Messages in dqn-list group. Page 75 of 80.

Group: dqn-list Message: 3763 From: Andreas Davour Date: 3/22/2016
Subject: Re: Dire Wolf Magic
Group: dqn-list Message: 3764 From: rthorm Date: 3/31/2016
Subject: Thinning Down the Counterspells
Group: dqn-list Message: 3765 From: David Novak Date: 3/31/2016
Subject: Re: Thinning Down the Counterspells
Group: dqn-list Message: 3766 From: rthorm Date: 4/1/2016
Subject: Re: Thinning Down the Counterspells
Group: dqn-list Message: 3767 From: rthorm Date: 4/1/2016
Subject: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3768 From: Jeffrey Vandine Date: 4/1/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3769 From: Martin Gallo Date: 4/1/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3770 From: Jim Goltz Date: 4/1/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3771 From: Christopher Cole Date: 4/2/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3772 From: Jeff Stauffer Date: 4/2/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3773 From: arielifan Date: 4/3/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3774 From: Andreas Davour Date: 4/11/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3775 From: Anthony N. Emmel Date: 4/12/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3776 From: kaith_athanes Date: 4/12/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3777 From: Andreas Davour Date: 4/12/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3778 From: Andreas Davour Date: 4/12/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3779 From: Martin Gallo Date: 4/13/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3780 From: John Kahane Date: 4/13/2016
Subject: Re: The Barrow of Calimendil Scenario?
Group: dqn-list Message: 3781 From: Howard Teal Date: 4/13/2016
Subject: Looking for demons
Group: dqn-list Message: 3782 From: Howard Teal Date: 4/13/2016
Subject: Re: Looking for demons
Group: dqn-list Message: 3783 From: imperium1@optusnet.com.au Date: 4/14/2016
Subject: Re: Looking for demons
Group: dqn-list Message: 3784 From: Andreas Davour Date: 4/14/2016
Subject: Re: Looking for demons
Group: dqn-list Message: 3785 From: Howard Teal Date: 4/14/2016
Subject: Re: Looking for demons
Group: dqn-list Message: 3786 From: John Kahane Date: 4/14/2016
Subject: Re: Merfolk as Player Characters
Group: dqn-list Message: 3787 From: John Kahane Date: 4/14/2016
Subject: Re: Thinning Down the Counterspells
Group: dqn-list Message: 3788 From: arielifan Date: 4/14/2016
Subject: Re: Looking for demons
Group: dqn-list Message: 3789 From: imperium1@optusnet.com.au Date: 4/15/2016
Subject: Re: Looking for demons
Group: dqn-list Message: 3790 From: John Kahane Date: 4/15/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3791 From: Andreas Davour Date: 4/23/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3792 From: Jeffrey Vandine Date: 4/23/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3793 From: hwteal Date: 4/25/2016
Subject: Primary Characteristics...
Group: dqn-list Message: 3794 From: Martin Gallo Date: 4/25/2016
Subject: Re: Primary Characteristics...
Group: dqn-list Message: 3795 From: arielifan Date: 4/25/2016
Subject: Re: Primary Characteristics...
Group: dqn-list Message: 3796 From: David Novak Date: 4/25/2016
Subject: Re: Primary Characteristics...
Group: dqn-list Message: 3797 From: Howard Teal Date: 4/26/2016
Subject: Re: Primary Characteristics...
Group: dqn-list Message: 3798 From: darkislephil Date: 6/5/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3799 From: darkislephil Date: 6/5/2016
Subject: Re: Thinning Down the Counterspells
Group: dqn-list Message: 3800 From: arielifan Date: 6/5/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3801 From: darkislephil Date: 6/5/2016
Subject: Re: Running a DQ PbP Game Stumbling Block
Group: dqn-list Message: 3802 From: arielifan Date: 6/5/2016
Subject: Re: Thinning Down the Counterspells
Group: dqn-list Message: 3803 From: arielifan Date: 6/5/2016
Subject: Re: Running a DQ PbP Game Stumbling Block
Group: dqn-list Message: 3804 From: darkislephil Date: 6/5/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3805 From: arielifan Date: 6/5/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3806 From: Daniel Robinson Date: 6/16/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3807 From: arielifan Date: 6/16/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3808 From: darkislephil Date: 6/19/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Group: dqn-list Message: 3809 From: kaith_athanes Date: 7/5/2016
Subject: Angels
Group: dqn-list Message: 3810 From: rthorm Date: 7/8/2016
Subject: Re: Angels
Group: dqn-list Message: 3811 From: kaith_athanes Date: 7/8/2016
Subject: Re: Angels
Group: dqn-list Message: 3812 From: David Novak Date: 7/8/2016
Subject: Re: Angels



Group: dqn-list Message: 3763 From: Andreas Davour Date: 3/22/2016
Subject: Re: Dire Wolf Magic
I see. Neat.

Thanks Jeffery!
 
-- "My son has spoken the truth, and he has sacrificed more than either the president of the United States or Peter King have ever in their political careers or their American lives. So how they choose to characterize him really doesn't carry that much weight with me." -- Edward Snowden's Father



From: "igmod@comcast.net [dqn-list]" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2016 6:52 PM
Subject: Re: [DQN-list] Dire Wolf Magic



Example: Dire Wolf #1 has an MA of 12 while Dire Wolf #2 and #3 have an MA of 11.  D100 is rolled for each Talent (in color) and Spell of a given college (optionally both colleges) and if DR is equal or less than 11 then a D5 is rolled for each successful Spell to determine the rank of said Spell.
Dire Wolf #1 only rolls D100 < 12 for Mind General Knowledge Counter-spell (Rk 1) and/or E&E T-1 Witchsight (Rk 5), Charming (Rk 5), Location (Rk 2), Mage Lock (Rk 3).
 
Dire Wolf #2 only rolls D100 < 11 for Mind Magics Phantasm (D5 = Rk 2) and/or E&E Mass Charming (D5 = Rk 2).
 
Dire Wolf #3 rolls D100 < 11 for Mind Magics Empathy (D5 = Rk 3), Controlling (D5 = Rk 3) and/or E&E Telekinesis (D5 = Rk 5), E&E General Knowledge (D5 = Rk 5), Enhancing Enhancement (D5 = Rk 1).
 
~Jeffery~
 
Could you maybe do an example? I looked at that spreadsheet and could not make it out. Also, are the specific spells in a differing background colour special in some way?

 
-- "My son has spoken the truth, and he has sacrificed more than either the president of the United States or Peter King have ever in their political careers or their American lives. So how they choose to characterize him really doesn't carry that much weight with me." -- Edward Snowden's Father




Group: dqn-list Message: 3764 From: rthorm Date: 3/31/2016
Subject: Thinning Down the Counterspells
There are a lot of counterspells to learn in the DQ world.  Probably too many.  It’s possible to speculate on how that came about, and there may have been good reasons for it, but in practice, it seems cumbersome and difficult, particularly in that there are two counterspells for each College.  Are the flows of mana somehow different between General and Special knowledge spells?  Why does the esoteric organization of a College’s magic determine which of two counterspells will affect a particular spell?


Instead, why not take a cue from Naming Magics, with the Generic and Individual True Names for things, and have counterspells at the level of Branch and College, rather than General and Special Knowledge?


In practice, this would give 3 generic counterspells (one each for Thaumaturgies, Elementals, and Entities), plus a specific counterspell for each particular College. The Branch counterspells would be less effective than the specific counterspell for each College, but would be useful against any magic of that particular Branch.  Instead of having at least 24 counterspells (General/Special for each of the original 12 Colleges, plus 2 more for each additional College introduced into a particular campaign, there would be 15, plus one for each additional College.  This would work much more fluidly in a campaign where some Colleges may not exist, at the outset, or where additional Colleges are included in the game.


As a matter of play balance, it seems more correct to me that, when faced with magic from a previously unknown College, a caster should have at least some small chance of being able to dispel the magical effect.  Counterspells are presumably based on the workings of mana, rather than being reverse-engineerings of spells.  So something that will disrupt the flow and effects of mana to one kind of spell should have a good chance to be able to disrupt a similar, though perhaps slightly different, one.


[Originally posted here  https://rthorm.wordpress.com/2016/03/31/dq-thinning-down-the-counterspells/]


Group: dqn-list Message: 3765 From: David Novak Date: 3/31/2016
Subject: Re: Thinning Down the Counterspells

Hi Rodger,

 

From the Namer’s perspective, this is a bit easier to keep track of and there are less spells .  I think the unintended consequence is that the Namer just became more powerful.  Under the current rules, a Namer can only “shut down” either the General Knowledge OR Special Knowledge spells of an opposing mage when the opposing mage is covered in an area affect counter spell.  I think under the proposed, the Namer would be “shutting down” the entirety of the college.

 

David

 

 

 

From: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dqn-list@yahoogroups.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2016 1:06 PM
To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [DQN-list] Thinning Down the Counterspells

 

 

There are a lot of counterspells to learn in the DQ world.  Probably too many.  It’s possible to speculate on how that came about, and there may have been good reasons for it, but in practice, it seems cumbersome and difficult, particularly in that there are two counterspells for each College.  Are the flows of mana somehow different between General and Special knowledge spells?  Why does the esoteric organization of a College’s magic determine which of two counterspells will affect a particular spell?

 

Instead, why not take a cue from Naming Magics, with the Generic and Individual True Names for things, and have counterspells at the level of Branch and College, rather than General and Special Knowledge?

 

In practice, this would give 3 generic counterspells (one each for Thaumaturgies, Elementals, and Entities), plus a specific counterspell for each particular College. The Branch counterspells would be less effective than the specific counterspell for each College, but would be useful against any magic of that particular Branch.  Instead of having at least 24 counterspells (General/Special for each of the original 12 Colleges, plus 2 more for each additional College introduced into a particular campaign, there would be 15, plus one for each additional College.  This would work much more fluidly in a campaign where some Colleges may not exist, at the outset, or where additional Colleges are included in the game.

 

As a matter of play balance, it seems more correct to me that, when faced with magic from a previously unknown College, a caster should have at least some small chance of being able to dispel the magical effect.  Counterspells are presumably based on the workings of mana, rather than being reverse-engineerings of spells.  So something that will disrupt the flow and effects of mana to one kind of spell should have a good chance to be able to disrupt a similar, though perhaps slightly different, one.

 

[Originally posted here  https://rthorm.wordpress.com/2016/03/31/dq-thinning-down-the-counterspells/]

 

Group: dqn-list Message: 3766 From: rthorm Date: 4/1/2016
Subject: Re: Thinning Down the Counterspells

Namers are, of course, one of the most important groups to consider in making a change like this.


The balancing factor would probably be that, in exchange for added breadth of coverage with counterspells, they would probably have less strength, but that may not be the best solution.


Appreciate the feedback!

Group: dqn-list Message: 3767 From: rthorm Date: 4/1/2016
Subject: Making a DragonQuest Clone

[This is an edited version of a post on my blog: https://rthorm.wordpress.com/2016/04/01/dragonquest-rules-clone/ ]


It’s time for a retroclone of the DragonQuest RPG.  It’s past time, really, so there’s no point in delaying further.


Yes, that’s correct, it is April 1st.  But when better to undertake such a fool’s errand?


I have been thinking about getting a clone version of DragonQuest for a long time.  Last month, Jarrod Shaw of Mythoard (a recent convert to DragonQuest compared to some of us grognards) was asking about a clone version of the DQ rules (in the spirit of the many other OSR games out there).  And that got me thinking, once again, about moving forward on a full retroclone of DQ.


Over the past year, I’ve seen a lot of OSR material and found a widespread community producing materials and engaged with these games.  There are many throwback RPGs, and each has its following.  Not only are there versions of every stripe of old D&D, but even games like RuneQuest now have retro-clone versions (OpenQuest).  DQ may never have had the fan base that some other games had, but it’s definitely a game with its merits and that ought to be brought up to date.


So is a retread of DQ a sacrilege?

The game many of us regard as canon was written in 1981. D&D is on its 5th edition (or more, depending on how you count things).  Third Edition DQ is less a new edition than  tinkering with a few rules and excising some of the “frightening material.”  But really, nothing has changed since the 80’s.  That was last millennium, folks!


What about copyright and trademark and so forth?

From what I know of copyright and the law in this area (and IANAL, but I’ve looked at this question more than a little bit), it is the specific expression of the rules (the particular language used to describe the rules) that is covered by copyright.  The ideas of the rules themselves (such as having six characteristics for a character in a range from 3-18) can’t be copyrighted.


As far as trademark goes, the DragonQuest mark has been abandoned by TSR/Wizards/Hasbro, so it would presumably be available (although there is also the Japanese video game of the same name, which is always confusing), but a new name might be better.


What would a new DQ be like?

In all, there’s going to be a lot more discussion about what should and should not be a part of any such thing, so treat all of this as starting points for discussion, rather than anything that has been completely settled.

DQ has always been a modular system, and the designers’ intent seemed to be to have a system that allowed for extension and adaptation.  New Colleges of magic were built into the system almost from the outset, and Arcane Wisdom almost made it to production.


The DQ-rules group on Yahoo was originally started to create a consensus version of new DragonQuest rules.  I think a more open-ended numbering system, to allow for new rules to be added in a more orderly fashion, would be important.  Being able to add or delete certain elements without breaking the whole system would be important.


What are the key elements of DQ that need to remain in order for things to stay compatible with existing DQ materials?

  • Stats and stat ranges (or an easy conversion system if things are changed)
  • World with multiple Colleges of Magic (but to remain exclusive?)
  • Skills
  • Non-super-heroic system/Human-scale (a game where even an advanced hero might be cut down by a simple peasant with a knife, and where dragons remain a terrifying opponent no matter how good you’ve gotten)

But there are also some elements where I wonder if they are as important to retain in their current form:

  • Extensive ability breakdowns (individual spells, weapons, etc.)
  • Fine granularity in rules
  • Experience and progression

So now what?

 What would you like to see in a new DQ?  What are the things most in need of revision?  What are the parts that represent the essence of DQ that need to remain as they are?

Group: dqn-list Message: 3768 From: Jeffrey Vandine Date: 4/1/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
One point you need to keep in mind.  The Dragonquest TRADEMARK may have been abandoned by TSR or whoever their successor company is these days, but COPYRIGHT is a different thing entirely. 

The following applies:


The idea for a game is not protected by copyright. The same is true of the name or title given to the game and of the method or methods for playing it.

Copyright protects only the particular manner of an author’s expression in literary, artistic, or musical form. Copyright protection does not extend to any idea, system, method, device, or trademark material involved in the development, merchandising, or playing of a game. Once a game has been made public, nothing in the copyright law prevents others from developing another game based on similar principles.

Among other things, that means you can't use the artwork from the original game without the express written consent of the artist or organization that currently owns that copyright.  Usually that will involve money.
As a general rule, you should try to express the rules using different language where possible, but in some cases it simply isn't possible.  There are only so many ways that you can say "Roll three six-sided dice."  The actual language in the rules is held to a lower standard than art work or the content of a novel is.  Generic creatures can be used, however if DQ has specific creatures uniqueand created for the game, they could NOT be lifted and placed in the retroclone bestiary because they are very specific creative content.  Similarly, you probably could NOT rewrite the existing adventures for DQ without violating copyright -- they are specific and the idea/content of them is not generic in the same sense that rules are.  They are similar to novels or song lyrics in that regard.  Naturally, if your retroclone is close to the original, then you can still play the old DQ adventures using the new rules, and this becomes less important.
Hope this helps!



From: "rthorm@cornellbox.com [dqn-list]" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, April 1, 2016 11:35 AM
Subject: [DQN-list] Making a DragonQuest Clone

 
[This is an edited version of a post on my blog: https://rthorm.wordpress.com/2016/04/01/dragonquest-rules-clone/ ]

It’s time for a retroclone of the DragonQuest RPG.  It’s past time, really, so there’s no point in delaying further.

Yes, that’s correct, it is April 1st.  But when better to undertake such a fool’s errand?

I have been thinking about getting a clone version of DragonQuest for a long time.  Last month, Jarrod Shaw of Mythoard (a recent convert to DragonQuest compared to some of us grognards) was asking about a clone version of the DQ rules (in the spirit of the many other OSR games out there).  And that got me thinking, once again, about moving forward on a full retroclone of DQ.

Over the past year, I’ve seen a lot of OSR material and found a widespread community producing materials and engaged with these games.  There are many throwback RPGs, and each has its following.  Not only are there versions of every stripe of old D&D, but even games like RuneQuest now have retro-clone versions (OpenQuest).  DQ may never have had the fan base that some other games had, but it’s definitely a game with its merits and that ought to be brought up to date.

So is a retread of DQ a sacrilege?
The game many of us regard as canon was written in 1981. D&D is on its 5th edition (or more, depending on how you count things).  Third Edition DQ is less a new edition than  tinkering with a few rules and excising some of the “frightening material.”  But really, nothing has changed since the 80’s.  That was last millennium, folks!

What about copyright and trademark and so forth?
From what I know of copyright and the law in this area (and IANAL, but I’ve looked at this question more than a little bit), it is the specific expression of the rules (the particular language used to describe the rules) that is covered by copyright.  The ideas of the rules themselves (such as having six characteristics for a character in a range from 3-18) can’t be copyrighted.

As far as trademark goes, the DragonQuest mark has been abandoned by TSR/Wizards/Hasbro, so it would presumably be available (although there is also the Japanese video game of the same name, which is always confusing), but a new name might be better.

What would a new DQ be like?
In all, there’s going to be a lot more discussion about what should and should not be a part of any such thing, so treat all of this as starting points for discussion, rather than anything that has been completely settled.
DQ has always been a modular system, and the designers’ intent seemed to be to have a system that allowed for extension and adaptation.  New Colleges of magic were built into the system almost from the outset, and Arcane Wisdom almost made it to production.

The DQ-rules group on Yahoo was originally started to create a consensus version of new DragonQuest rules.  I think a more open-ended numbering system, to allow for new rules to be added in a more orderly fashion, would be important.  Being able to add or delete certain elements without breaking the whole system would be important.

