieves Guild (me) and a chase across the open sea. It did make for a very memorable between-adventures adventure and after devaluing the gold, they had just enough to blow it all on a new home and the Shaper's Guild. Whew!

        --- In dqn-list@yahoogroup s.com, "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@ ...> wrote:
        >
        > Wow, sounds like your GM was having to do some quick game balancing after he let that dagger out.
        >

        1b.

        Re: quick game balancing

        Posted by: "Brock" brockrwood@eurekais.com   brockrwood

        Sat Mar 20, 2010 9:39 pm (PDT)



        The most game imbalancing spell in my current campaign is "Spell of Enchanted Sleep" (G-3, Ensorcelments and Enchantments) . The player who is using this spell has gotten his success chance up to about 34 percent. He has also invested the spell into everything he can lay his hands on.

        The player is no dummy. He uses the spell on the toughest opponent in each set of opposing NPC's until it works. It doesn't matter how powerful the NPC opponent is - if he/she doesn't resist, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

        Personally, I don't sweat the "game imbalancing" issues too much. I just keep increasing the toughness of the opponents until the "fear" factor returns!

        I also, don't worry too much about "minmaxer" players. I appreciate minmaxers because it usually means that they are really getting into the game and enjoying the campaign.

        - Brock

        --- In dqn-list@yahoogroup s.com, "Bob" <bobconstans@ ...> wrote:
        >
        > I had a VERY difficult time after my players figured out just how much that damned solid gold statue from the Palace Of Ontocle was worth. They pretty much decided that it was the only treasure they needed and no matter what difficulties I threw in their way, they managed to get it home. It ended up being quite the challenge for me to "Conan" it away from them in a legitimate fashion - culminating in a battle-of wits between them and the Thieves Guild (me) and a chase across the open sea. It did make for a very memorable between-adventures adventure and after devaluing the gold, they had just enough to blow it all on a new home and the Shaper's Guild. Whew!
        >
        > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroup s.com, "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@ > wrote:
        > >
        > > Wow, sounds like your GM was having to do some quick game balancing after he let that dagger out.
        > >
        >

        1c.

        Re: quick game balancing

        Posted by: "Andreas Davour" Koraq@yahoo.com   koraq

        Sun Mar 21, 2010 7:56 am (PDT)



        --- On Sun, 3/21/10, Brock <brockrwood@eurekais .com> wrote:

        > The most game imbalancing spell in my
        > current campaign is "Spell of Enchanted Sleep" (G-3,
        > Ensorcelments and Enchantments) .  The player who is
        > using this spell has gotten his success chance up to about
        > 34 percent.  He has also invested the spell into
        > everything he can lay his hands on.
        >
        > The player is no dummy.  He uses the spell on the
        > toughest opponent in each set of opposing NPC's until it
        > works.  It doesn't matter how powerful the NPC opponent
        > is - if he/she doesn't resist, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!
        >
        > Personally, I don't sweat the "game imbalancing" issues too
        > much.  I just keep increasing the toughness of the
        > opponents until the "fear" factor returns!

        Hey, I'd say you are spot on. Balancing is impossible anyway, and just reduce the game to uninspired dross. Give the players rope to hang themselves. Give the players the tools to be creative, bold and adventurous. It's supposed to be a game where you all invent cool shit. If you're not surprised by your players at least once per session it would be a boring game, I think.

        /andreas

        2a.

        Favorite Magic College?

        Posted by: "Brock" brockrwood@eurekais.com   brockrwood

        Sat Mar 20, 2010 9:43 pm (PDT)



        What is your favorite magic college in DragonQuest?

        I like "Sorceries of the Mind." You are not just sending jets of flame, or ice, or wind, or whatnot, at your enemy - you are messing with his head!

        Also, this college was inspired by Katherine Kurtz's Deryni novels, which I very much enjoyed reading.

        - Brock

        2b.

        Re: Favorite Magic College?

        Posted by: "kaith_athanes" kaith_athanes@yahoo.com   kaith_athanes

        Sun Mar 21, 2010 4:20 am (PDT)



        Ensorcelments and Enchantments, Air Magics, Celestial Dark Magics. Very difficult for me to choose. I love all three both for the flavor and the tactics.