What are the key elements of DQ that need to remain in order for things to stay compatible with existing DQ materials?
  • Stats and stat ranges (or an easy conversion system if things are changed)
  • World with multiple Colleges of Magic (but to remain exclusive?)
  • Skills
  • Non-super-heroic system/Human-scale (a game where even an advanced hero might be cut down by a simple peasant with a knife, and where dragons remain a terrifying opponent no matter how good you’ve gotten)
But there are also some elements where I wonder if they are as important to retain in their current form:
  • Extensive ability breakdowns (individual spells, weapons, etc.)
  • Fine granularity in rules
  • Experience and progression
So now what?
 What would you like to see in a new DQ?  What are the things most in need of revision?  What are the parts that represent the essence of DQ that need to remain as they are?


Group: dqn-list Message: 3769 From: Martin Gallo Date: 4/1/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
As much as I would like to see DQ make a comeback, I doubt I will be part o it. It appears that my RPG days are over (no time, no group, etc.) it does bring back find memories of my attempt at blending The Fantasy Trip with DQ.

Best wishes, good luck, and don’t forget those adventures!

On Apr 1, 2016, at 1:35 PM, rthorm@cornellbox.com [dqn-list] <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


[This is an edited version of a post on my blog: https://rthorm.wordpress.com/2016/04/01/dragonquest-rules-clone/ ]


It’s time for a retroclone of the DragonQuest RPG.  It’s past time, really, so there’s no point in delaying further.


Yes, that’s correct, it is April 1st.  But when better to undertake such a fool’s errand?


I have been thinking about getting a clone version of DragonQuest for a long time.  Last month, Jarrod Shaw of Mythoard (a recent convert to DragonQuest compared to some of us grognards) was asking about a clone version of the DQ rules (in the spirit of the many other OSR games out there).  And that got me thinking, once again, about moving forward on a full retroclone of DQ.


Over the past year, I’ve seen a lot of OSR material and found a widespread community producing materials and engaged with these games.  There are many throwback RPGs, and each has its following.  Not only are there versions of every stripe of old D&D, but even games like RuneQuest now have retro-clone versions (OpenQuest).  DQ may never have had the fan base that some other games had, but it’s definitely a game with its merits and that ought to be brought up to date.


So is a retread of DQ a sacrilege?

The game many of us regard as canon was written in 1981. D&D is on its 5th edition (or more, depending on how you count things).  Third Edition DQ is less a new edition than  tinkering with a few rules and excising some of the “frightening material.”  But really, nothing has changed since the 80’s.  That was last millennium, folks!


What about copyright and trademark and so forth?

From what I know of copyright and the law in this area (and IANAL, but I’ve looked at this question more than a little bit), it is the specific expression of the rules (the particular language used to describe the rules) that is covered by copyright.  The ideas of the rules themselves (such as having six characteristics for a character in a range from 3-18) can’t be copyrighted.


As far as trademark goes, the DragonQuest mark has been abandoned by TSR/Wizards/Hasbro, so it would presumably be available (although there is also the Japanese video game of the same name, which is always confusing), but a new name might be better.


What would a new DQ be like?

In all, there’s going to be a lot more discussion about what should and should not be a part of any such thing, so treat all of this as starting points for discussion, rather than anything that has been completely settled.

DQ has always been a modular system, and the designers’ intent seemed to be to have a system that allowed for extension and adaptation.  New Colleges of magic were built into the system almost from the outset, and Arcane Wisdom almost made it to production.


The DQ-rules group on Yahoo was originally started to create a consensus version of new DragonQuest rules.  I think a more open-ended numbering system, to allow for new rules to be added in a more orderly fashion, would be important.  Being able to add or delete certain elements without breaking the whole system would be important.


What are the key elements of DQ that need to remain in order for things to stay compatible with existing DQ materials?

  • Stats and stat ranges (or an easy conversion system if things are changed)
  • World with multiple Colleges of Magic (but to remain exclusive?)
  • Skills
  • Non-super-heroic system/Human-scale (a game where even an advanced hero might be cut down by a simple peasant with a knife, and where dragons remain a terrifying opponent no matter how good you’ve gotten)

But there are also some elements where I wonder if they are as important to retain in their current form:

  • Extensive ability breakdowns (individual spells, weapons, etc.)
  • Fine granularity in rules
  • Experience and progression

So now what?

 What would you like to see in a new DQ?  What are the things most in need of revision?  What are the parts that represent the essence of DQ that need to remain as they are?


Group: dqn-list Message: 3770 From: Jim Goltz Date: 4/1/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
My RPG days are probably behind me, but my wife and I played DQ quite a bit a scant 15 years ago, and my adult kids are into RPGs now (gaming is a lot less geeky than it used to be, or being geeky is in, or both).  Let my wife and I put our heads together and see if we can come up with what we liked and didn't like.

A few thoughts off the top of my head:

* One source of confusion in our mixed DQ/D&D crowd was the dice.  In DQ you calculate a percent chance to hit and try to roll low; in D&D you calculate a minimum to-hit and try to roll high.  Apparently this bothers people who aren't math geeks like me, or are more into gambling than I am (please forgive me if that sounds snobbish).  I don't know if that needs changing or not, I just thought I'd mention it.

* Speaking of combat, I remember the excruciating detail of 1st ed. combat, and the somewhat-better-but-still-complex 2nd ed. combat system.  It might help if there was a relatively simple core combat system with lots of optional rules (Grievous Injury, weapon breakage, bonuses/penalties for high/low strength or agility, etc.), so that the complexity level can be adjusted by the GM to a level everyone is comfortable with.

* Maybe that should be an ongoing theme: a core system with optional add-ons.  Technically that was always the case: GMs were always free to leave stuff out or change stuff, but that was kind of mentioned in passing in the introductory section.  Maybe formalizing that in the structure of "New DQ" would be good.

This is all completely off the top of my head.  Take it in the spirit of brainstorming — not all of it may be a good idea, even to me.



--
Jim Goltz <jgoltz@acm.org>

Group: dqn-list Message: 3771 From: Christopher Cole Date: 4/2/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
I have never played DQ but I loved the system and tried to get my (then) gaming group to try it but they were stuck on D&D. Since SPI built the rules on wargames with numbered sections and so forth, I would suggest starting with Section 1 and taking the idea presented and rewriting it to keep the basic idea, but improve where you think it is needed. There is a built-in editing board in this group so presenting the sections, one at a time here, will allow for people make concrete suggestions which can be accepted or not as the author(s) see fit. Obviously no set of rules is going to please everyone.

Once the rules are complete enough I would suggest an "adventure generator" which can be used for those willing and able to "home-brew" their own adventures. These can be used in a campaign world such as Harn until someone builds a DQ world. (I might be able to help there as I enjoy making worlds.)

However, DQ will NOT get off the ground without full-time professional work. Someone needs to have enough money to pay people to do this work exclusive of every other job.

Christopher Cole

From: "Jeffrey Vandine jlv61560@yahoo.com [dqn-list]" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
To: "dqn-list@yahoogroups.com" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, April 1, 2016 11:54 AM
Subject: Re: [DQN-list] Making a DragonQuest Clone

 
One point you need to keep in mind.  The Dragonquest TRADEMARK may have been abandoned by TSR or whoever their successor company is these days, but COPYRIGHT is a different thing entirely. 

The following applies:


The idea for a game is not protected by copyright. The same is true of the name or title given to the game and of the method or methods for playing it.

Copyright protects only the particular manner of an author’s expression in literary, artistic, or musical form. Copyright protection does not extend to any idea, system, method, device, or trademark material involved in the development, merchandising, or playing of a game. Once a game has been made public, nothing in the copyright law prevents others from developing another game based on similar principles.

Among other things, that means you can't use the artwork from the original game without the express written consent of the artist or organization that currently owns that copyright.  Usually that will involve money.
As a general rule, you should try to express the rules using different language where possible, but in some cases it simply isn't possible.  There are only so many ways that you can say "Roll three six-sided dice."  The actual language in the rules is held to a lower standard than art work or the content of a novel is.  Generic creatures can be used, however if DQ has specific creatures uniqueand created for the game, they could NOT be lifted and placed in the retroclone bestiary because they are very specific creative content.  Similarly, you probably could NOT rewrite the existing adventures for DQ without violating copyright -- they are specific and the idea/content of them is not generic in the same sense that rules are.  They are similar to novels or song lyrics in that regard.  Naturally, if your retroclone is close to the original, then you can still play the old DQ adventures using the new rules, and this becomes less important.
Hope this helps!



From: "rthorm@cornellbox.com [dqn-list]" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, April 1, 2016 11:35 AM
Subject: [DQN-list] Making a DragonQuest Clone

 
[This is an edited version of a post on my blog: https://rthorm.wordpress.com/2016/04/01/dragonquest-rules-clone/ ]

It’s time for a retroclone of the DragonQuest RPG.  It’s past time, really, so there’s no point in delaying further.

Yes, that’s correct, it is April 1st.  But when better to undertake such a fool’s errand?

I have been thinking about getting a clone version of DragonQuest for a long time.  Last month, Jarrod Shaw of Mythoard (a recent convert to DragonQuest compared to some of us grognards) was asking about a clone version of the DQ rules (in the spirit of the many other OSR games out there).  And that got me thinking, once again, about moving forward on a full retroclone of DQ.

Over the past year, I’ve seen a lot of OSR material and found a widespread community producing materials and engaged with these games.  There are many throwback RPGs, and each has its following.  Not only are there versions of every stripe of old D&D, but even games like RuneQuest now have retro-clone versions (OpenQuest).  DQ may never have had the fan base that some other games had, but it’s definitely a game with its merits and that ought to be brought up to date.

So is a retread of DQ a sacrilege?
The game many of us regard as canon was written in 1981. D&D is on its 5th edition (or more, depending on how you count things).  Third Edition DQ is less a new edition than  tinkering with a few rules and excising some of the “frightening material.”  But really, nothing has changed since the 80’s.  That was last millennium, folks!

What about copyright and trademark and so forth?
From what I know of copyright and the law in this area (and IANAL, but I’ve looked at this question more than a little bit), it is the specific expression of the rules (the particular language used to describe the rules) that is covered by copyright.  The ideas of the rules themselves (such as having six characteristics for a character in a range from 3-18) can’t be copyrighted.

As far as trademark goes, the DragonQuest mark has been abandoned by TSR/Wizards/Hasbro, so it would presumably be available (although there is also the Japanese video game of the same name, which is always confusing), but a new name might be better.

What would a new DQ be like?
In all, there’s going to be a lot more discussion about what should and should not be a part of any such thing, so treat all of this as starting points for discussion, rather than anything that has been completely settled.
DQ has always been a modular system, and the designers’ intent seemed to be to have a system that allowed for extension and adaptation.  New Colleges of magic were built into the system almost from the outset, and Arcane Wisdom almost made it to production.

The DQ-rules group on Yahoo was originally started to create a consensus version of new DragonQuest rules.  I think a more open-ended numbering system, to allow for new rules to be added in a more orderly fashion, would be important.  Being able to add or delete certain elements without breaking the whole system would be important.

What are the key elements of DQ that need to remain in order for things to stay compatible with existing DQ materials?
  • Stats and stat ranges (or an easy conversion system if things are changed)
  • World with multiple Colleges of Magic (but to remain exclusive?)
  • Skills
  • Non-super-heroic system/Human-scale (a game where even an advanced hero might be cut down by a simple peasant with a knife, and where dragons remain a terrifying opponent no matter how good you’ve gotten)
But there are also some elements where I wonder if they are as important to retain in their current form:
  • Extensive ability breakdowns (individual spells, weapons, etc.)
  • Fine granularity in rules
  • Experience and progression
So now what?
 What would you like to see in a new DQ?  What are the things most in need of revision?  What are the parts that represent the essence of DQ that need to remain as they are?




Group: dqn-list Message: 3772 From: Jeff Stauffer Date: 4/2/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Hello,

My friends and I played RPGs in the '80s and '90s and DQ was one of my favorite RPGs.  I've been lurking on these Yahoo DQ groups for many months out of nostalgia and to see what has happened with the game since.  I'm all for rewriting the rules; I was impressed by OpenDQ and by the new rules you have all uploaded to these groups in attempts to extend/expand the game.  I wouldn't be able to help with any such effort, but I would like to offer my thoughts:


I think a key element of any RPG is diversity.  Are the game rules capable of modelling a complex game world with diverse characters, NPCs and monsters?  Modelling a half-dozen adventurers is "easy".  Modelling a dungeon is "easy" - it doesn't have to make any real sense and only has to be around long enough for the adventurers to run through it.  But can the game rules realistically model a town or city with hundreds of NPCs from all walks of life?  We all know how towns and cities work; any chinks or holes in the game rules will become apparent there.

I don't like it when the 3rd level Fighter you meet in the bar is the same as all the other 3rd level Fighters in town.  That's one of the reasons I quite playing That Other Game.  I think the DQ core rules are pretty good.  Good enough to support the diversity I crave and, as you said, support extension and adaptation.  In my opinion, their weakness is that DQ was not on the shelves long enough for that extension and adaptation to really occur in print.  A rewrite should take care of that, especially with decades of new rule suggestions from players.  (I remember I created a number of new skills in the '80s just to allow the GM to populate the game world with more diverse NPCs.)

Specifically, I think the extensive ability breakdowns are a strength of the rules which directly supports diversity and should remain.  I agree, the rules should have a more open-ended numbering system.

I think d100 is the best method for determining success/failure.  People think in terms of percentages of success or failure.  Using other dice for this requires adapting the percentage: is it divisible by 5? Use a d20.  Divisible by 10?  Use a d10.  Divisible by 25?  Use a d4.  I say forget the secondary adaptation and just use d100 for success/failure.  On the other hand, it might be an improvement if you bring other dice in to calculate effects.  I think DQ mistakenly tries to adapt all effect calculations to d10 (I remember d5 being referenced a lot in the rules).

One last thing: I think you should keep the name DragonQuest if possible - or very similar to, like OpenDQ.

Thanks everyone for keeping the game alive and keeping these groups around.  I am impressed!


On 4/1/2016 1:35 PM, rthorm@cornellbox.com [dqn-list] wrote:
 

[This is an edited version of a post on my blog: https://rthorm.wordpress.com/2016/04/01/dragonquest-rules-clone/ ]


It’s time for a retroclone of the DragonQuest RPG.  It’s past time, really, so there’s no point in delaying further.


Yes, that’s correct, it is April 1st.  But when better to undertake such a fool’s errand?


I have been thinking about getting a clone version of DragonQuest for a long time.  Last month, Jarrod Shaw of Mythoard (a recent convert to DragonQuest compared to some of us grognards) was asking about a clone version of the DQ rules (in the spirit of the many other OSR games out there).  And that got me thinking, once again, about moving forward on a full retroclone of DQ.


Over the past year, I’ve seen a lot of OSR material and found a widespread community producing materials and engaged with these games.  There are many throwback RPGs, and each has its following.  Not only are there versions of every stripe of old D&D, but even games like RuneQuest now have retro-clone versions (OpenQuest).  DQ may never have had the fan base that some other games had, but it’s definitely a game with its merits and that ought to be brought up to date.


So is a retread of DQ a sacrilege?

The game many of us regard as canon was written in 1981. D&D is on its 5th edition (or more, depending on how you count things).  Third Edition DQ is less a new edition than  tinkering with a few rules and excising some of the “frightening material.”  But really, nothing has changed since the 80’s.  That was last millennium, folks!


What about copyright and trademark and so forth?

From what I know of copyright and the law in this area (and IANAL, but I’ve looked at this question more than a little bit), it is the specific expression of the rules (the particular language used to describe the rules) that is covered by copyright.  The ideas of the rules themselves (such as having six characteristics for a character in a range from 3-18) can’t be copyrighted.


As far as trademark goes, the DragonQuest mark has been abandoned by TSR/Wizards/Hasbro, so it would presumably be available (although there is also the Japanese video game of the same name, which is always confusing), but a new name might be better.


What would a new DQ be like?

In all, there’s going to be a lot more discussion about what should and should not be a part of any such thing, so treat all of this as starting points for discussion, rather than anything that has been completely settled.

DQ has always been a modular system, and the designers’ intent seemed to be to have a system that allowed for extension and adaptation.  New Colleges of magic were built into the system almost from the outset, and Arcane Wisdom almost made it to production.


The DQ-rules group on Yahoo was originally started to create a consensus version of new DragonQuest rules.  I think a more open-ended numbering system, to allow for new rules to be added in a more orderly fashion, would be important.  Being able to add or delete certain elements without breaking the whole system would be important.


What are the key elements of DQ that need to remain in order for things to stay compatible with existing DQ materials?

  • Stats and stat ranges (or an easy conversion system if things are changed)
  • World with multiple Colleges of Magic (but to remain exclusive?)
  • Skills
  • Non-super-heroic system/Human-scale (a game where even an advanced hero might be cut down by a simple peasant with a knife, and where dragons remain a terrifying opponent no matter how good you’ve gotten)

But there are also some elements where I wonder if they are as important to retain in their current form:

  • Extensive ability breakdowns (individual spells, weapons, etc.)
  • Fine granularity in rules
  • Experience and progression

So now what?

 What would you like to see in a new DQ?  What are the things most in need of revision?  What are the parts that represent the essence of DQ that need to remain as they are?





Avast logo

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com


Group: dqn-list Message: 3773 From: arielifan Date: 4/3/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
IMO, DQ still stands above any FRPG.  I add interesting things I find here and general online material.  I am particularly thankful of the beastiary and I have collected all the creatures that were in adventures into it.

~Jeffery~


From: "Christopher Cole gruundehn@yahoo.com [dqn-list]" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2016 8:10:53 AM
Subject: Re: [DQN-list] Making a DragonQuest Clone



I have never played DQ but I loved the system and tried to get my (then) gaming group to try it but they were stuck on D&D. Since SPI built the rules on wargames with numbered sections and so forth, I would suggest starting with Section 1 and taking the idea presented and rewriting it to keep the basic idea, but improve where you think it is needed. There is a built-in editing board in this group so presenting the sections, one at a time here, will allow for people make concrete suggestions which can be accepted or not as the author(s) see fit. Obviously no set of rules is going to please everyone.

Once the rules are complete enough I would suggest an "adventure generator" which can be used for those willing and able to "home-brew" their own adventures. These can be used in a campaign world such as Harn until someone builds a DQ world. (I might be able to help there as I enjoy making worlds.)

However, DQ will NOT get off the ground without full-time professional work. Someone needs to have enough money to pay people to do this work exclusive of every other job.