        --- In dqn-list@yahoogroup s.com, "Brock" <brockrwood@ ...> wrote:
        >
        > What is your favorite magic college in DragonQuest?
        >
        > I like "Sorceries of the Mind." You are not just sending jets of flame, or ice, or wind, or whatnot, at your enemy - you are messing with his head!
        >
        > Also, this college was inspired by Katherine Kurtz's Deryni novels, which I very much enjoyed reading.
        >
        > - Brock
        >

        Recent Activity
        Visit Your Group
        Yahoo! News

        Get it all here

        Breaking news to

        entertainment news

        Group Charity

        Be the Change

        A citizen movement

        to change the world

        Yahoo! Groups

        Mental Health Zone

        Find support for

        Mental illnesses

        Need to Reply?

        Click one of the "Reply" links to respond to a specific message in the Daily Digest.

        Group: dqn-list Message: 3551 From: Christopher Cole Date: 3/22/2010
        Subject: Re: Digest Number 885
        I just bought and read ORBIS MUNDI, a book to help RPG gamers understand the real world society and economics of medieval Europe. One thing Phillip McGregor spoke about was the fact that prices were not fixed. And one factor that modified prices greatly was the perceived social class of the buyer. If your PCs have too much money, have the merchants start increasing the prices. To prepare for this so that it doesn't seem harsh and manipulative, set the campaign rules for buying and selling like this: Each NPC will have Merchant - this converts buying and selling into a contest between the buyer and seller with each rolling against their skill and determining the adjustment for their skill roll; the GM then adds to two adjustments together and adjusts the price by that much. An added detail Once the PCs achieve fame, they must have fortune, so all the merchants will want their share. And the beggars, and anyone else who might see the PCs as a source of income.
         
        Christopher Cole
        The World's Tallest Dwarf

        --- On Mon, 3/22/10, Don Hawthorne <ravenglass@earthlink.net> wrote:

        From: Don Hawthorne <ravenglass@earthlink.net>
        Subject: Re: [DQN-list] Digest Number 885
        To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
        Date: Monday, March 22, 2010, 1:20 PM

         
        To anyone who's ever had troubles with items of surpassing value passing into players' hands, I recommend reading John Steinbeck's "The Pearl".
         
        Well, I recommend reading it anyway, it's a great American novel.
         
        Just remember that anything you've given your players must never be taken away without them having a chance to hang onto it; preferably in a stand-up fight... you can make their lives miserable while they have it, and even as a direct result of their having it, but once something is given, you just have to live with it, because there is no way to take it back without losing your players' trust that you will deal with them fairly(no matter how "unfair" the item may seem toward you as the GM).
         
        We once had players all captured and thrown into the goblin mines as slaves... secondary characters went in the next session to rescue them and THEY were captured. Naked and half-starved, they managed to work out an escape by doing what they had not bothered to do beffore: Thinking before acting! The surviving characters grew into legendary heroes and heroines.
         
        I have NEVER worried about "balance" in any game. When players wandered into a Hydra lair during their explorations, they complained that, at their skill levels, they couldn't hope to survive a Hydra, let alone defeat it. "Then I guess you'd better run." They did, and came back many skill levels later and purged the land of the Hydra scourge. They had a long-term goal based on a frustration they brought on themselves; no one was to blame, the ruin they wanted to loot just happened to be where the Hydra lived.
         
        I spend a lot of time developing labyrinthine plots for players to deal witth; it's only fair that I should have to do the same when things go their way.  :-)
         
        Don Hawthorne
         
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2010 1:06 PM
        Subject: [DQN-list] Digest Number 885

        Messages In This Digest (5 Messages)

        1a.
        Re: quick game balancing From: Bob
        1b.
        Re: quick game balancing From: Brock
        1c.
        Re: quick game balancing From: Andreas Davour
        2a.
        Favorite Magic College? From: Brock
        2b.
        Re: Favorite Magic College? From: kaith_athanes

        Messages

        1a.

        Re: quick game balancing

        Posted by: "Bob" bobconstans@ yahoo.ca   bobconstans

        Sat Mar 20, 2010 6:01 pm (PDT)



        I had a VERY difficult time after my players figured out just how much that damned solid gold statue from the Palace Of Ontocle was worth. They pretty much decided that it was the only treasure they needed and no matter what difficulties I threw in their way, they managed to get it home. It ended up being quite the challenge for me to "Conan" it away from them in a legitimate fashion - culminating in a battle-of wits between them and the Thieves Guild (me) and a chase across the open sea. It did make for a very memorable between-adventures adventure and after devaluing the gold, they had just enough to blow it all on a new home and the Shaper's Guild. Whew!

        --- In dqn-list@yahoogroup s.com, "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@ ...> wrote:
        >
        > Wow, sounds like your GM was having to do some quick game balancing after he let that dagger out.
        >

        1b.