Christopher Cole

From: "Jeffrey Vandine jlv61560@yahoo.com [dqn-list]" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
To: "dqn-list@yahoogroups.com" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, April 1, 2016 11:54 AM
Subject: Re: [DQN-list] Making a DragonQuest Clone

 

One point you need to keep in mind.  The Dragonquest TRADEMARK may have been abandoned by TSR or whoever their successor company is these days, but COPYRIGHT is a different thing entirely. 

The following applies:



The idea for a game is not protected by copyright. The same is true of the name or title given to the game and of the method or methods for playing it.

Copyright protects only the particular manner of an author’s expression in literary, artistic, or musical form. Copyright protection does not extend to any idea, system, method, device, or trademark material involved in the development, merchandising, or playing of a game. Once a game has been made public, nothing in the copyright law prevents others from developing another game based on similar principles.

Among other things, that means you can't use the artwork from the original game without the express written consent of the artist or organization that currently owns that copyright.  Usually that will involve money.
As a general rule, you should try to express the rules using different language where possible, but in some cases it simply isn't possible.  There are only so many ways that you can say "Roll three six-sided dice."  The actual language in the rules is held to a lower standard than art work or the content of a novel is.  Generic creatures can be used, however if DQ has specific creatures uniqueand created for the game, they could NOT be lifted and placed in the retroclone bestiary because they are very specific creative content.  Similarly, you probably could NOT rewrite the existing adventures for DQ without violating copyright -- they are specific and the idea/content of them is not generic in the same sense that rules are.  They are similar to novels or song lyrics in that regard.  Naturally, if your retroclone is close to the original, then you can still play the old DQ adventures using the new rules, and this becomes less important.
Hope this helps!





From: "rthorm@cornellbox.com [dqn-list]" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, April 1, 2016 11:35 AM
Subject: [DQN-list] Making a DragonQuest Clone

 


[This is an edited version of a post on my blog: https://rthorm.wordpress.com/2016/04/01/dragonquest-rules-clone/ ]

It’s time for a retroclone of the DragonQuest RPG.  It’s past time, really, so there’s no point in delaying further.

Yes, that’s correct, it is April 1st.  But when better to undertake such a fool’s errand?

I have been thinking about getting a clone version of DragonQuest for a long time.  Last month, Jarrod Shaw of Mythoard (a recent convert to DragonQuest compared to some of us grognards) was asking about a clone version of the DQ rules (in the spirit of the many other OSR games out there).  And that got me thinking, once again, about moving forward on a full retroclone of DQ.

Over the past year, I’ve seen a lot of OSR material and found a widespread community producing materials and engaged with these games.  There are many throwback RPGs, and each has its following.  Not only are there versions of every stripe of old D&D, but even games like RuneQuest now have retro-clone versions (OpenQuest).  DQ may never have had the fan base that some other games had, but it’s definitely a game with its merits and that ought to be brought up to date.

So is a retread of DQ a sacrilege?
The game many of us regard as canon was written in 1981. D&D is on its 5th edition (or more, depending on how you count things).  Third Edition DQ is less a new edition than  tinkering with a few rules and excising some of the “frightening material.”  But really, nothing has changed since the 80’s.  That was last millennium, folks!

What about copyright and trademark and so forth?
From what I know of copyright and the law in this area (and IANAL, but I’ve looked at this question more than a little bit), it is the specific expression of the rules (the particular language used to describe the rules) that is covered by copyright.  The ideas of the rules themselves (such as having six characteristics for a character in a range from 3-18) can’t be copyrighted.

As far as trademark goes, the DragonQuest mark has been abandoned by TSR/Wizards/Hasbro, so it would presumably be available (although there is also the Japanese video game of the same name, which is always confusing), but a new name might be better.

What would a new DQ be like?
In all, there’s going to be a lot more discussion about what should and should not be a part of any such thing, so treat all of this as starting points for discussion, rather than anything that has been completely settled.
DQ has always been a modular system, and the designers’ intent seemed to be to have a system that allowed for extension and adaptation.  New Colleges of magic were built into the system almost from the outset, and Arcane Wisdom almost made it to production.

The DQ-rules group on Yahoo was originally started to create a consensus version of new DragonQuest rules.  I think a more open-ended numbering system, to allow for new rules to be added in a more orderly fashion, would be important.  Being able to add or delete certain elements without breaking the whole system would be important.

What are the key elements of DQ that need to remain in order for things to stay compatible with existing DQ materials?
  • Stats and stat ranges (or an easy conversion system if things are changed)
  • World with multiple Colleges of Magic (but to remain exclusive?)
  • Skills
  • Non-super-heroic system/Human-scale (a game where even an advanced hero might be cut down by a simple peasant with a knife, and where dragons remain a terrifying opponent no matter how good you’ve gotten)
But there are also some elements where I wonder if they are as important to retain in their current form:
  • Extensive ability breakdowns (individual spells, weapons, etc.)
  • Fine granularity in rules
  • Experience and progression
So now what?
 What would you like to see in a new DQ?  What are the things most in need of revision?  What are the parts that represent the essence of DQ that need to remain as they are?









Group: dqn-list Message: 3774 From: Andreas Davour Date: 4/11/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
These are my thoughts, also posted at Rodger's blog:

After having spent some time generating characters for a one shot, and not having had any experience at all with DQ as a player, I have some issues with the rules as they are.

1. Having the characters roll for how many points they get to place on stats feels kind of redundant. It would be easier to compare characters and their abilities if all had the same amount of points.

2. With a minimum of 5 on each stat, who not just remove 30 points off the total as those are not available for distribution anyway?

3. Perception is low, and ridiculously expensive to increase. There are some things which all adventurer types do, like Stealth. But, I’d suggest Perception is also one of these. If you do not agree about that, I’d suggest that the Skill Ranger is all but useless for beginning characters. Most of the Ranger abilities are based on Perception, and in order to get a decent Base Chance they need to spend 1750 pts to get a 10 and more than a 50/50 chance to be effective.
In general, it feels like it’s way to easy to make a dumb hack and slash character than it is to make a “thinker” or a “social guy” and part of that is due to the cost of PC. You should be able to select to play a perceptive character, just as you choose to play a strong brute.

4. The XP allotment to begin with is broken. The root cause for some of the above is that the beginning XP is generated randomly, and even when rolling really well you don’t get much.

I totally agree about the less than super human scale of DQ, but many of the characters I rolled up could not even buy level 0 of anything with the “100 pt discount” as they had less than 100 XP to begin with!

These days I don’t think people like to “grind” their characters, and I’d suggest a flat xp amount to start with for all characters, and it should be significantly above 100! Probably something like 2000.

Those are my 4 (euro)cents!
 -andreas
--
"My son has spoken the truth, and he has sacrificed more than either the president of the United States or Peter King have ever in their political careers or their American lives. So how they choose to characterize him really doesn't carry that much weight with me." -- Edward Snowden's Father



From: "rthorm@cornellbox.com [dqn-list]" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, April 1, 2016 8:35 PM
Subject: [DQN-list] Making a DragonQuest Clone



[This is an edited version of a post on my blog: https://rthorm.wordpress.com/2016/04/01/dragonquest-rules-clone/ ]

It’s time for a retroclone of the DragonQuest RPG.  It’s past time, really, so there’s no point in delaying further.

Yes, that’s correct, it is April 1st.  But when better to undertake such a fool’s errand?

I have been thinking about getting a clone version of DragonQuest for a long time.  Last month, Jarrod Shaw of Mythoard (a recent convert to DragonQuest compared to some of us grognards) was asking about a clone version of the DQ rules (in the spirit of the many other OSR games out there).  And that got me thinking, once again, about moving forward on a full retroclone of DQ.

Over the past year, I’ve seen a lot of OSR material and found a widespread community producing materials and engaged with these games.  There are many throwback RPGs, and each has its following.  Not only are there versions of every stripe of old D&D, but even games like RuneQuest now have retro-clone versions (OpenQuest).  DQ may never have had the fan base that some other games had, but it’s definitely a game with its merits and that ought to be brought up to date.

So is a retread of DQ a sacrilege?
The game many of us regard as canon was written in 1981. D&D is on its 5th edition (or more, depending on how you count things).  Third Edition DQ is less a new edition than  tinkering with a few rules and excising some of the “frightening material.”  But really, nothing has changed since the 80’s.  That was last millennium, folks!

What about copyright and trademark and so forth?
From what I know of copyright and the law in this area (and IANAL, but I’ve looked at this question more than a little bit), it is the specific expression of the rules (the particular language used to describe the rules) that is covered by copyright.  The ideas of the rules themselves (such as having six characteristics for a character in a range from 3-18) can’t be copyrighted.

As far as trademark goes, the DragonQuest mark has been abandoned by TSR/Wizards/Hasbro, so it would presumably be available (although there is also the Japanese video game of the same name, which is always confusing), but a new name might be better.

What would a new DQ be like?
In all, there’s going to be a lot more discussion about what should and should not be a part of any such thing, so treat all of this as starting points for discussion, rather than anything that has been completely settled.
DQ has always been a modular system, and the designers’ intent seemed to be to have a system that allowed for extension and adaptation.  New Colleges of magic were built into the system almost from the outset, and Arcane Wisdom almost made it to production.

The DQ-rules group on Yahoo was originally started to create a consensus version of new DragonQuest rules.  I think a more open-ended numbering system, to allow for new rules to be added in a more orderly fashion, would be important.  Being able to add or delete certain elements without breaking the whole system would be important.

What are the key elements of DQ that need to remain in order for things to stay compatible with existing DQ materials?
  • Stats and stat ranges (or an easy conversion system if things are changed)
  • World with multiple Colleges of Magic (but to remain exclusive?)
  • Skills
  • Non-super-heroic system/Human-scale (a game where even an advanced hero might be cut down by a simple peasant with a knife, and where dragons remain a terrifying opponent no matter how good you’ve gotten)
But there are also some elements where I wonder if they are as important to retain in their current form:
  • Extensive ability breakdowns (individual spells, weapons, etc.)
  • Fine granularity in rules
  • Experience and progression
So now what?
 What would you like to see in a new DQ?  What are the things most in need of revision?  What are the parts that represent the essence of DQ that need to remain as they are?




Group: dqn-list Message: 3775 From: Anthony N. Emmel Date: 4/12/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Some of my thoughts.

1. Having the characters roll for how many points they get to place on stats feels kind of redundant. It would be easier to compare characters and their abilities if all had the same amount of points.

Ah, but that was not the point. There was pre-third edition D&D/21st C. Characters were not expected to be equal or balanced with each other. Think about you: you can play a freaking giant. How is that even remotely fair?

Part of it has to with the whole concept of point-buy; this was one of the first games to use it even in this limited manner. Point buy was seen with disdain to some extent; random was the way to go. It did help to prevent min/max characters.

2. With a minimum of 5 on each stat, who not just remove 30 points off the total as those are not available for distribution anyway?

Game balance. Some races have negative modifiers to certain stats. By paying the minimum of 5, if you take a penalty, you lost those points. Remember: not fair or balanced.

3. Perception is low, and ridiculously expensive to increase. There are some things which all adventurer types do, like Stealth. But, I’d suggest Perception is also one of these. If you do not agree about that, I’d suggest that the Skill Ranger is all but useless for beginning characters. Most of the Ranger abilities are based on Perception, and in order to get a decent Base Chance they need to spend 1750 pts to get a 10 and more than a 50/50 chance to be effective. In general, it feels like it’s way to easy to make a dumb hack and slash character than it is to make a “thinker” or a “social guy” and part of that is due to the cost of PC. You should be able to select to play a perceptive character, just as you choose to play a strong brute. 

I got nothing. :)

4. The XP allotment to begin with is broken. The root cause for some of the above is that the beginning XP is generated randomly, and even when rolling really well you don’t get much. 

One way to allieviate this is to find a copy of Paul (now Jennell) Jacquays's Central Casting: Heroes of Legend. Designed to work with many fantasy games, there is a section in it for use with DQ. Basically, you roll up a background for the character that gives him starting skills at the beginning of his career. I myself always felt it was sad that beginning adventurers are not even a match for an equal numver of Goblins.
 
-- Anthony N. Emmel, M.A., Esq. 
Scholar & Catholic Gentleman 
GM of the Guardians of the Polar Bear  
Member of Complete Logical Disconnect 

Q: GM, what is good? 
A: To crush the PCs, see their character sheets pile before you, and hear the lamentation of their players. 

"And suppose…suppose that when rationalism does go, it’s as if a bright dazzle has gone for a while and we could see…Dark magic…A universe of marvels where water flows uphill and trolls live in the deepest woods and dragons live under the mountains." 
--Stephen King, The Stand
Group: dqn-list Message: 3776 From: kaith_athanes Date: 4/12/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone



---In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, <Koraq@...> wrote :

These are my thoughts, also posted at Rodger's blog:

After having spent some time generating characters for a one shot, and not having had any experience at all with DQ as a player, I have some issues with the rules as they are.

1. Having the characters roll for how many points they get to place on stats feels kind of redundant. It would be easier to compare characters and their abilities if all had the same amount of points.

In my games I have stopped using random roll and started allowing the players to just pick the die roll. I've removed all the randomness from character creation so that players can make the kind of characters they want to play. I start all of the characters with the same amount of experience and money. I usually let them pick their social status and race, but the type of campaign can limit the choices.

2. With a minimum of 5 on each stat, who not just remove 30 points off the total as those are not available for distribution anyway?

3. Perception is low, and ridiculously expensive to increase. There are some things which all adventurer types do, like Stealth. But, I’d suggest Perception is also one of these. If you do not agree about that, I’d suggest that the Skill Ranger is all but useless for beginning characters. Most of the Ranger abilities are based on Perception, and in order to get a decent Base Chance they need to spend 1750 pts to get a 10 and more than a 50/50 chance to be effective.
In general, it feels like it’s way to easy to make a dumb hack and slash character than it is to make a “thinker” or a “social guy” and part of that is due to the cost of PC. You should be able to select to play a perceptive character, just as you choose to play a strong brute.

Way back in the mid 80s, our groups instituted a house rule limiting how often a character can purchase perception. Compared to raising most skills and spells, it is relatively cheap and has a high impact on skills such as Ranger and Military Scientist, as well as being the main component of unengaged initiative and the most easily raised component of engaged initiative value.

4. The XP allotment to begin with is broken. The root cause for some of the above is that the beginning XP is generated randomly, and even when rolling really well you don’t get much.

I totally agree about the less than super human scale of DQ, but many of the characters I rolled up could not even buy level 0 of anything with the “100 pt discount” as they had less than 100 XP to begin with!

These days I don’t think people like to “grind” their characters, and I’d suggest a flat xp amount to start with for all characters, and it should be significantly above 100! Probably something like 2000.

Those are my 4 (euro)cents!
 -andreas
--
"My son has spoken the truth, and he has sacrificed more than either the president of the United States or Peter King have ever in their political careers or their American lives. So how they choose to characterize him really doesn't carry that much weight with me." -- Edward Snowden's Father


From: "rthorm@... [dqn-list]" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, April 1, 2016 8:35 PM
Subject: [DQN-list] Making a DragonQuest Clone



[This is an edited version of a post on my blog: https://rthorm.wordpress.com/2016/04/01/dragonquest-rules-clone/ ]

It’s time for a retroclone of the DragonQuest RPG.  It’s past time, really, so there’s no point in delaying further.

Yes, that’s correct, it is April 1st.  But when better to undertake such a fool’s errand?

I have been thinking about getting a clone version of DragonQuest for a long time.  Last month, Jarrod Shaw of Mythoard (a recent convert to DragonQuest compared to some of us grognards) was asking about a clone version of the DQ rules (in the spirit of the many other OSR games out there).  And that got me thinking, once again, about moving forward on a full retroclone of DQ.

Over the past year, I’ve seen a lot of OSR material and found a widespread community producing materials and engaged with these games.  There are many throwback RPGs, and each has its following.  Not only are there versions of every stripe of old D&D, but even games like RuneQuest now have retro-clone versions (OpenQuest).  DQ may never have had the fan base that some other games had, but it’s definitely a game with its merits and that ought to be brought up to date.

So is a retread of DQ a sacrilege?
The game many of us regard as canon was written in 1981. D&D is on its 5th edition (or more, depending on how you count things).  Third Edition DQ is less a new edition than  tinkering with a few rules and excising some of the “frightening material.”  But really, nothing has changed since the 80’s.  That was last millennium, folks!

What about copyright and trademark and so forth?
From what I know of copyright and the law in this area (and IANAL, but I’ve looked at this question more than a little bit), it is the specific expression of the rules (the particular language used to describe the rules) that is covered by copyright.  The ideas of the rules themselves (such as having six characteristics for a character in a range from 3-18) can’t be copyrighted.

As far as trademark goes, the DragonQuest mark has been abandoned by TSR/Wizards/Hasbro, so it would presumably be available (although there is also the Japanese video game of the same name, which is always confusing), but a new name might be better.

What would a new DQ be like?
In all, there’s going to be a lot more discussion about what should and should not be a part of any such thing, so treat all of this as starting points for discussion, rather than anything that has been completely settled.
DQ has always been a modular system, and the designers’ intent seemed to be to have a system that allowed for extension and adaptation.  New Colleges of magic were built into the system almost from the outset, and Arcane Wisdom almost made it to production.

The DQ-rules group on Yahoo was originally started to create a consensus version of new DragonQuest rules.  I think a more open-ended numbering system, to allow for new rules to be added in a more orderly fashion, would be important.  Being able to add or delete certain elements without breaking the whole system would be important.

What are the key elements of DQ that need to remain in order for things to stay compatible with existing DQ materials?
  • Stats and stat ranges (or an easy conversion system if things are changed)
  • World with multiple Colleges of Magic (but to remain exclusive?)
  • Skills
  • Non-super-heroic system/Human-scale (a game where even an advanced hero might be cut down by a simple peasant with a knife, and where dragons remain a terrifying opponent no matter how good you’ve gotten)
But there are also some elements where I wonder if they are as important to retain in their current form:
  • Extensive ability breakdowns (individual spells, weapons, etc.)
  • Fine granularity in rules
  • Experience and progression
So now what?
 What would you like to see in a new DQ?  What are the things most in need of revision?  What are the parts that represent the essence of DQ that need to remain as they are?




Group: dqn-list Message: 3777 From: Andreas Davour Date: 4/12/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Thanks for your input, Anthony!

You raise some good points (eh, well...) on the point buy system. I guess it was early days and SPI tried to do some kind of mix. I'm not sure I think they succeeded. But, I can actually totally missed the non-human races! For those it make some sense with the minimum 5 pts.