        Re: quick game balancing

        Posted by: "Brock" brockrwood@eurekais .com   brockrwood

        Sat Mar 20, 2010 9:39 pm (PDT)



        The most game imbalancing spell in my current campaign is "Spell of Enchanted Sleep" (G-3, Ensorcelments and Enchantments) . The player who is using this spell has gotten his success chance up to about 34 percent. He has also invested the spell into everything he can lay his hands on.

        The player is no dummy. He uses the spell on the toughest opponent in each set of opposing NPC's until it works. It doesn't matter how powerful the NPC opponent is - if he/she doesn't resist, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

        Personally, I don't sweat the "game imbalancing" issues too much. I just keep increasing the toughness of the opponents until the "fear" factor returns!

        I also, don't worry too much about "minmaxer" players. I appreciate minmaxers because it usually means that they are really getting into the game and enjoying the campaign.

        - Brock

        --- In dqn-list@yahoogroup s.com, "Bob" <bobconstans@ ...> wrote:
        >
        > I had a VERY difficult time after my players figured out just how much that damned solid gold statue from the Palace Of Ontocle was worth. They pretty much decided that it was the only treasure they needed and no matter what difficulties I threw in their way, they managed to get it home. It ended up being quite the challenge for me to "Conan" it away from them in a legitimate fashion - culminating in a battle-of wits between them and the Thieves Guild (me) and a chase across the open sea. It did make for a very memorable between-adventures adventure and after devaluing the gold, they had just enough to blow it all on a new home and the Shaper's Guild. Whew!
        >
        > --- In dqn-list@yahoogroup s.com, "Ted" <tmckelvey77089@ > wrote:
        > >
        > > Wow, sounds like your GM was having to do some quick game balancing after he let that dagger out.
        > >
        >

        1c.

        Re: quick game balancing

        Posted by: "Andreas Davour" Koraq@yahoo. com   koraq

        Sun Mar 21, 2010 7:56 am (PDT)



        --- On Sun, 3/21/10, Brock <brockrwood@eurekais .com> wrote:

        > The most game imbalancing spell in my
        > current campaign is "Spell of Enchanted Sleep" (G-3,
        > Ensorcelments and Enchantments) .  The player who is
        > using this spell has gotten his success chance up to about
        > 34 percent.  He has also invested the spell into
        > everything he can lay his hands on.
        >
        > The player is no dummy.  He uses the spell on the
        > toughest opponent in each set of opposing NPC's until it
        > works.  It doesn't matter how powerful the NPC opponent
        > is - if he/she doesn't resist, zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!
        >
        > Personally, I don't sweat the "game imbalancing" issues too
        > much.  I just keep increasing the toughness of the
        > opponents until the "fear" factor returns!

        Hey, I'd say you are spot on. Balancing is impossible anyway, and just reduce the game to uninspired dross. Give the players rope to hang themselves. Give the players the tools to be creative, bold and adventurous. It's supposed to be a game where you all invent cool shit. If you're not surprised by your players at least once per session it would be a boring game, I think.

        /andreas

        2a.

        Favorite Magic College?

        Posted by: "Brock" brockrwood@eurekais .com   brockrwood

        Sat Mar 20, 2010 9:43 pm (PDT)



        What is your favorite magic college in DragonQuest?

        I like "Sorceries of the Mind." You are not just sending jets of flame, or ice, or wind, or whatnot, at your enemy - you are messing with his head!

        Also, this college was inspired by Katherine Kurtz's Deryni novels, which I very much enjoyed reading.

        - Brock

        2b.

        Re: Favorite Magic College?

        Posted by: "kaith_athanes" kaith_athanes@ yahoo.com   kaith_athanes

        Sun Mar 21, 2010 4:20 am (PDT)



        Ensorcelments and Enchantments, Air Magics, Celestial Dark Magics. Very difficult for me to choose. I love all three both for the flavor and the tactics.

        --- In dqn-list@yahoogroup s.com, "Brock" <brockrwood@ ...> wrote:
        >
        > What is your favorite magic college in DragonQuest?
        >
        > I like "Sorceries of the Mind." You are not just sending jets of flame, or ice, or wind, or whatnot, at your enemy - you are messing with his head!
        >
        > Also, this college was inspired by Katherine Kurtz's Deryni novels, which I very much enjoyed reading.
        >
        > - Brock
        >

        Recent Activity
        Visit Your Group
        Yahoo! News
        Breaking news to
        entertainment news
        Group Charity
        A citizen movement
        to change the world
        Yahoo! Groups
        Find support for
        Mental illnesses
        Need to Reply?
        Click one of the "Reply" links to respond to a specific message in the Daily Digest.

        Group: dqn-list Message: 3552 From: takayuki.narita Date: 3/22/2010
        Subject: Re: Favorite Magic College?
        Hi,

        I love Greater Summoning!
        It is risky but brings great benefits for the party sometimes.
        Friendly GS character is very useful to fight arch-enemy (almost arch-enemies of official adventures are Greater Summoners or Demons).

        Tak
        Group: dqn-list Message: 3553 From: Brock Date: 3/22/2010
        Subject: Virtual Tabletop Services (was: Re: Anybody up for a play-by-post g
        Speaking of playing in an RPG with remotely located players, has anyone tried DragonQuest, or any RPG, using one of the "virtual table top" services (or software)? Do they work OK? Do they give you even a little bit of the "sitting around the dining room table" fun we love about in-person, PnP RPGs? If you have used one of the services or software packages, I would love to know about your experiences with it.

        An person I met on a meetup.com group tempted me with a proposal of running Champions via one of the virtual tabletop services, but he never followed through and actually did it.

        Wouldn't it be fun to get a virtual DragonQuest game together using the active members of this Yahoo! group connecting via a virtual table top service?

        Thanks in advance for your thoughts on PnP RPGs via virtual tabletop services!

        - Brock


        --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffery K. McGonagill" <igmod@...> wrote:
        >
        > How do you propose that posts look like, their format?
        >
        > I am currently running a play-by-post campaign, it's been running for going on nine years, with three players. We have a format that we play by.
        >
        > Also, do you predetermined cultures?
        >
        > ~Jeffery~
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: Ran Hardin
        > To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
        > Sent: Monday, April 06, 2009 2:36 PM
        > Subject: [DQN-list] Anybody up for a play-by-post game?
        >
        >
        > I went through the experience of playing D&D v4 not too long ago. If you want to play a computer "role-playing" game on a table-top, D&D4 is the game for you. plenty of jumping around and super-normal powers for everyone, right from the get-go.
        >
        > Ecch.
        >
        > It really made me wistful for DragonQuest. I could never get the group I was with to play it - somehow my game ideas were always superseded by other games, always D&D. I dusted off my game world the other day, and got the itch.
        >
        > So.
        >
        > I'm thinking of starting a play-by-post DQ game on Myth-Weavers ( www.myth-weavers.com. ) Work right now is eating my life, but by May it should be down to a dull roar. I'm in the planning stages, looking to start the game end of May/early June.
        >
        > Right now, I'd just like to know if there's enough interest to continue planning. I'd like 4 to 6 players. Here's a bit of background:
        >
        > The setting is a particular continent and two substantial islands close by. It was occupied by roving tribes millennia ago. Openings into the underworld, called Hell Wells, spontaneously open up in random locations, and remain for a random duration. These result in everything from conflicts on both large and small scales to unusual trade opportunities.
        >
        > Many centuries ago, multiple Hell Wells opened up and disgorged a large number of infernal creatures who made war upon the human inhabitants. In desperation, the humans sent ships across the unexplored oceans, looking for help. One ship found an advanced peoples who agreed to come and fight the hordes of the underworld.
        >
        > Once victorious, these saviors remained to rule the land, and began a golden age of great magic and technological advances. Over the centuries, though, the rulers became cruel tyrants, and only after many savage battles were they defeated. Out of the chaos following the overthrow of the tyrants, city-states and kingdoms arose. Many settled areas have reverted to wild lands, and much knowledge of the golden age has been lost. There is much intrigue amongst these nations, and many mysteries of olden times remain to be discovered and unraveled.
        >
        > All player-characters must be human.
        >
        > Players will be given some experience to elevate characters past starting level.
        >
        > I will request fairly extensive information on the background of prospective characters (and more background of the setting will be provided when we get to that point).
        >
        > Again, right now, I'm just checking on possible interest. Anybody up for a game?
        >
        Group: dqn-list Message: 3554 From: Mark D Date: 3/22/2010
        Subject: Re: Digest Number 886
        My group uses a combination of two different software packages: Skype and Gametable. Skype is a bit of a processor hog, but it works fairly well. As an alternate for voice (instead of Skype), I have heard good things about Ventrilo.

        Using the two software packages for our sessions, People are one via voice/chat and the Gametable has a table top (squares or hexes) and can accomodate tokens(pogs) which can be created / customized. Game table has a customizable dice macro system and a chat feature as well. We have a had a session (or two) per week for over a year now with only minor, fixable issues

        We used to use Skype and OpenRPG, but found Gametable to be a better software package than OpenRPG, tho Gametable seems a little more complex to setup.