I actually own the 2nd ed of Jaquays Heroes of Legend, but I have actually almost never opened the book! I guess maybe I should...

/andreas
 
-- "My son has spoken the truth, and he has sacrificed more than either the president of the United States or Peter King have ever in their political careers or their American lives. So how they choose to characterize him really doesn't carry that much weight with me." -- Edward Snowden's Father



From: "'Anthony N. Emmel' lord_kjeran@yahoo.com [dqn-list]" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
To: "dqn-list@yahoogroups.com" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 3:12 PM
Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone



Some of my thoughts.

1. Having the characters roll for how many points they get to place on stats feels kind of redundant. It would be easier to compare characters and their abilities if all had the same amount of points.

Ah, but that was not the point. There was pre-third edition D&D/21st C. Characters were not expected to be equal or balanced with each other. Think about you: you can play a freaking giant. How is that even remotely fair?

Part of it has to with the whole concept of point-buy; this was one of the first games to use it even in this limited manner. Point buy was seen with disdain to some extent; random was the way to go. It did help to prevent min/max characters.

2. With a minimum of 5 on each stat, who not just remove 30 points off the total as those are not available for distribution anyway?

Game balance. Some races have negative modifiers to certain stats. By paying the minimum of 5, if you take a penalty, you lost those points. Remember: not fair or balanced.

3. Perception is low, and ridiculously expensive to increase. There are some things which all adventurer types do, like Stealth. But, I’d suggest Perception is also one of these. If you do not agree about that, I’d suggest that the Skill Ranger is all but useless for beginning characters. Most of the Ranger abilities are based on Perception, and in order to get a decent Base Chance they need to spend 1750 pts to get a 10 and more than a 50/50 chance to be effective. In general, it feels like it’s way to easy to make a dumb hack and slash character than it is to make a “thinker” or a “social guy” and part of that is due to the cost of PC. You should be able to select to play a perceptive character, just as you choose to play a strong brute. 

I got nothing. :)

4. The XP allotment to begin with is broken. The root cause for some of the above is that the beginning XP is generated randomly, and even when rolling really well you don’t get much. 

One way to allieviate this is to find a copy of Paul (now Jennell) Jacquays's Central Casting: Heroes of Legend. Designed to work with many fantasy games, there is a section in it for use with DQ. Basically, you roll up a background for the character that gives him starting skills at the beginning of his career. I myself always felt it was sad that beginning adventurers are not even a match for an equal numver of Goblins.
 
-- Anthony N. Emmel, M.A., Esq. 
Scholar & Catholic Gentleman 
GM of the Guardians of the Polar Bear  
Member of Complete Logical Disconnect 

Q: GM, what is good? 
A: To crush the PCs, see their character sheets pile before you, and hear the lamentation of their players. 

"And suppose…suppose that when rationalism does go, it’s as if a bright dazzle has gone for a while and we could see…Dark magic…A universe of marvels where water flows uphill and trolls live in the deepest woods and dragons live under the mountains." 
--Stephen King, The Stand




Group: dqn-list Message: 3778 From: Andreas Davour Date: 4/12/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Hi David

I think your note about the way Perception is key for both Ranger and Military Scientist, and also for Initiative makes it even more relevant to re-think that stat.

But, is it really relatively cheap to rise? The Skills vary a lot, so maybe it depends on what you compare it to.

One thing I am not fond of is when one stat is used for so much it becomes a "must" to always max that stat. I find that kind of design lopsided.

It's no bad idea at all to make all of char gen non-random. Most of it is anyway so it is a minor change that fits within the spirit of the rules.

/andreas
 
-- "My son has spoken the truth, and he has sacrificed more than either the president of the United States or Peter King have ever in their political careers or their American lives. So how they choose to characterize him really doesn't carry that much weight with me." -- Edward Snowden's Father



From: "davidchappell@gmail.com [dqn-list]" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 4:20 PM
Subject: Re: [DQN-list] Making a DragonQuest Clone






---In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, <Koraq@...> wrote :

These are my thoughts, also posted at Rodger's blog:

After having spent some time generating characters for a one shot, and not having had any experience at all with DQ as a player, I have some issues with the rules as they are.

1. Having the characters roll for how many points they get to place on stats feels kind of redundant. It would be easier to compare characters and their abilities if all had the same amount of points.

In my games I have stopped using random roll and started allowing the players to just pick the die roll. I've removed all the randomness from character creation so that players can make the kind of characters they want to play. I start all of the characters with the same amount of experience and money. I usually let them pick their social status and race, but the type of campaign can limit the choices.

2. With a minimum of 5 on each stat, who not just remove 30 points off the total as those are not available for distribution anyway?

3. Perception is low, and ridiculously expensive to increase. There are some things which all adventurer types do, like Stealth. But, I’d suggest Perception is also one of these. If you do not agree about that, I’d suggest that the Skill Ranger is all but useless for beginning characters. Most of the Ranger abilities are based on Perception, and in order to get a decent Base Chance they need to spend 1750 pts to get a 10 and more than a 50/50 chance to be effective.
In general, it feels like it’s way to easy to make a dumb hack and slash character than it is to make a “thinker” or a “social guy” and part of that is due to the cost of PC. You should be able to select to play a perceptive character, just as you choose to play a strong brute.

Way back in the mid 80s, our groups instituted a house rule limiting how often a character can purchase perception. Compared to raising most skills and spells, it is relatively cheap and has a high impact on skills such as Ranger and Military Scientist, as well as being the main component of unengaged initiative and the most easily raised component of engaged initiative value.

4. The XP allotment to begin with is broken. The root cause for some of the above is that the beginning XP is generated randomly, and even when rolling really well you don’t get much.

I totally agree about the less than super human scale of DQ, but many of the characters I rolled up could not even buy level 0 of anything with the “100 pt discount” as they had less than 100 XP to begin with!

These days I don’t think people like to “grind” their characters, and I’d suggest a flat xp amount to start with for all characters, and it should be significantly above 100! Probably something like 2000.

Those are my 4 (euro)cents!
 -andreas
--
"My son has spoken the truth, and he has sacrificed more than either the president of the United States or Peter King have ever in their political careers or their American lives. So how they choose to characterize him really doesn't carry that much weight with me." -- Edward Snowden's Father


From: "rthorm@... [dqn-list]" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, April 1, 2016 8:35 PM
Subject: [DQN-list] Making a DragonQuest Clone



[This is an edited version of a post on my blog: https://rthorm.wordpress.com/2016/04/01/dragonquest-rules-clone/ ]

It’s time for a retroclone of the DragonQuest RPG.  It’s past time, really, so there’s no point in delaying further.

Yes, that’s correct, it is April 1st.  But when better to undertake such a fool’s errand?

I have been thinking about getting a clone version of DragonQuest for a long time.  Last month, Jarrod Shaw of Mythoard (a recent convert to DragonQuest compared to some of us grognards) was asking about a clone version of the DQ rules (in the spirit of the many other OSR games out there).  And that got me thinking, once again, about moving forward on a full retroclone of DQ.

Over the past year, I’ve seen a lot of OSR material and found a widespread community producing materials and engaged with these games.  There are many throwback RPGs, and each has its following.  Not only are there versions of every stripe of old D&D, but even games like RuneQuest now have retro-clone versions (OpenQuest).  DQ may never have had the fan base that some other games had, but it’s definitely a game with its merits and that ought to be brought up to date.

So is a retread of DQ a sacrilege?
The game many of us regard as canon was written in 1981. D&D is on its 5th edition (or more, depending on how you count things).  Third Edition DQ is less a new edition than  tinkering with a few rules and excising some of the “frightening material.”  But really, nothing has changed since the 80’s.  That was last millennium, folks!

What about copyright and trademark and so forth?
From what I know of copyright and the law in this area (and IANAL, but I’ve looked at this question more than a little bit), it is the specific expression of the rules (the particular language used to describe the rules) that is covered by copyright.  The ideas of the rules themselves (such as having six characteristics for a character in a range from 3-18) can’t be copyrighted.

As far as trademark goes, the DragonQuest mark has been abandoned by TSR/Wizards/Hasbro, so it would presumably be available (although there is also the Japanese video game of the same name, which is always confusing), but a new name might be better.

What would a new DQ be like?
In all, there’s going to be a lot more discussion about what should and should not be a part of any such thing, so treat all of this as starting points for discussion, rather than anything that has been completely settled.
DQ has always been a modular system, and the designers’ intent seemed to be to have a system that allowed for extension and adaptation.  New Colleges of magic were built into the system almost from the outset, and Arcane Wisdom almost made it to production.

The DQ-rules group on Yahoo was originally started to create a consensus version of new DragonQuest rules.  I think a more open-ended numbering system, to allow for new rules to be added in a more orderly fashion, would be important.  Being able to add or delete certain elements without breaking the whole system would be important.

What are the key elements of DQ that need to remain in order for things to stay compatible with existing DQ materials?
  • Stats and stat ranges (or an easy conversion system if things are changed)
  • World with multiple Colleges of Magic (but to remain exclusive?)
  • Skills
  • Non-super-heroic system/Human-scale (a game where even an advanced hero might be cut down by a simple peasant with a knife, and where dragons remain a terrifying opponent no matter how good you’ve gotten)
But there are also some elements where I wonder if they are as important to retain in their current form:
  • Extensive ability breakdowns (individual spells, weapons, etc.)
  • Fine granularity in rules
  • Experience and progression
So now what?
 What would you like to see in a new DQ?  What are the things most in need of revision?  What are the parts that represent the essence of DQ that need to remain as they are?








Group: dqn-list Message: 3779 From: Martin Gallo Date: 4/13/2016
Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
Some of my thoughts.

1. Having the characters roll for how many points they get to place on stats feels kind of redundant. It would be easier to compare characters and their abilities if all had the same amount of points.

Ah, but that was not the point. There was pre-third edition D&D/21st C. Characters were not expected to be equal or balanced with each other. Think about you: you can play a freaking giant. How is that even remotely fair?

Part of it has to with the whole concept of point-buy; this was one of the first games to use it even in this limited manner. Point buy was seen with disdain to some extent; random was the way to go. It did help to prevent min/max characters.

It was a “potential” system. High point characters were great to start with but were of “limited growth” potential for attributes.

2. With a minimum of 5 on each stat, who not just remove 30 points off the total as those are not available for distribution anyway?

Game balance. Some races have negative modifiers to certain stats. By paying the minimum of 5, if you take a penalty, you lost those points. Remember: not fair or balanced.

3. Perception is low, and ridiculously expensive to increase. There are some things which all adventurer types do, like Stealth. But, I’d suggest Perception is also one of these. If you do not agree about that, I’d suggest that the Skill Ranger is all but useless for beginning characters. Most of the Ranger abilities are based on Perception, and in order to get a decent Base Chance they need to spend 1750 pts to get a 10 and more than a 50/50 chance to be effective. In general, it feels like it’s way to easy to make a dumb hack and slash character than it is to make a “thinker” or a “social guy” and part of that is due to the cost of PC. You should be able to select to play a perceptive character, just as you choose to play a strong brute. 

I got nothing. :)

4. The XP allotment to begin with is broken. The root cause for some of the above is that the beginning XP is generated randomly, and even when rolling really well you don’t get much. 

One way to allieviate this is to find a copy of Paul (now Jennell) Jacquays's Central Casting: Heroes of Legend. Designed to work with many fantasy games, there is a section in it for use with DQ. Basically, you roll up a background for the character that gives him starting skills at the beginning of his career. I myself always felt it was sad that beginning adventurers are not even a match for an equal numver of Goblins.
 
-- Anthony N. Emmel, M.A., Esq. 
Scholar & Catholic Gentleman 
GM of the Guardians of the Polar Bear  
Member of Complete Logical Disconnect 

Q: GM, what is good? 
A: To crush the PCs, see their character sheets pile before you, and hear the lamentation of their players. 

"And suppose…suppose that when rationalism does go, it’s as if a bright dazzle has gone for a while and we could see…Dark magic…A universe of marvels where water flows uphill and trolls live in the deepest woods and dragons live under the mountains." 
--Stephen King, The Stand



Group: dqn-list Message: 3780 From: John Kahane Date: 4/13/2016
Subject: Re: The Barrow of Calimendil Scenario?
Hullo, Grindwall,

In a message of 16-01-25 02:16 AM, grindwall@yahoo.com wrote,

> Thank you, very kind.

:)

> I thought I had placed all those adventures in the Adventures section
> of the Files pages, but looks like I missed that one.

I had wondered about that. It happens. :)

> I have more adventures I'd be willing to trade if you'd like. Let's chat.

Sure, I'd love to talk to you about this. Drop me a line at my
e-mail address, okay?

...The worst thing is to get involved with people who aren't passionate
about what they're doing. (actor Willem Dafoe)

--
JohnK
e-mail: johnk100@sympatico.ca
blog: http://jkahane.livejournal.com
Group: dqn-list Message: 3781 From: Howard Teal Date: 4/13/2016
Subject: Looking for demons
Do any of my fellow DQ players have a write up for generic demons? Succubi & Incubi & demonic royalty abound (in 2nd ed anyway), but I was wondering if any of you had created any other lower castes of demons/devils. I lazy-ed this in the past with gargoyle stats. If anyone has put real thought into this though, I'd like to hear (read) about it.

Howard
Group: dqn-list Message: 3782 From: Howard Teal Date: 4/13/2016
Subject: Re: Looking for demons
Other than the one entry for devils in Greater Summonings... I crave variety.

On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 10:18 PM, Howard Teal <hwteal@gmail.com> wrote:
Do any of my fellow DQ players have a write up for generic demons? Succubi & Incubi & demonic royalty abound (in 2nd ed anyway), but I was wondering if any of you had created any other lower castes of demons/devils. I lazy-ed this in the past with gargoyle stats. If anyone has put real thought into this though, I'd like to hear (read) about it.

Howard

Group: dqn-list Message: 3783 From: imperium1@optusnet.com.au Date: 4/14/2016
Subject: Re: Looking for demons
Attachments :
    Amorph

    Natural Habitat: Other Planes

    Frequency: Very Rare              Number: 1

    Description: Amorphs manifest as oozing blobs of grey-mauve protoplasm full of eyes and chattering mouths.

    Talents, Skills and Magic: Amorphs have the ability to drive a character insane.  For each Pulse spent within 50 feet of an Amorph a roll of ([4 x WP of victim] – [10% x number of Pulses spent in Amorphs presence] or less.  If the roll is failed the character becomes permanently insane.  Roll on the Insanity Table.

    Movement Rates: Crawling: 200; Swimming: 300

    PS: None          MD: None        AG: 9–13          MA: 1–3
    EN: 12–14        FT: 21–26        WP: 17–20       PC: 11‑16
    PB: 3–5            TMR: 4/6         NA: None

    PY: 9-12           LC: 1-3

    Weapons: Amorphs have the ability to form pseudopods and whip [BC: 50%, D10+6 Damage] in Close or Melee Combat.

    Comments:  If an amorph is reduced to 0 endurance as a result of the attacks of normal (non‑magical) weapons, the amorph merely splits into two amorphs, each with half the size, endurance, and fatigue of the original. Magical weapons and magical attacks affect the amorph normally.  Fire causes amorphs 50% extra damage.  If an amorph crosses a line of oil they suffer D10+2 Damage.  Amorphs will only agree to serve a summoner who provides them with a giant amoeba to consume. 

     
    Demonic locust

    Natural Habitat: Other Planes

    Frequency: Very Rare              Number: 1-3

    Description:  Demonic locusts resemble large, winged insects with horrible, human-like visages.  Their bodies are covered by a hard, chitinous shell, which ranges in colour from dull yellow to green.  Each of their six legs is covered with rows of sharp spines and barbs.

    Talents, Skills and Magic: Demonic locusts have no magical properties, and no special abilities other than the ability to make a horrid buzzing sound which is audible up to 1000 feet distant.  Any creature hearing this buzzing [unless the creature is angelic, demonic or undead] must roll 3 x WP or less or roll on the Fright Table.  Making such noise requires a pass action.

    Movement Rates: Flying: 400; Crawling: 50

    PS: 10–15        MD: 8–10        AG: 18–22        MA: 1–6
    EN: 17–20        FT: 20–22        WP: 10–16       PC: 18‑25
    PB: 3–5            TMR: 8/1         NA: shell absorbs 6 DP

    PY: 6-11            LC: 1-6

    Weapons: Demonic locusts may make six attacks with the spines on their legs in Melee or Close Combat (Base Chance:  25%, D10+2 damage).

    Comments: The services of demonic locusts are often provided to chosen humans to be used as air support in a demonic army.   Demonic locusts demand carrion before they will serve.

     
    Fiend

    Natural Habitat: Other Planes

    Frequency: Very Rare              Number: 1

    Description: Standing 6 feet and weighing anywhere between 120-160 pounds fiends are fur-covered hunch-backed humanoids with large crooked horns and small bat-like wings.

    Talents, Skills and Magic: Fiends will never be members of any College of Magic . Fiends can only be harmed by silvered weapons or magic. Cold iron does not affect them.  They are also 3 times as stealthy as humans, and can blend in with surrounding trees (90% chance they will be undetected if they remain still). Fiends also have the unusual ability to spot magical “gates” and inter-planar rifts.

    Movement Rates: Run: 350; Fly: 50

    PS: 20–30        MD: 15–17      AG: 15–17        MA: 3–6
    EN: 25–30        FT: 30–40        WP: 10–16       PC: 14‑18
    PB: 3–5            TMR: 7/1         NA: Skin absorbs 4 DP

    PY: 7-11            LC: 3-6

    Weapons: Fiends may Bite (BC: 20%, D10+4 Damage) in Close Combat or make two claw attacks (BC: 35%, D10+2 Damage) in Melee or Close.

    Comments. Fiends are devils of hideous aspect and retched temperament.  Fiends can only use their wings to glide for distances of up to only 100-200 feet, after which they must alight before again becoming airborne.  They are not capable of carrying more than 10-40 lbs while gliding.

     
    Gatherer

    Natural Habitat: Other Planes

    Frequency: Very Rare              Number: 1

    Description: Gatherers are reptilian in appearance with a long scaly tail and short horns, which curve close to their head.  They are a sickly grey in colour.  They wear dark-coloured loin sashes and carry no weapons.

    Talents, Skills and Magic: Gatherers possess Rank 10 in Martial Artist [wrestling].  They possess no other skills and are not tool or magic users.

    Movement Rates: Running: 225

    PS: 50–60        MD: 19–24      AG: 17–20        MA: 1–6
    EN: 22–28        FT: 35–42        WP: 18–23       PC: 13‑16
    PB: 3–5            TMR: 4            NA: Scales absorb 6 DP

    PY: 10-15          LC: 1-6

    Weapons: Bare hands as per the Martial Arts rules.

    Comments. Gatherers are devils, which are sent to gather the damned souls of those scheduled to die.  To escape a Gatherer the character would have to out fight him.

     
    Hezrau (clerk)

    Natural Habitat: Other Planes

    Frequency: Very Rare              Number: 1

    Description: Hezraus appear on first glance as attractive men dressed as high-ranking eastern bureaucrats.  As the character looks closer he will notice that Hezraus eyes are fiery, their skin scaled and their feet are cloven hooves.

    Talents, Skills and Magic: Hezrau possess the Scribe and Steward skills at Rank 12.  They also possess Rank 10 with all the magic of the College of the Mind.

    Movement Rates: Running: 225

    PS: 24–27        MD: 20–23      AG: 21–24        MA: 22–26
    EN: 19–22        FT: 21–25        WP: 21–26       PC: 18‑25
    PB: 3–5            TMR: 4            NA: Skin absorbs 5 DP

    PY: 21-26          LC: 22-26

    Weapons: Hezrau may strike with their hands (Base Chance: 55%; D10+2 Damage) in Close or Melee Combat.

    Comments:  Hezrau are the bureaucrats of hell.  They keep all the records of comings and goings, transactions, punishments, impending deaths, and all other information necessary to run the infernus.

     
    Kalkydri (warder of the damned)

    Natural Habitat: Other Planes

    Frequency: Very Rare              Number: 1-3

    Description: Kalkydri are grossly obese humanoids.  Their skin, spiked shell and curved horns are red like a cooked lobster.

    Talents, Skills and Magic: Kalkydri have no skills or abilities [apart from skill with a trident] and are not magic users.  They do possess objects, usually keys, which can open the “gates” they guard.  Kalkydri possess the ability to regenerate themselves at the rate of 1 Damage Point healed each Pulse.  They are totally immune to fire and heat based attacks.  Kalkydri suffer D10+7 Damage from holy water or holy symbols.  They possess Rank 8 in all talents, and general knowledge spells of the College of Fire Magic .  They may also teleport a distance of 10 feet at will.

    Movement Rates: Running: 250

    PS: 28–30        MD: 22–25      AG: 30–34        MA: 19–22
    EN: 6–10          FT: 10–15        WP: 10–16       PC: 18‑25
    PB: 3–5            TMR: 5            NA: Shell absorbs 8 DP

    PY: 15-19          LC: 19-22

    Weapons:  Kalkydri are usually armed with a trident (Base Chance: 45%, D10+2 Damage, Rank 5).   Kalkydri may make a horn attack in Close Combat (Base Chance: 25%, D10+4 Damage). 

    Comments: Kalkydri are devils summoned by demons to protect important portals.  Once in place, they will never leave the portals they were assigned to protect, and they will use all their abilities to prevent most creatures from entering those portals.  Due to a strange flaw in their character however Kalkydri will allow any being that can answer a special riddle, access to the portal they guard.

     
    Mane

    Natural Habitat: Other Planes

    Frequency: Very Rare              Number: 1-3

    Description: Manes are sinister in appearance, having deep-set, glowing eyes, pointed ears, and beetle brows.  Their bodies are covered with coarse, grayish fur, and their hands are clawed and their feet are cloven hooves.  Most have a crest of darker hair running from the forehead back down the base of the skull and along the manes back.  Manes stand 3 feet high and weigh about 30 pounds and can appear as small sized dogs.

    Talents, Skills and Magic: Manes may be members of any Colleges of Magic except the Entities as determined by the GM. Manes can only be harmed by silvered weapons or magic. Cold iron does not affect them. Manes can reach up to Rank 5 in General knowledge and Rank 2 in special knowledge in their College.  Manes have an extremely sensitive sense of smell and can follow a trail many days old.  They are also 3 times as stealthy as humans, and can blend in with any shadows (90% chance they will be undetected if they remain still).

    Movement Rates: Running: 400

    PS: 12–22        MD: 14–18      AG: 14–22        MA: 5–23
    EN: 12–20        FT: 20–30        WP: 10–16       PC: 14‑18
    PB: 3–5            TMR: 8            NA: Skin absorbs 4 DP

    PY: 8-20           LC: 5-23

    Weapons: Manes may Bite in Close Combat (Base Chance: 75%, D10-7 Damage) or use their Claws in Melee or Close (Base Chance: 70%, D10+1 Damage)

    Comments: Manes possess the ability to communicate with the dead, making them much prized as familiars.  All but the most evil creatures will have difficulty controlling a manes familiar as these creatures are not happy unless engaged in some vile pursuit.  Manes are also able to use their keen sense of smell to detect magical emanations by scent, at ranges of up to 10 feet.

     
    Mephit

    Natural Habitat: Other Planes

    Frequency: Very Rare              Number: 1

    Description:  Mephits are nightmarish in appearance.  Standing five feet tall their skin is the colour of deeply bruised and ulcerous flesh while their hands and feet possess wickedly sharp claws.  They all have tattered but functional bat-like wings.

    Talents, Skills and Magic: Mephits possess the ability to regenerate 1 DP/Pulse.

    Movement Rates: Running: 225; Flying: 350

    PS: 8–11          MD: 15–18      AG: 16–21        MA: 13–18
    EN: 8–10          FT: 14–18        WP: 20–24       PC: 13‑20
    PB: 3–5            TMR: 4/7         NA: Skin absorbs 1 DP

    PY: 13-21         LC: 13-18

    Weapons:  Mephits may make two claw attacks in Melee or Close Combat (Base Chance: 40%, D10 Damage).  They may also spit a stream of hot water [Base Chance: 35%, D10-1 Damage, Range 4 hexes].

    Comments: Mephits are used as messengers and for petty-errands by the demon to whom they belong.  Mephits possess the same cruel sense of humour as Imps.  Mephits may be summoned by mages but the mage will be unable to stop the mephitis pranks loving ways.  Mephits often adopt a strutting gait and have shrill voices. 

     
    Mirror Devil

    Natural Habitat: Other Planes

    Frequency: Very Rare              Number: 1

    Description: Mirror devils resemble horrific humanoid beings with four arms and four faces that scream wildly. 

    Talents, Skills and Magic: Mirror devils have the ability to use any large mirror as a passageway to hell.  The devil may try to grab hold of its victim and pull him into the mirror.  Once on the other side of the mirror the victim will not be able to pass through the mirror without the mirror devil’s help.

    Movement Rates: Running: 375

    PS: 20–26        MD: 19–24      AG: 23–28        MA: 27-32

    EN: 18-23         FT: 29-34         WP: 25–29       PC: 23‑27
    PB: 1–2            TMR: 7            NA: Skin absorbs 3 DP

    PY: 26-30          LC: 27-32

    Weapons: Mirror devils may make 4 clawing attacks [BC: 30%, D10-1 Damage, and may be Ranked 8-10) in Close Combat or close and grapple [BC: 70%].  If an opponent is grappled no damage is done but the devil will attempt to drag its victim into the mirror on the next Pulse.

    Comments:  If the mirror devil’s mirror is broken the devil will immediately be destroyed.  However it is killed, cracks will begin to race across its face and body, and it will collapse with an ear-splitting shriek into a small pile of shattered glass.

     
    Nephilim (ice devil)

    Natural Habitat: Other Planes

    Frequency: Very Rare              Number: 1

    Description: The nephilim stands at least 18 feet tall, and is fat and strong.  Its grim head supports two huge curving horns.  Behind it are a large pair of bat wings.  It is completely white, and appears to be made from the ice itself.

    Talents, Skills and Magic: Nephilim, are members of the College of Air Magics .  They have no Skills, but possess Rank 12 with all magic of their College.  Nephilim may breathe a chilling blast of frigid air.  They may not be bound or subjected to a Ritual of True Speaking.

    Movement Rates: Running: 500; Flying: 600

    PS: 27–46        MD: 10–13      AG: 8–10          MA: 25–30
    EN: 30–44        FT: 30–36        WP: 26–30       PC: 19‑25
    PB: 3–6            TMR: 10/12     NA: 4 DP per Strike

    PY: 25-30          LC: 25-30

    Weapons: Nephilim may make a horn attack in Close Combat (Base Chance: 30%, D10+4 Damage).  They may attack with their fists in Melee or Close combat (Base Chance: 55%, D10+6 Damage).  The nephilim are able to breathe a a frigid blast of air in a cone 20 feet long by 10 feet wide at the base (D10+8 Damage).  It takes a Pulse for a nephilim to breathe in such a manner.

    Comments: For most of the time, a nephilim simply squats, watching and listening to those around it.  Some nephilim have even attracted worshipers.  Nephilim are often sent by demons to aid those worshipers or mages who may be opposed by the Powers of Light.  

     
    Nightmare

    Natural Habitat: Other Planes

    Frequency: Very Rare              Number: 1

    Description: Nightmares are insubstantial steeds, capable of taking on solid form.  They resemble coal-black horses, gaunt and almost skeletal, with fanged jaws and eyes like glowing embers.

    Talents, Skills and Magic: Nightmares are able to fly for one hour every night.  They are superb trackers, and can smell out a living being up to a distance of a mile.

    Movement Rates: Running: 1200; Flying: 1100

    PS: 10–12        MD: 18–20      AG: 23–25        MA: None

    EN: None         FT: None         WP: 12–16       PC: 17‑19
    PB: 4–6            TMR: 24/22     NA: None

    PY: None          LC: None

    Weapons: Kick (BC 45%, D10+7 Damage) or Bite (BC 20%, D10+4 Damage). 

    Comments:  Nightmares are rarely found alone, most being found in the service of a wraith, spectre, vampire or adept who serves the Powers of Darkness.  Nightmares are extremely sensitive to light.  When under moonlight halve all the nightmare’s stats.  When the nightmare encounters sunlight it turns to mist and disappears.

     
    Pazuzu

    Natural Habitat: Other Planes

    Frequency: Very Rare              Number: 1

    Description: Pazuzus manifest as thin, gaunt humanoids.  Their taut, glistening skin is ruddy-bronze in colour, their leonine manes are dusty grey and their eagle-like wings are pitch black.

    Talents, Skills and Magic: Pazuzus, will have some ability in the powers of the College of Illusions [Rank 8-9]. They are able to breath fire in a cone 30 feet long by 10 feet wide at the base, doing D10+8 damage to all within Range. This ability requires a Fire Action.

    Movement Rates: Running: 300; Flying: 450

    PS: 20–23        MD: 16–21      AG: 18–21        MA: 20–27
    EN: 17–21        FT: 27–31        WP: 20–24       PC: 23‑28
    PB: 3–5            TMR: 6/9         NA: Skin absorbs 1 DP

    PY: 20-25          LC: 20-27

    Weapons: Pazuzus have no natural weapons but will use any weaponry provided by the summoner.

    Comments:  Pazuzus require 750 SP worth of ivory before they will serve the summoner. 

     
    Raver

    Natural Habitat: Other Planes

    Frequency: Very Rare              Number: 1

    Description: Ravers are normally invisible.

    Talents, Skills, and Magic: Ravers have the ability to possess any humanoid body they wish (BC: [4 x WP of Raver] – [4 x WP of victim]).  Such possessions are subject to the following modification: Giant, Monk or Monastic –50%, Adept –20%, Cleric or Priest –30%, Elf or Khuzdul –5%, Character serving the Powers of Darkness +5%, Character possessing an Illearth Stone +25%.  All modifiers are cumulative.  While in possession of a body ravers also have special skill in the Windstorm spell from the College of Air Magics [Rank 12], and the Ritual of Summoning and Binding the Lesser Undead which they can use as a spell [Rank 12].  They also possess the mimicry [humanoid speech] and Artist [acting] skills [both at Rank 10 ].

    Movement Rates: Flying: 300

    PS: None          MD: None        AG: See below  MA: 30-35

    EN: None         FT: None         WP: 30-35        PC: 24-28

    PB: None          TMR: 6            NA: None

    PY: 30-35          LC: 30-35

    Weapons: Ravers can strike with their bare hands [BC: 55%, D10+4 Damage]. 

    Comments: Ravers possess the same stats as the being they possess.  They may be driven out of the being only by an exorcism.  Any attempt to destroy the body they inhabit will merely result in them going into the next available body and possessing that.

     
    Rult

    Natural Habitat: Other Planes

    Frequency: Very Rare          &nbs

    (Message over 64 KB, truncated)

    Group: dqn-list Message: 3784 From: Andreas Davour Date: 4/14/2016
    Subject: Re: Looking for demons

    Impressive!

    Thanks for sharing.

    /andreas
    Group: dqn-list Message: 3785 From: Howard Teal Date: 4/14/2016
    Subject: Re: Looking for demons
    What Andreas said... Much appreciated!

    From: Andreas Davour Koraq@yahoo.com [dqn-list]
    Sent: ‎4/‎14/‎2016 10:57 AM
    To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
    Subject: Re: [DQN-list] Re: Looking for demons

     


    Impressive!

    Thanks for sharing.

    /andreas

    Group: dqn-list Message: 3786 From: John Kahane Date: 4/14/2016
    Subject: Re: Merfolk as Player Characters
    Hullo, Martin,

    In a message of 16-02-07 12:14 PM, Martin Gallo martimer@mindspring.com
    wrote,

    > My campaign centered around a city about half a dayside from that same
    > swampland! I had menfolk world up for my world, but lost the notes in a
    > basement flood a few years ago. It was so disheartening that we moved!

    Having been through the basement flood business myself (back in
    2009, iirc, where I lost a ton of gaming stuff), I know how you feel.

    I had statistics for merfolk as player characters back in the day,
    but can't remember what happened to those notes (they may not have
    survived the flood, irony of ironies). But I could have sworn I saw
    some material player character merfolk somewhere on-line at one point.
    No idea where.

    > Nobody wanted to play one because one of the mods I had was that their
    > claws prevented the wielding of most weapons except for spears/tridents
    > (I think they were a +4 so I never really got the issue except that the
    > were mostly SCA weenies and needed their swords to be cool?)

    Well, the claws of merfolk wouldn't be all that great for holding
    swords and the like, I never thought, and besides, how effective would
    that kind of weapon be underwater? So why learn the skill to begin with?

    ...You can go anywhere you want if you look serious and carry a clipboard.

    --
    JohnK
    e-mail: johnk100@sympatico.ca
    blog: http://jkahane.livejournal.com
    Chill 3rd Edition RPG:
    https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/chill_3rd_edition_rpg/info
    Fvminata: Armed with Lightning RPG:
    https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/fvlminata/info
    Polaris RPG: https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/polaris_sf_rpg/info
    Group: dqn-list Message: 3787 From: John Kahane Date: 4/14/2016
    Subject: Re: Thinning Down the Counterspells
    Hullo, Rodger,

    In a message of 16-03-31 04:06 PM, rthorm@cornellbox.com wrote,

    > There are a lot of counterspells to learn in the DQ world. Probably too
    > many.

    Actually, I would hazard a guess this depends on whether the GM
    running the game is using only the Colleges found in the edition of the
    game they're using or have added a few Colleges. What have we got? -
    E&E, Sorceries of the Mind, Illusions, Naming Incantations, Air, Earth,
    Fire, Water, Celestial, Necromancy, Black, and Greater Summonings. Add
    Rune, Shaping, and Lesser Summonings, if one is using Arcane Wisdom. So
    15 Colleges, meaning 30 Counterspells. The problem only occurs if one
    is playing a Namer, since only Namers get all the counterspells. If
    you're playing an Air Mage, frex, you only have the counterspells for
    General and Special Knowledge of the College.

    Now if you've got a bunch of additional Colleges that one has
    added to the game, yeah, that can be a lot of counterspells. :)

    > It’s possible to speculate on how that came about, and there may
    > have been good reasons for it, but in practice, it seems cumbersome and
    > difficult, particularly in that there are two counterspells for each
    > College. Are the flows of mana somehow different between General and
    > Special knowledge spells? Why does the esoteric organization of a
    > College’s magic determine which of two counterspells will affect a
    > particular spell?

    Interesting points and questions, none of which I have answers to.

    > Instead, why not take a cue from Naming Magics, with the Generic
    > and Individual True Names for things, and have counterspells at the
    > level of Branch and College, rather than General and Special Knowledge?

    Hmm, an interesting idea...but wouldn't it serve to make Namers
    even more powerful? (Which is what they're supposed to be, given the
    Namers were powerful anyway, based as they are on Le Guin's Earthsea?)

    > In practice, this would give 3 generic counterspells (one each for
    > Thaumaturgies, Elementals, and Entities), plus a specific counterspell
    > for each particular College. The Branch counterspells would be less
    > effective than the specific counterspell for each College, but would be
    > useful against any magic of that particular Branch.

    While this makes sense, what about the Elementals? You have
    opposed Colleges there, so how does the Branch counterspell(s) work
    given the opposed nature of the elements themselves (other than
    Celestial, which has no opposite for whatever reasons)?

    > Instead of having at least 24 counterspells (General/Special for
    > each of the original 12 Colleges, plus 2 more for each additional
    > College introduced into a particular campaign, there would be 15,
    > plus one for each additional College. This would work much more
    > fluidly in a campaign where some Colleges may not exist, at the
    > outset, or where additional Colleges are included in the game.

    You present a convincing argument for using this approach to
    counterspells, I'll give you that. :)

    > As a matter of play balance, it seems more correct to me that, when
    > faced with magic from a previously unknown College, a caster should have
    > at least some small chance of being able to dispel the magical effect.

    Hmm...

    > Counterspells are presumably based on the workings of mana, rather than
    > being reverse-engineerings of spells. So something that will disrupt
    > the flow and effects of mana to one kind of spell should have a good
    > chance to be able to disrupt a similar, though perhaps slightly
    > different, one.

    ...I have always assumed that the counterspells for magic are
    based on the idea that the way mana is harnessed/channelled for each
    College is different (even if only slightly).

    As for the flow and effects of mana for spells, if one wants to
    take that approach, a College dealing strictly with mana would take
    advantage of this whole basis for counterspells, and be highly effective
    at disrupting the flow of and/or limiting the effects of mana.