        Mark

        --- On Mon, 3/22/10, dqn-list@yahoogroups.com <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


        > ________________________________________________________________________
        > 3a. Virtual Tabletop Services (was:  Re: Anybody up
        > for a play-by-post g
        >     Posted by: "Brock" brockrwood@eurekais.com
        > brockrwood
        >     Date: Mon Mar 22, 2010 10:40 am ((PDT))
        >
        > Speaking of playing in an RPG with remotely located
        > players, has anyone tried DragonQuest, or any RPG, using one
        > of the "virtual table top" services (or software)?  Do
        > they work OK?  Do they give you even a little bit of
        > the "sitting around the dining room table" fun we love about
        > in-person, PnP RPGs?  If you have used one of the
        > services or software packages, I would love to know about
        > your experiences with it.
        >
        > An person I met on a meetup.com group tempted me with a
        > proposal of running Champions via one of the virtual
        > tabletop services, but he never followed through and
        > actually did it.
        >
        > Wouldn't it be fun to get a virtual DragonQuest game
        > together using the active members of this Yahoo! group
        > connecting via a virtual table top service?
        >
        > Thanks in advance for your thoughts on PnP RPGs via virtual
        > tabletop services!
        >
        > - Brock
        Group: dqn-list Message: 3555 From: Henry Cribbs Date: 3/22/2010
        Subject: Virtual Tabletop Services (was: Re: Anybody up for a play-by-post g
        Posted by: "Brock" brockrwood@eurekais.com   brockrwood
        Mon Mar 22, 2010 10:40 am (PDT)
        >Speaking of playing in an RPG with remotely located players, has anyone tried DragonQuest, or any RPG,
        >using one of the "virtual table top" services (or software)? Do they work OK? Do they give you even a little bit
        >of the "sitting around the dining room table" fun we love about in-person, PnP RPGs? If you have used one of
        >the services or software packages, I would love to know about your experiences with it.
         
        I play in a group remotely. We used OpenRPG for several years, but have recently started to use MapTool by RPTools. Both work okay, but MapTool has lots of extra bells and whistles which we are learning to mess with.
         
        I think whether they give you the same "sitting around the dining room table" fun will mainly depend on the group. We'd played together in college so we already have a cohesive group. Now that we've moved away form each other we keep up with each other and play online, so in my imagination it's still face to face (with the advantage that you don't get hit by thrown dice). 
         
        I've found I definitely like the virtual tabletop much more than high-end graphic MMORPGs. In both OpenRPG and MapTool, the table banter takes place in an IM chat type window, you have a write-on map which acts as your hexmap, miniatures you can move around (and even design), and the software handles dice rolls for you, making them visible to all players or just to the GM. You can use voicechat in conjunction with it if you have your own voice progarm for that, but I've found that using the chat window, while slower, makes it easy to keep a text record of the session. I've been very pleased with my experience with both programs, both as a GM and a player (but again, I think it will mainly depend on the group)
         
        -Hotspur
        Group: dqn-list Message: 3556 From: John_Rauchert Date: 3/22/2010
        Subject: Virtual Tabletop Services (was: Re: Anybody up for a play-by-post g
        Although I am not using a Virtual Table Top system currently. I did briefly take part in some games through the defunct? WebRPG system back in the day.

        It seemed to work reasonably well.

        I have recently looked into using Fantasy Grounds II (http://www.fantasygrounds.com/) and TeamSpeak (http://www.teamspeak.com/) for a Call of Cthulhu Campaign.

        The open system architecture of that system could be used to create a DragonQuest Rules Set (I believe that OpenRPG can be similarly customized).

        JohnR

        --- In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, "Brock" <brockrwood@...> wrote:
        >
        > Speaking of playing in an RPG with remotely located players, has anyone tried DragonQuest, or any RPG, using one of the "virtual table top" services (or software)? Do they work OK? Do they give you even a little bit of the "sitting around the dining room table" fun we love about in-person, PnP RPGs? If you have used one of the services or software packages, I would love to know about your experiences with it.
        >
        > An person I met on a meetup.com group tempted me with a proposal of running Champions via one of the virtual tabletop services, but he never followed through and actually did it.
        >
        > Wouldn't it be fun to get a virtual DragonQuest game together using the active members of this Yahoo! group connecting via a virtual table top service?
        >
        > Thanks in advance for your thoughts on PnP RPGs via virtual tabletop services!
        >
        > - Brock
        >