    Just my $0.02 Canadian, adjusted for inflation.

    ...Rules are for Thriddle, dreams are for Sholari. (Joruni saying)

    --
    JohnK
    e-mail: johnk100@sympatico.ca
    blog: http://jkahane.livejournal.com
    Chill 3rd Edition RPG:
    https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/chill_3rd_edition_rpg/info
    Fvminata: Armed with Lightning RPG:
    https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/fvlminata/info
    Polaris RPG: https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/polaris_sf_rpg/info
    Group: dqn-list Message: 3788 From: arielifan Date: 4/14/2016
    Subject: Re: Looking for demons
    Thank you for the demon/devils, how about servants of deities?

    ~Jeffery~
    Group: dqn-list Message: 3789 From: imperium1@optusnet.com.au Date: 4/15/2016
    Subject: Re: Looking for demons
    Attachments :
      Well here's some copyrighted material for a start:
       
       

      Entities of the Vault

         Entities of the Vault are the physical manifestations of spirits from the vault of heaven. They do not normally exist on this plane, but are summoned by adepts of the College of White Magics . They will always be well disposed to their summoner, but cannot be forced to serve and must be persuaded.  Entities of the Vault are impervious to attacks made with normal weapons although silvered weapons, or magic does affect them as does weaponry dedicated to evil.  

       
      Baku

      Natural Habitat: Other Planes

      Frequency: Very Rare              Number: 1-5 (1)

      Description: Bakus have elephant-like heads, and dragon-like bodies, with short tails, the forelegs of a rhinoceros and the rear legs of a lion.

      Talents, Skills, and Magic: Bakus can turn invisible at will and remain that way until touched.  Their roar causes all creatures from hell within 4 hexes to take D10-2 damage and a roll of 3 x WP or less must be made or a roll on the fright table must be made for the hell creatures.  The bakus may possess knowledge of a limited number of spells from the College of Sorceries of the Mind.

      Movement Rates: Running: 525

      PS: 45‑55         MD: 17-22       AG: 17‑21        MA: 19-23
      EN: 35‑43         FT: 40‑48         WP: 11‑15        PC: 10‑12
      PB: 5‑9             TMR: 10          NA: Hide absorbs 6 DP

      PY: 15-19          LC: 19-23

      Weapons: Bakus can butt [BC: 15%, D10+4 Damage] in Melee or Close Combat or can trample with its front two feet [BC: 35%, D10+7 Damage].  Two possible attacks, resolve each separately.

      Comments: Bakus are usually peaceful and timid creatures but will become ferocious upon sight of a creature from hell.

       
      Black dog

      Natural Habitat: See Below

      Frequency: Very Rare              Number: 1

      Description: Black dogs are the size of a calf with a black shaggy coat and glowing fiery eyes.

      Talents, Skills, and Magic: The howl of black dogs can be heard up to 5 miles away.  They can speak in quenyan but seldom do so.  Black dogs possess the ability to drain life from their prey with a glance.  Anyone who is within 50 feet of the black dog may be attacked in this manner.  This attack requires a Fire Action [BC: 60%, D10+3 Damage].  They are adepts of the College of the Mind possessing Rank 5 in all General Knowledge and Rank 2 in all Special Knowledge.

      Movement Rates: Running: 500

      PS: 30‑36         MD: 21-24       AG: 26‑30        MA: 19-23
      EN: 20‑25         FT: 31‑38         WP: 25‑30        PC: 22‑27
      PB: 6‑9             TMR: 10          NA: Fur absorbs 6 DP

      PY: 22-27         LC: 19-23

      Weapons: Black dogs can bite [BC: 65%, D10+6 Damage] in either Melee or Close Combat.

      Comments: Black dogs do not normally appear on this plane.  They are brought here by sentinels to aid those who serve the Powers of Light.  They have also been known to save the lives of others by deterring them from harm.  Mostly though black dogs are content to leave most beings [except creatures from hell] alone and be left alone in return.  Anyone who speaks to them [except those they were sent to help], strikes at them, or otherwise attempts to deter them will be attacked.

       
      Devakim

      Natural Habitat: Other Planes

      Frequency: Very Rare              Number: 1-6 (1)

      Description: Devakim usually appear as extremely tall (7' - 7'6"), good-looking elven and human men and women, of Herculean or Amazonian stature. All have large feathered wings, although they may choose to conceal these at will. Devakim radiate a strong inner light, and glow faintly in all lighting. They wear short robes (cut to reveal their muscled physique) or Armour, in the colour of their Sentinel, and usually appear armed with spear, sword and shield.

      Talents, Skills, and Magic: Devakim of Raphael, Sammael and Uriel tend to be Mages. Some of Gabriel's devakim are Mages; but most of Michael’s are not. Devakim Mages are almost all Thaumaturges, with a few Elementalists. They will have Ranks 10-12 with most of the magics of their College. Most have at least 1 skill at Rank 9; this skill varies depending on their calling. Non-mage devakim will have the Warrior skill at Rank 9.

      Movement Rates: Running: 400; Flying: 500

      PS: 28‑30         MD: 18-25       AG: 22‑28        MA: 5-30
      EN: 28‑34         FT: 35‑40         WP: 22‑28        PC: 20‑25
      PB: 20-26         TMR: 8/10       NA: Aura absorbs 2 DP

      PY: 22-28          LC: 5-30

      Weapons: Devakim usually have spear, and a sword and shield at maximum ranks, and Warrior devakim will know a large number of other weapons. They may choose to appear in well-crafted improved plate armour of some unknown material, and will carry a spear, sword and shield of their choice.

      Comments: Devakim are lesser minions of the Sentinels.

       
      Foo

      Natural Habitat: Other Planes

      Frequency: Very Rare              Number: 1-8 (2)

      Description: Foos are leonine in appearance with a large main, large head and fangs, and a bushy tail.

      Talents, Skills, and Magic: Foos can inflict 1 extra point of damage against those who serve the Powers of Darkness.

      Movement Rates: Running: 600

      PS: 29‑34         MD: 20-26       AG: 26‑34        MA: 12-20
      EN: 15‑16         FT: 16‑20         WP: 17‑19        PC: 23‑28
      PB: 7‑9             TMR: 12          NA: Fur absorbs 6 DP

      PY: 15-20          LC: 12-20

      Weapons: Foos can make 2 claw attacks [BC: 45%, D10+5 Damage] and a bite [BC: 50%, D10+8 Damage] in Melee or Close Combat without penalty.

      Comments: Foos are released by the Powers of Light to persecute those who do evil.

       

      Sentinels of the Vault (Apart from Andoriel I haven't really finished these angels)

      High Sentinels

      Exalted Andoriel “High Sentinel of the 1st Dominion”

      Description: Andoriel appears as a giant marble statue standing beneath a marble dome supported by seven fluted columns.  Both sentinel and dome are draped with innumerable cobwebs and covered in dust.

      Talents, Skills, and Magic: Andoriel is a master of the College of Telepathy .  He possesses the following skills: Ascetic, Dervish, Devotee, Monk, Priest, Psychic Warrior.  He can accurately sense the motives and intentions of any creature entering his presence.  He can see any location within the Mundane Plane or the Vault.     

      Movement Rates: Running: 500

      PS: 23                  MD: 18      AG: 18    MA: 35

      EN: 25                  FT: 37                        WP: 38                 PC: 38

      PB: 15                     TMR: 10 NA: Skin absorbs 7 DP

      PY: 36              LC: 35

      Weapons: Andoriel may hit with his bare hands in combat.  His hands have a BC of 50% of doing +7 Damage and are at Rank 5.

      Comments: Andoriel has no evident personality.  He does not speak and moves only when he must.  He communicates only in a cold, telepathic monotone if at all.  Andoriel will never give any indication that he recognizes a visitor to his dominion.  If he deigns to respond to any questions or statements, he will prefer do so by allowing the speaker to understand a fact or idea. 

       
      Exalted Celandise “High Sentinel of the 2nd Dominion”

      Description: Celandise appears as a tall human female standing atop a glass pedastal.  Her hair is gold thread, her eyes sapphires, and tiny red letters are tattooed in intricate detail across her flesh.  Celandise is clothed in robes of simple white cotton, resembling those of a scholar from the ancient times.  In her right hand is a great book, which [it is said] may not be opened till the end of the age.

      Talents, Skills, and Magic: Celandise is a mistress of the College of Loremastery .  She possesses the following skills: Alchemist, Astrologer, Mechanician, Scholar, Scribe.  Celandise knows every scrap of knowledge ever uncovered by a mortal, and those matters which are yet unknown are inscribed upon her flesh.  

      Movement Rates: Running: 400

      PS: 23                  MD: 18             AG: 18                           MA: 33

      EN: 21                  FT: 35                        WP: 34                 PC: 34

      PB: 23                     TMR: 8   NA: Skin absorbs 2 DP

      PY: 33               LC: 33

      Weapons: Celandise may strike with her bare hands.  Her hands have a BC of 65% and are Rank 10.  Any successful strike inflicts no damage but automatically stuns the victim.

      Comments: This sentinel is the epitome of all the virtues of scholarship.  Celandise reveres and respects learning, and considerers that all problems can be solved with the application of rational thought.  She will refuse to speak with those who are not learned and those she deigns to address she expects to have an excellent understanding of history, languages, and learning in general.

       
      Exalted Rapheionas “High Sentinel of the 3rd Dominion”

      Description: Rapheionas appears seated in a chair of wrought silver, decorated with scenes from innumerable legends and epics.  He is humanoid in form but has the head of a stag with a brilliant sphere, glowing like the sun, suspended between his antlers.  He wears full flowing robes of purple satin, and holds in one hand a golden scepter. 

      Talents, Skills, and Magic: Rapheionas is the master of the College of Bardic Magics .  He possesses the following skills: Administrator, Bard, Courtier, Diplomat, Herald, Troubadour.  Rapheionas instantly knows the powers and properties of any magical artifact brought into his presence.  Staring at any being for two pulses Rapheionas knows every brave or cowardly act that being has ever committed, and every valorous or timid impulse that being has ever felt.    

      Movement Rates: Running: 300

      PS: 27                  MD: 22      AG: 22    MA: 33

      EN: 27                  FT: 38        WP: 29   PC: 29

      PB: 22                TMR: 6        NA: Skin absorbs 10 DP

      PY: 31                  LC: 33

      Weapons: 

      Comments: Rapheionas is concerned with great deeds of heroism, daring and might.  He speaks with mortals only if they are rulers of kingdoms, greater nobility, or at least renowned heroes.  He despises cowardice and applauds heroism, refusing to aid those who come to him in fear or desperation, and looking with kindness on those motivated by anger or courage. 

         Rapheionas is the epitomy of courtesy.  He will never insult or ridicule anyone, is unfailingly polite, and disarms the rude and boorish with practiced courtesy.  His regal speech however may prove confusing. 

       
      Exalted Athael “High Sentinel of the 4th Dominion”

      Description: Athael appears as a plump matron bearing an overflowing cornucopia. 

      Talents, Skills, and Magic: Athael is a mage of the College of Ensorcelments and Enchantments.  She has the following skills: Craftsman [cloth & leatherworking, domestic crafts], Healer, Herbalist, Homemaker.

      Movement Rates: Running: 250

      PS: 24                  MD: 22                   AG: 22       MA: 36

      EN: 27                  FT: 35                        WP: 29                 PC: 29

      PB: 17                     TMR: 5   NA: Skin absorbs 8 DP

      PY: 32               LC: 36

      Weapons: 

      Comments: Athael is concerned with the common folk, the poor and the ignorant, and has little time for the wealthy or powerful.  She willingly seeks to aid those who desire to make the world a better place for the common people and dismisses from her presence those who show a lack of concern for their fellow mortals. 

         Athael is deeply concerned for the lot of ordinary folk but since her voice always remains filled with joy this is hard to tell.  Even when discussing the greatest of human catastrophes, or berating a visitor for callous disregard her voice remains unchanged. 

       
      Exalted Visaein “High Sentinel of the 5th Dominion”

      Description: Visaein appears as a fortress in human form.  His eyes are black pools and his body seems composed of hewn stone. 

      Talents, Skills, and Magic: Visaein is a mage of the College of Earth Magics . He has the following skills: Armourer, Engineer [combat], Knight, Military Scientist, Soldier, Weaponsmith. Visaein instantly knows which power a character in his presence is dedicated too [i.e. Light, Shadow or Dark].  He can sense any evil intent in any being within twenty feet.  Any being touched by his sword must make a roll of 4 x PY or less or die.  Note: This ability does not apply to any demon, devil, or diety. 

      Movement Rates: Running: 625

      PS: 32                  MD: 22                   AG: 22                    MA: 30

      EN: 27                  FT: 38                        WP: 28                 PC: 28

      PB: 17                     TMR: 12 NA: Skin absorbs 7 DP

      PY: 29               LC: 30

      Weapons: The sentinal is armed with a broadsword with a BC: of 65%, doing D10 +4 Damage he is Rank 5 in its use.  He also has a kite shield.  He is Rank 8 in its use.

      Comments: Visaein expects respect, obedience and exemplary courage from the mortals who come before him.  Those who do not live up to his high ideals are dismissed without an audience, and those who severely disappoint him are slain out of hand.

       
      Exalted Honaraeis “High Sentinel of the 6th Dominion”

      Description: Honaraeis stands beneath a clockwork canopy of cogs, and gears, suspended in the air above her grinding slowly.  She appears as a human female, draped in plain linen robes, and holding a ruler, set-square and compass.  Her chest, belly and cranium, however, are absent and in their place are clearly visible network of cogs and chains. 

      Talents, Skills, and Magic: Honaraeis is a mage of the College of Shaping Magics .  She has the following skills:  Cartographer, Ranger, Spell Weaver, Steward, and War Dancer.

      Movement Rates: Running: 300

      PS: 18                  MD: 18                   AG: 18                    MA: 31

      EN: 22                  FT: 31                        WP: 28                 PC: 28

      PB: 15                     TMR: 6   NA: Skin absorbs 7 DP

      PY: 29               LC: 31

      Weapons:

      Comments: Honaraeis thinks with the strictest logic.  She moves with deliberate, stiff gestures and speaks in short, simply constructed sentences.  She displays astounding deductive reasoning, but has little imagination and no understanding of mortal emotions.  She also epitomizes this dominion’s obsession with hierarchy and obedience, dismissing the traitorous and disrespectful and cooperating with the obedient and realistic.  

       

      -------Original Message-------
       
      Date: 15/04/2016 12:38:58 PM
      Subject: Re: [DQN-list] Re: Looking for demons
       
       

      Thank you for the demon/devils, how about servants of deities?

      ~Jeffery~

       
      Group: dqn-list Message: 3790 From: John Kahane Date: 4/15/2016
      Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
      Hullo, Andreas,

      In a message of 16-04-11 07:16 AM, Andreas Davour Koraq@yahoo.com wrote,

      > These are my thoughts, also posted at Rodger's blog:
      > After having spent some time generating characters for a one shot, and
      > not having had any experience at all with DQ as a player, I have some
      > issues with the rules as they are.

      Should be interesting, since creating characters for a one-shot is
      a lot different than creating characters for a campaign game.

      > 1. Having the characters roll for how many points they get to place on
      > stats feels kind of redundant. It would be easier to compare characters
      > and their abilities if all had the same amount of points.

      While that is certainly true, the Characteristics (assuming you're
      referring to them?) spread in the game allows for a bit of randomness.
      Iirc, DRAGONQUEST was the first game that offered this randomness for
      Characteristics, with finite limits to it.

      You could, of course, just take a set value of points, and let
      players assign the numbers that way. It would work. :)

      > 2. With a minimum of 5 on each stat, who not just remove 30 points off
      > the total as those are not available for distribution anyway?

      Simply because one would be starting with even less points.
      Unless you stated explicitly that all characters get 5s in all
      Characteristics, and add the extra points to that.

      > 3. Perception is low, and ridiculously expensive to increase. There are
      > some things which all adventurer types do, like Stealth. But, I’d
      > suggest Perception is also one of these. If you do not agree about that,
      > I’d suggest that the Skill Ranger is all but useless for beginning
      > characters. Most of the Ranger abilities are based on Perception, and in
      > order to get a decent Base Chance they need to spend 1750 pts to get a
      > 10 and more than a 50/50 chance to be effective.
      > In general, it feels like it’s way to easy to make a dumb hack and slash
      > character than it is to make a “thinker” or a “social guy” and part of
      > that is due to the cost of PC. You should be able to select to play a
      > perceptive character, just as you choose to play a strong brute.

      Perception has been a bugbear (no pun intended) in DRAGONQUEST
      since the early days, I think. It started at 5 in one version of the
      game, and ended up starting with an 8 in the 3rd Edition (iirc).

      I tend to default starting PC to 5 (8, if I'm running a more
      experienced group of characters), add +1 for Mercenary, +2 for
      Adventurer, or +3 for Hero, and then add the result of a D5 to that.
      Been doing this since about 1981, and it works for me. :)

      > 4. The XP allotment to begin with is broken. The root cause for some of
      > the above is that the beginning XP is generated randomly, and even when
      > rolling really well you don’t get much.

      Another bugbear that has plagued the system, I think. Not
      necessarily a flaw as far as I'm concerned, but one that bugs some
      people and doesn't bother others.

      While I understand why it was done the way it was (back in
      1979/1980), players these days want "better" starting characters
      nowadays, among other things.

      Basically, after doing a lot of mathematical scut work on the EPs
      for raising skills, weapons, etc. in 1983/1984, iirc, I decided to start
      beginning Mercenary characters with 2,500 EPs plus the amount they roll
      in section 8.5. High level Mercenary characters begin with 8,000 EPs.
      I also use the "For a Fuller Background: Heritage in the DRAGONQUEST
      game" article by Paul Montgomery Crabaugh in my games.

      > I totally agree about the less than super human scale of DQ, but many of
      > the characters I rolled up could not even buy level 0 of anything with
      > the “100 pt discount” as they had less than 100 XP to begin with!

      That's just the problem with rolling the dice to see how many EPs
      one gets. And using the default system, if one calls it problematic.
      That's one of the reasons why there's all kinds of House Rules for the
      game out there.

      > These days I don’t think people like to “grind” their characters, and
      > I’d suggest a flat xp amount to start with for all characters, and it
      > should be significantly above 100! Probably something like 2000.

      See my comments on this above.

      > Those are my 4 (euro)cents!

      And a good 4 (euro)cents they were! :)

      ...Nature speaks; humans have forgotten how to listen.

      --
      JohnK
      e-mail: johnk100@sympatico.ca
      blog: http://jkahane.livejournal.com
      Chill 3rd Edition RPG:
      https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/chill_3rd_edition_rpg/info
      Fvminata: Armed with Lightning RPG:
      https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/fvlminata/info
      Polaris RPG: https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/polaris_sf_rpg/info
      Group: dqn-list Message: 3791 From: Andreas Davour Date: 4/23/2016
      Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
      I just realized this had been lost in my inbox.

      I think some of the points discussed below, like starting power level, and the amount of randomness, are worth considering if you'd like to make a new "edition" of DQ. Treating them like "dials" that can be set to tweak the kind of game you get is a design I can get behind.

      >
      > Hullo, Andreas,
      >
      >In a message of 16-04-11 07:16 AM, Andreas Davour Koraq@yahoo.com wrote,
      >
      >> These are my thoughts, also posted at Rodger's blog:
      >> After having spent some time generating characters for a one shot, and
      >> not having had any experience at all with DQ as a player, I have some
      >> issues with the rules as they are.
      >
      > Should be interesting, since creating characters for a one-shot is
      >a lot different than creating characters for a campaign game.


      Yeah. I've found with the limited time for gaming, the way to get players on board is through one-shots and short story arc, rather than the long character building campaigns.

      >> 1. Having the characters roll for how many points they get to place on
      >> stats feels kind of redundant. It would be easier to compare characters
      >> and their abilities if all had the same amount of points.
      >
      > While that is certainly true, the Characteristics (assuming you're
      >referring to them?) spread in the game allows for a bit of randomness.
      >Iirc, DRAGONQUEST was the first game that offered this randomness for
      >Characteristics, with finite limits to it.
      >
      > You could, of course, just take a set value of points, and let
      >players assign the numbers that way. It would work. :)
      >
      >> 2. With a minimum of 5 on each stat, who not just remove 30 points off
      >> the total as those are not available for distribution anyway?
      >
      > Simply because one would be starting with even less points.
      >Unless you stated explicitly that all characters get 5s in all
      >Characteristics, and add the extra points to that.


      It might indeed be this was the first game that tried this, and thus it became a bit of "neither nor". I am a big fan om randomness, but combining it with point buy feels like the worst of both worlds. If we compare this design with a modern one like Savage Worlds, you can have a point buy system with bonuses and penalties for non-humans. In Savage Worlds e.g. Dwarves start with Vigor at D6 instead of D4 like everyone else (Savage Worlds uses die sizes instead of numerical ratings), but they still get the same amount of points to spread around.


      To specifically address you question, yes I'd explicitly state you start with 5 in all Characteristics, and then give them 60 points or so to spread around.

      >> 3. Perception is low, and ridiculously expensive to increase. There are
      >> some things which all adventurer types do, like Stealth. But, I’d
      >> suggest Perception is also one of these. If you do not agree about that,
      >> I’d suggest that the Skill Ranger is all but useless for beginning
      >> characters. Most of the Ranger abilities are based on Perception, and in
      >> order to get a decent Base Chance they need to spend 1750 pts to get a
      >> 10 and more than a 50/50 chance to be effective.
      >> In general, it feels like it’s way to easy to make a dumb hack and slash
      >> character than it is to make a “thinker” or a “social guy” and part of
      >> that is due to the cost of PC. You should be able to select to play a
      >> perceptive character, just as you choose to play a strong brute.
      >
      > Perception has been a bugbear (no pun intended) in DRAGONQUEST
      >since the early days, I think. It started at 5 in one version of the
      >game, and ended up starting with an 8 in the 3rd Edition (iirc).
      >
      > I tend to default starting PC to 5 (8, if I'm running a more
      >experienced group of characters), add +1 for Mercenary, +2 for
      >Adventurer, or +3 for Hero, and then add the result of a D5 to that.
      >Been doing this since about 1981, and it works for me. :)


      It has indeed changed a bit. It's 8 in the Bantham edition as well, actually.

      Since the rating of this ability so totally changes the usability of Skills like Ranger, I find it weird to have it be markedly lower than all abilities that influence combat efficiency. It sends the wrong signal to players, especially since combat is quite deadly!

      Your hack of adding a D5 and some experience based modifier is really neat! That I think could really work well.

      >> 4. The XP allotment to begin with is broken. The root cause for some of
      >> the above is that the beginning XP is generated randomly, and even when
      >> rolling really well you don’t get much.
      >
      > Another bugbear that has plagued the system, I think. Not
      >necessarily a flaw as far as I'm concerned, but one that bugs some
      >people and doesn't bother others.
      >
      > While I understand why it was done the way it was (back in
      >1979/1980), players these days want "better" starting characters
      >nowadays, among other things.
      >
      > Basically, after doing a lot of mathematical scut work on the EPs
      >for raising skills, weapons, etc. in 1983/1984, iirc, I decided to start
      >beginning Mercenary characters with 2,500 EPs plus the amount they roll
      >in section 8.5. High level Mercenary characters begin with 8,000 EPs.
      >I also use the "For a Fuller Background: Heritage in the DRAGONQUEST
      >game" article by Paul Montgomery Crabaugh in my games.



      It was actually the character generation posts on you LJ that made me start cranking out characters myself and develop opinions! :)


      Just from gut feeling, and my above mentioned starting point of beefier characters for the busy modern gamer, I also found something in that 2000-2500 range to be something of a sweet spot.

      /andreas
      Group: dqn-list Message: 3792 From: Jeffrey Vandine Date: 4/23/2016
      Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
      That's not a bad concept, though it might be hard to draft up as a rule.



      From: "Andreas Davour Koraq@yahoo.com [dqn-list]" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
      To: "dqn-list@yahoogroups.com" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Saturday, April 23, 2016 7:08 AM
      Subject: Re: [DQN-list] Making a DragonQuest Clone

       
      I just realized this had been lost in my inbox.

      I think some of the points discussed below, like starting power level, and the amount of randomness, are worth considering if you'd like to make a new "edition" of DQ. Treating them like "dials" that can be set to tweak the kind of game you get is a design I can get behind.

      >
      > Hullo, Andreas,
      >
      >In a message of 16-04-11 07:16 AM, Andreas Davour Koraq@yahoo.com wrote,
      >
      >> These are my thoughts, also posted at Rodger's blog:
      >> After having spent some time generating characters for a one shot, and
      >> not having had any experience at all with DQ as a player, I have some
      >> issues with the rules as they are.
      >
      > Should be interesting, since creating characters for a one-shot is
      >a lot different than creating characters for a campaign game.

      Yeah. I've found with the limited time for gaming, the way to get players on board is through one-shots and short story arc, rather than the long character building campaigns.

      >> 1. Having the characters roll for how many points they get to place on
      >> stats feels kind of redundant. It would be easier to compare characters
      >> and their abilities if all had the same amount of points.
      >
      > While that is certainly true, the Characteristics (assuming you're
      >referring to them?) spread in the game allows for a bit of randomness.
      >Iirc, DRAGONQUEST was the first game that offered this randomness for
      >Characteristics, with finite limits to it.
      >
      > You could, of course, just take a set value of points, and let
      >players assign the numbers that way. It would work. :)
      >
      >> 2. With a minimum of 5 on each stat, who not just remove 30 points off
      >> the total as those are not available for distribution anyway?
      >
      > Simply because one would be starting with even less points.
      >Unless you stated explicitly that all characters get 5s in all
      >Characteristics, and add the extra points to that.

      It might indeed be this was the first game that tried this, and thus it became a bit of "neither nor". I am a big fan om randomness, but combining it with point buy feels like the worst of both worlds. If we compare this design with a modern one like Savage Worlds, you can have a point buy system with bonuses and penalties for non-humans. In Savage Worlds e.g. Dwarves start with Vigor at D6 instead of D4 like everyone else (Savage Worlds uses die sizes instead of numerical ratings), but they still get the same amount of points to spread around.

      To specifically address you question, yes I'd explicitly state you start with 5 in all Characteristics, and then give them 60 points or so to spread around.

      >> 3. Perception is low, and ridiculously expensive to increase. There are
      >> some things which all adventurer types do, like Stealth. But, I’d
      >> suggest Perception is also one of these. If you do not agree about that,
      >> I’d suggest that the Skill Ranger is all but useless for beginning
      >> characters. Most of the Ranger abilities are based on Perception, and in
      >> order to get a decent Base Chance they need to spend 1750 pts to get a
      >> 10 and more than a 50/50 chance to be effective.
      >> In general, it feels like it’s way to easy to make a dumb hack and slash
      >> character than it is to make a “thinker” or a “social guy” and part of
      >> that is due to the cost of PC. You should be able to select to play a
      >> perceptive character, just as you choose to play a strong brute.
      >
      > Perception has been a bugbear (no pun intended) in DRAGONQUEST
      >since the early days, I think. It started at 5 in one version of the
      >game, and ended up starting with an 8 in the 3rd Edition (iirc).
      >
      > I tend to default starting PC to 5 (8, if I'm running a more
      >experienced group of characters), add +1 for Mercenary, +2 for
      >Adventurer, or +3 for Hero, and then add the result of a D5 to that.
      >Been doing this since about 1981, and it works for me. :)

      It has indeed changed a bit. It's 8 in the Bantham edition as well, actually.

      Since the rating of this ability so totally changes the usability of Skills like Ranger, I find it weird to have it be markedly lower than all abilities that influence combat efficiency. It sends the wrong signal to players, especially since combat is quite deadly!

      Your hack of adding a D5 and some experience based modifier is really neat! That I think could really work well.

      >> 4. The XP allotment to begin with is broken. The root cause for some of
      >> the above is that the beginning XP is generated randomly, and even when
      >> rolling really well you don’t get much.
      >
      > Another bugbear that has plagued the system, I think. Not
      >necessarily a flaw as far as I'm concerned, but one that bugs some
      >people and doesn't bother others.
      >
      > While I understand why it was done the way it was (back in
      >1979/1980), players these days want "better" starting characters
      >nowadays, among other things.
      >
      > Basically, after doing a lot of mathematical scut work on the EPs
      >for raising skills, weapons, etc. in 1983/1984, iirc, I decided to start
      >beginning Mercenary characters with 2,500 EPs plus the amount they roll
      >in section 8.5. High level Mercenary characters begin with 8,000 EPs.
      >I also use the "For a Fuller Background: Heritage in the DRAGONQUEST
      >game" article by Paul Montgomery Crabaugh in my games.

      It was actually the character generation posts on you LJ that made me start cranking out characters myself and develop opinions! :)

      Just from gut feeling, and my above mentioned starting point of beefier characters for the busy modern gamer, I also found something in that 2000-2500 range to be something of a sweet spot.

      /andreas


      Group: dqn-list Message: 3793 From: hwteal Date: 4/25/2016
      Subject: Primary Characteristics...
      I played this game avidly with friends in the mid 90s, but haven't had a solid group since then. Now I am about to run it again for the first time since then. I am re-reading the rules and I am finding that we may have had a lot of house rules as I can't find them in the book.

      Is there any cap on how many dots of a primary characteristic that can be purchased?
      IE Can a human buy a point of strength between each adventure and after many games arm wrestle giants?

      Is there any level of agility or manual dexterity that you can purchase points up to that will give you a second action?

      Is there a level of magical aptitude that allows you to prep and cast in the same turn?


      I think my old group had some seriously overpowered characters that would not be legal by the book, but I may just be looking in the wrong place for some obscure rules.

      Thanks,
      Howard
      Group: dqn-list Message: 3794 From: Martin Gallo Date: 4/25/2016
      Subject: Re: Primary Characteristics...
      I played this game avidly with friends in the mid 90s, but haven't had a solid group since then. Now I am about to run it again for the first time since then. I am re-reading the rules and I am finding that we may have had a lot of house rules as I can't find them in the book.

      Yeah, that happens in EVERY game I play, from boardgames to RPGs.

      Is there any cap on how many dots of a primary characteristic that can be purchased?
      IE Can a human buy a point of strength between each adventure and after many games arm wrestle giants?

      When you first create a character you are assigned two things by a die roll - the number of beginning attribute points AND the single maximum stat. Only one stat can be at the maximum, two can be one less than max and three can be no more than max-2.

      So if you get a max of 22 then one can be 22, two can be 21 and three can be 20. None may exceed those limits 9except, of course for magic and house rules).

      Is there any level of agility or manual dexterity that you can purchase points up to that will give you a second action?

      House rules - For example I had one about initiative value that I toyed with but never really liked. Something about being doubled giving an extra swing (not movement).

      Is there a level of magical aptitude that allows you to prep and cast in the same turn?

      Again, by house rule. To tell the truth I never imposed the one turn concentration. Spells were cast like swords were swung, in the same round the action was declared. Everybody I played with had played D&D and there was NO WAY any of them were going to wait a turn to cast a spell!

      I did have one player who wanted to be a warrior mage, casting spells and swinging a sword in the same turn. Never did get that one worked out.

      I think my old group had some seriously overpowered characters that would not be legal by the book, but I may just be looking in the wrong place for some obscure rules.

      As long as everybody had fun...


      Thanks,
      Howard



      Group: dqn-list Message: 3795 From: arielifan Date: 4/25/2016
      Subject: Re: Primary Characteristics...
      I've played DQ since it ever came out.  Sometimes played up to 3 times a week, now only 1 every 2 weeks (life permitting).

      Humans have a max of primary characteristics 25.  Even my oldest character isn't maxed.

      You need a 26 AG after any modifiers to have two actions per pulse.  So only certain non-humans can do that without magic enhancement.

      ~Jeffery~


      From: "hwteal@gmail.com [dqn-list]" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
      To: "dqn-list" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 1:16:37 AM
      Subject: [DQN-list] Primary Characteristics...



      I played this game avidly with friends in the mid 90s, but haven't had a solid group since then. Now I am about to run it again for the first time since then. I am re-reading the rules and I am finding that we may have had a lot of house rules as I can't find them in the book.

      Is there any cap on how many dots of a primary characteristic that can be purchased?
      IE Can a human buy a point of strength between each adventure and after many games arm wrestle giants?

      Is there any level of agility or manual dexterity that you can purchase points up to that will give you a second action?

      Is there a level of magical aptitude that allows you to prep and cast in the same turn?


      I think my old group had some seriously overpowered characters that would not be legal by the book, but I may just be looking in the wrong place for some obscure rules.

      Thanks,
      Howard



      Group: dqn-list Message: 3796 From: David Novak Date: 4/25/2016
      Subject: Re: Primary Characteristics...

      Hi,

       

      Human max for all characteristics is 25 as Jeffery said is inferred from rule 5.1 “… The number of Characteristic Points and Maximum value thereby obtained … “. And the max on the table following is 25.  Non-Hum maximum is 25 plus the racial bonus or penalty (e.g. a dwarf could have a maximum PS = 27, while their maximum agility would be only 23).   Thus a character will eventually max out their characteristics and the naturally max’ed out human won’t be arm wrestling giants (and winning, without some magical assistance). 

       

      Martin’s comments about the number of characteristics at beginning of play is also in that area of the rules.

       

      David

       

      From: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dqn-list@yahoogroups.com]
      Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 3:43 PM
      To: dqn-list
      Subject: Re: [DQN-list] Primary Characteristics...

       

       

      I've played DQ since it ever came out.  Sometimes played up to 3 times a week, now only 1 every 2 weeks (life permitting).

       

      Humans have a max of primary characteristics 25.  Even my oldest character isn't maxed.

       

      You need a 26 AG after any modifiers to have two actions per pulse.  So only certain non-humans can do that without magic enhancement.

       

      ~Jeffery~

       


      From: "hwteal@gmail.com [dqn-list]" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
      To: "dqn-list" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 1:16:37 AM
      Subject: [DQN-list] Primary Characteristics...

       

       

       

      I played this game avidly with friends in the mid 90s, but haven't had a solid group since then. Now I am about to run it again for the first time since then. I am re-reading the rules and I am finding that we may have had a lot of house rules as I can't find them in the book.

       

      Is there any cap on how many dots of a primary characteristic that can be purchased?

      IE Can a human buy a point of strength between each adventure and after many games arm wrestle giants?

       

      Is there any level of agility or manual dexterity that you can purchase points up to that will give you a second action?

       

      Is there a level of magical aptitude that allows you to prep and cast in the same turn?

       

       

      I think my old group had some seriously overpowered characters that would not be legal by the book, but I may just be looking in the wrong place for some obscure rules.

       

      Thanks,

      Howard

       

       

      Group: dqn-list Message: 3797 From: Howard Teal Date: 4/26/2016
      Subject: Re: Primary Characteristics...
      Hello,
           I just wanted to say thank you for your replies and comments. All were appreciated.

      Howard
      Group: dqn-list Message: 3798 From: darkislephil Date: 6/5/2016
      Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
      Good to see some DQ discussion still going on.  I've been out of the loop for a couple years but have never entirely stopped playing DQ.

      So are there any longstanding DQ GM's that actually do character generation per the original 2nd Ed or 3rd Ed rules?  Pretty sure we bailed on it not more than a year or two after 2nd Ed. came out

      Point Generation

      For most of the DQ GM's in our groups over the years we would give players 2 rolls on the 5.1 point generation table and let the players chose which result they wanted to use. Don't recall anyone ever complaining about not being able to reach the stat max they wanted to have.

      I do agree that rolling for stat points is outdated but that can be addressed by simply restating [5.1]:

      All characters begin with 90 Characteristic points and a Maximum characteristic (before racial mods) of 22. They can increase the Maximum by one (1) point by taking away two (2) Characteristic Points and conversely they can decrease the Maximum by one (1) point and gain two (2) Characteristic Points.

      The Player can chose exactly what he wants/needs. This way the various Maximum values for Characteristics are retained though the low and high CP totals are missing. No big loss in my opinion.

      Starting EP

      By the time most our group were in our mid-20s we were pretty much done with playing teenagers unless the campaign was driven around it.  Towards that end we always used a fixed amount to start with. I typically used 5000 EP to start characters with and didn't impose any limits on ranks that could be purchased or made the players take the [6.3] Racial EP Multiplier into account during character creation.

      Character Background

      I've used Jaquay's Central Casting - Heroes of Legend since it was released in '88 to generate the backgrounds for my player's characters. Generally I would have them roll while I looked up the results. If the rolls produced stuff too far out there for my campaign or just too boring I would have them roll again or push a roll to the next or previous entry.  Skills granted through CC HoL are fairly easily mapped to DQ skills by just dropping the granted Rank by 1 to match DQ's starting Rank of 0.  I got a lot of adventure hooks out of the backgrounds produced this way as a GM. As a player I found it frequently gave my character's with personalities I might not have come up with on my own.

      As far as a new version of DQ goes I definitely say dump the roll for starting XP and give the GM some suggestions for his campaign like 500 EP for truly newbie Mercenary class characters or 5000 EP for Mercenaries on the cusp of becoming Adventurers.

      For starting money, we typically used the DQ rules influenced by the results from the Central Casting book.

      For a new take on the DQ rules I would think taking out some of the randomness of it by either replacing [8.5] with fixed values modified by the results of the previous [8.x] rolls or at least flattening the table so that the worst case is 125 EP.

      Perception

      This is a definitely an overly important stat in DQ but I've never thought about what might be done to change that. Certainly starting characters (under strict rules or our house rules) suffer frequently wtih all of the various rolls that it factors into but by the same token they also miss all the time and fail to cast their spells even more often so we've also just felt that was the life of a starting adventurer. Perhaps an optional rule would allow players to transfer starting CPs to PC without penalty?

      I would say however that PC is the one stat that players consistently get maxed out in the various campaigns I have run and been in.  I don't think it is expensive at all.

      It might be better to find a way to reduce the impact Perception has on so many different skills and rolls.

      Racial Modifiers and the Racial EP Multiplier

      The Racial EP Multiplier is one aspect of the character rules that I have always hated but I never came up with an alternate idea with which to "maintain balance" so have always just gone with it.  Would like to see some alternatives to the annoying EP multiplier. It just feels like a punishment for having been lucky enough to get the race you wanted to play.
      Group: dqn-list Message: 3799 From: darkislephil Date: 6/5/2016
      Subject: Re: Thinning Down the Counterspells
      That's an intriguing idea Rodger.  I may have to find a way to play with it in my next campaign.

      I've always found the counterspell system in DQ to be problematic and truthfully are largely all but unused in our games. No character has ever ranked themselves in them and I'm the only one in our various groups that has ever played a Namer.  While several members of my original DQ group had read the Earth-Sea Trilogy it is derived from all found it just too tedious and ill-defined to bother with.

      I don't even allow them as a choice for PCs in my campaigns.  Nor Sorceries of the Mind, Black Magics or either Summoning college but that is a whole 'nother discussion.

      In my campaigns the only Namers have been NPCs and I treat them more like one of the orders found in the King's Blades books. They largely serve rulers or other powerful figures to protect them from magical assaults or spying and for truth sensing, true speech compulsions, geases and such.
      Group: dqn-list Message: 3800 From: arielifan Date: 6/5/2016
      Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
      See below.


      From: "phergus@gmail.com [dqn-list]" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
      To: "dqn-list" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Sunday, June 5, 2016 1:57:37 PM
      Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone



      Good to see some DQ discussion still going on.  I've been out of the loop for a couple years but have never entirely stopped playing DQ.

      So are there any longstanding DQ GM's that actually do character generation per the original 2nd Ed or 3rd Ed rules?  Pretty sure we bailed on it not more than a year or two after 2nd Ed. came out

      Point Generation

      For most of the DQ GM's in our groups over the years we would give players 2 rolls on the 5.1 point generation table and let the players chose which result they wanted to use. Don't recall anyone ever complaining about not being able to reach the stat max they wanted to have.

      I do agree that rolling for stat points is outdated but that can be addressed by simply restating [5.1]:

      All characters begin with 90 Characteristic points and a Maximum characteristic (before racial mods) of 22. They can increase the Maximum by one (1) point by taking away two (2) Characteristic Points and conversely they can decrease the Maximum by one (1) point and gain two (2) Characteristic Points.

      The Player can chose exactly what he wants/needs. This way the various Maximum values for Characteristics are retained though the low and high CP totals are missing. No big loss in my opinion.

      Seagate rules have a default of 90/22 if players want to try to get more, then roll and have to deal with whatever is rolled up.

      Starting EP

      By the time most our group were in our mid-20s we were pretty much done with playing teenagers unless the campaign was driven around it.  Towards that end we always used a fixed amount to start with. I typically used 5000 EP to start characters with and didn't impose any limits on ranks that could be purchased or made the players take the [6.3] Racial EP Multiplier into account during character creation.

      Also based on Seagate rules, we had no problem acquiring plenty of EP's, no still don't even if gaming is only played twice a month (on a good month).  Starting EPs depend on an Adept (standard EP rolls) or 10,000 for non-Adepts.  Also depends on the age the player wants a character have older one. 

      Character Background

      I've used Jaquay's Central Casting - Heroes of Legend since it was released in '88 to generate the backgrounds for my player's characters. Generally I would have them roll while I looked up the results. If the rolls produced stuff too far out there for my campaign or just too boring I would have them roll again or push a roll to the next or previous entry.  Skills granted through CC HoL are fairly easily mapped to DQ skills by just dropping the granted Rank by 1 to match DQ's starting Rank of 0.  I got a lot of adventure hooks out of the backgrounds produced this way as a GM. As a player I found it frequently gave my character's with personalities I might not have come up with on my own.  I've used CC HoL, allowing players to reroll they don't like, and other times just use the book, depending on what players prefer.  I'm currently working on Warcrafts careers for DQ.

      As far as a new version of DQ goes I definitely say dump the roll for starting XP and give the GM some suggestions for his campaign like 500 EP for truly newbie Mercenary class characters or 5000 EP for Mercenaries on the cusp of becoming Adventurers.

      For starting money, we typically used the DQ rules influenced by the results from the Central Casting book.

      For a new take on the DQ rules I would think taking out some of the randomness of it by either replacing [8.5] with fixed values modified by the results of the previous [8.x] rolls or at least flattening the table so that the worst case is 125 EP.

      Perception

      This is a definitely an overly important stat in DQ but I've never thought about what might be done to change that. Certainly starting characters (under strict rules or our house rules) suffer frequently wtih all of the various rolls that it factors into but by the same token they also miss all the time and fail to cast their spells even more often so we've also just felt that was the life of a starting adventurer. Perhaps an optional rule would allow players to transfer starting CPs to PC without penalty?

      I would say however that PC is the one stat that players consistently get maxed out in the various campaigns I have run and been in.  I don't think it is expensive at all.

      It might be better to find a way to reduce the impact Perception has on so many different skills and rolls.

      I still have start 8 PC, it doesn't take long to max out and something all characters focus on.  There was one player whose character (Clueless, that was his name) was 8 PC for a long time, until he almost drowned in an illusionary pool on the fourth floor of a tower.

      Racial Modifiers and the Racial EP Multiplier

      The Racial EP Multiplier is one aspect of the character rules that I have always hated but I never came up with an alternate idea with which to "maintain balance" so have always just gone with it.  Would like to see some alternatives to the annoying EP multiplier. It just feels like a punishment for having been lucky enough to get the race you wanted to play.

      With the exception of Shapechangers, Giants and Suarime (a character race from Ares), I let players choose what race they want, the EP multiplier the price to being something other than Human.

      The Seagate rules include elaboration of Humans.

      I've added every 'monster' in a DQ module I've been able to find and add them to the beastiary, along with a few from my campaign world.

      ~Jeffery~

      Group: dqn-list Message: 3801 From: darkislephil Date: 6/5/2016
      Subject: Re: Running a DQ PbP Game Stumbling Block
      Hey John.  Did you ever come up with a solution for this?  It's something that has kept me from trying it and I've just started again looking back into how one might do it.
      Group: dqn-list Message: 3802 From: arielifan Date: 6/5/2016
      Subject: Re: Thinning Down the Counterspells
      In my current campaign I have a Namer who's helped the party many times, I have adjusted the Spell of Compelling to reduce the number of targets.  Combined with the Namer ranked counterspells and the E&E character with Rk 20 Ritual of Enchantment reduces the chances of failing resisting to minimal, at least to the spells of certain colleges.

      I've never had with Mind or Black Magics any difficult.  Only one player has not mentioned to kill her Black Magic characters.  There was one player who played a Greater Summoning and caused me to limit only NPC's to Greater Summonings, with one exception, a player who doesn't abuse her college (same as her playing Black Mages).  I did once play a Greater Summoning character, who is now a NPC.  A couple of house rules for Greater Summonings: 1) cannot make a Demon invest any spells; 2) all demons can actively resist being summoned.

      I've only had one play a Lesser Summoning (other than myself), haven't had any problem.

      I've rewritten Spell of Protection From Magical Fire a couple of times, and have just had another idea for it.

      ~Jeffery~

      That's an intriguing idea Rodger.  I may have to find a way to play with it in my next campaign.

      I've always found the counterspell system in DQ to be problematic and truthfully are largely all but unused in our games. No character has ever ranked themselves in them and I'm the only one in our various groups that has ever played a Namer.  While several members of my original DQ group had read the Earth-Sea Trilogy it is derived from all found it just too tedious and ill-defined to bother with.

      I don't even allow them as a choice for PCs in my campaigns.  Nor Sorceries of the Mind, Black Magics or either Summoning college but that is a whole 'nother discussion.

      In my campaigns the only Namers have been NPCs and I treat them more like one of the orders found in the King's Blades books. They largely serve rulers or other powerful figures to protect them from magical assaults or spying and for truth sensing, true speech compulsions, geases and such.


      Group: dqn-list Message: 3803 From: arielifan Date: 6/5/2016
      Subject: Re: Running a DQ PbP Game Stumbling Block
      I've had e-mail gaming a number of times for the last 20+ yrs.  Fights, not often, mostly character development, are described rather than rolled.  I can create pics of counters on a hex sheet to help visualize the situation.

      One idea is for each character rolls for each fight for both them and their opponent(s), Adepts let everyone what spells are to be used in which pulse (and if/when they failed or backfired) and the target.

      My wife and oldest friend at one point posted many times a day, taking a lot of time on my part when I got home.

      Posts include a date/time (play time) and chapter to help characters with their posts.

      I'm still offering GM an e-mail game.  But it would take constant effort on everyone involved.

      ~Jeffery~


      From: "phergus@gmail.com [dqn-list]" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
      To: "dqn-list" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Sunday, June 5, 2016 2:55:40 PM
      Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Running a DQ PbP Game Stumbling Block



      Hey John.  Did you ever come up with a solution for this?  It's something that has kept me from trying it and I've just started again looking back into how one might do it.


      Group: dqn-list Message: 3804 From: darkislephil Date: 6/5/2016
      Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone

      So your group, like most, have moved to alternative or house rules for character creation.

      > Seagate rules have a default of 90/22 if players want to try to get more, then roll and have to deal with whatever is rolled up.

      Fair enough.

      > Also based on Seagate rules, we had no problem acquiring plenty of EP's, no still don't even if gaming is only played twice a month (on a good month).  Starting EPs depend on an Adept (standard EP rolls) or 10,000 for non-Adepts.  Also depends on the age the player wants a character have older one.

      Generally speaking I'd say that when our gaming did manage 2 to 4 sessions a month that we did see pretty steady progression and getting EP wasn't a major concern.

      > I've used CC HoL, allowing players to reroll they don't like, and other times just use the book, depending on what players prefer.  I'm currently working on Warcrafts careers for DQ.

      Be curious to see what you come up with there.

      > I still have start 8 PC, it doesn't take long to max out and something all characters focus on.  There was one player whose character (Clueless, that was his name) was 8 PC for a long time, until he almost drowned in an illusionary pool on the fourth floor of a tower.

      Heh.  I think we have all had players/characters like in our campaigns.  :)

      > With the exception of Shapechangers, Giants and Suarime (a character race from Ares), I let players choose what race they want, the EP multiplier the price to being something other than Human.

      Right.  So it's a punishment.  ;)   Like you, whenever someone has just wanted to play an elf, dwarf or halfling I've always just let them.


      Group: dqn-list Message: 3805 From: arielifan Date: 6/5/2016
      Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone

      > With the exception of Shapechangers, Giants and Suarime (a character race from Ares), I let players choose what race they want, the EP multiplier the price to being something other than Human.

      Right.  So it's a punishment.  ;)   Like you, whenever someone has just wanted to play an elf, dwarf or halfling I've always just let them.

      It's not a punishment, a non-human has advantageous humans don't have, it compensates for being a human, otherwise why choose human, a punishment for being human.

      ~Jeffery~

      Group: dqn-list Message: 3806 From: Daniel Robinson Date: 6/16/2016
      Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
      Hello,

      Can someone please tell me if Witchsight...

      1. Witchsight(T-1)The Adept has a Base Chance equal to his Perception +4 per
      Rank achieved with this talent DRAGONQUEST SECOND EDITION, PAGE 38 of seeing
      objects or entities which are normally invisible or which have been rendered
       invisible by magical means (i.e., such spells as WalkingUnseen, Blending,
      and Invisibility).

      trumps Mind Magic Invisibility

      8. Spell of Invisibility (S-8) RANGE:15 feet + 15 additional/Rank DURATION: 10 minutes + 10 additional/Rank
      EXPERIENCE MULTIPLE: 450
      BASE CHANCE: 15% RESIST: May not be resisted.
      EFFECTS:The Adept may cause the target of thisspell to become impossible to sense in
      any fashion unless the observer's Player rolls hisPerception or less on D100=

      I'm not sure if the stipulation in Invisibility about perception overrides witch sight,
       or if it's the other way around.

      Thanks


      On Sunday, June 5, 2016 4:57 PM, "phergus@gmail.com [dqn-list]" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


       
      Good to see some DQ discussion still going on.  I've been out of the loop for a couple years but have never entirely stopped playing DQ.

      So are there any longstanding DQ GM's that actually do character generation per the original 2nd Ed or 3rd Ed rules?  Pretty sure we bailed on it not more than a year or two after 2nd Ed. came out

      Point Generation

      For most of the DQ GM's in our groups over the years we would give players 2 rolls on the 5.1 point generation table and let the players chose which result they wanted to use. Don't recall anyone ever complaining about not being able to reach the stat max they wanted to have.

      I do agree that rolling for stat points is outdated but that can be addressed by simply restating [5.1]:

      All characters begin with 90 Characteristic points and a Maximum characteristic (before racial mods) of 22. They can increase the Maximum by one (1) point by taking away two (2) Characteristic Points and conversely they can decrease the Maximum by one (1) point and gain two (2) Characteristic Points.

      The Player can chose exactly what he wants/needs. This way the various Maximum values for Characteristics are retained though the low and high CP totals are missing. No big loss in my opinion.

      Starting EP

      By the time most our group were in our mid-20s we were pretty much done with playing teenagers unless the campaign was driven around it.  Towards that end we always used a fixed amount to start with. I typically used 5000 EP to start characters with and didn't impose any limits on ranks that could be purchased or made the players take the [6.3] Racial EP Multiplier into account during character creation.

      Character Background

      I've used Jaquay's Central Casting - Heroes of Legend since it was released in '88 to generate the backgrounds for my player's characters. Generally I would have them roll while I looked up the results. If the rolls produced stuff too far out there for my campaign or just too boring I would have them roll again or push a roll to the next or previous entry.  Skills granted through CC HoL are fairly easily mapped to DQ skills by just dropping the granted Rank by 1 to match DQ's starting Rank of 0.  I got a lot of adventure hooks out of the backgrounds produced this way as a GM. As a player I found it frequently gave my character's with personalities I might not have come up with on my own.

      As far as a new version of DQ goes I definitely say dump the roll for starting XP and give the GM some suggestions for his campaign like 500 EP for truly newbie Mercenary class characters or 5000 EP for Mercenaries on the cusp of becoming Adventurers.

      For starting money, we typically used the DQ rules influenced by the results from the Central Casting book.

      For a new take on the DQ rules I would think taking out some of the randomness of it by either replacing [8.5] with fixed values modified by the results of the previous [8.x] rolls or at least flattening the table so that the worst case is 125 EP.

      Perception

      This is a definitely an overly important stat in DQ but I've never thought about what might be done to change that. Certainly starting characters (under strict rules or our house rules) suffer frequently wtih all of the various rolls that it factors into but by the same token they also miss all the time and fail to cast their spells even more often so we've also just felt that was the life of a starting adventurer. Perhaps an optional rule would allow players to transfer starting CPs to PC without penalty?

      I would say however that PC is the one stat that players consistently get maxed out in the various campaigns I have run and been in.  I don't think it is expensive at all.

      It might be better to find a way to reduce the impact Perception has on so many different skills and rolls.

      Racial Modifiers and the Racial EP Multiplier

      The Racial EP Multiplier is one aspect of the character rules that I have always hated but I never came up with an alternate idea with which to "maintain balance" so have always just gone with it.  Would like to see some alternatives to the annoying EP multiplier. It just feels like a punishment for having been lucky enough to get the race you wanted to play.


      Group: dqn-list Message: 3807 From: arielifan Date: 6/16/2016
      Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone
      In my gaming Witchsight overrides the limits of Perception of Mind Magics Invisibility.  Only Mind Magic Invisibility can be overridden by Perception, not for any other kind of Invisibility, Walking Unseen or Blending.  Witchsight won't work look through any Illusion that hides/conceals a character.

      FYI:  My experience proves that a player has to be imaginative to be an effective character Illusionist.

      ~Jeffery~


      From: "Daniel Robinson captainspaulding88@yahoo.com [dqn-list]" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
      To: "dqn-list" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2016 7:37:50 AM
      Subject: Re: [DQN-list] Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone



      Hello,

      Can someone please tell me if Witchsight...

      1. Witchsight(T-1)The Adept has a Base Chance equal to his Perception +4 per
      Rank achieved with this talent DRAGONQUEST SECOND EDITION, PAGE 38 of seeing
      objects or entities which are normally invisible or which have been rendered
       invisible by magical means (i.e., such spells as WalkingUnseen, Blending,
      and Invisibility).

      trumps Mind Magic Invisibility

      8. Spell of Invisibility (S-8) RANGE:15 feet + 15 additional/Rank DURATION: 10 minutes + 10 additional/Rank
      EXPERIENCE MULTIPLE: 450
      BASE CHANCE: 15% RESIST: May not be resisted.
      EFFECTS:The Adept may cause the target of thisspell to become impossible to sense in
      any fashion unless the observer's Player rolls hisPerception or less on D100=

      I'm not sure if the stipulation in Invisibility about perception overrides witch sight,
       or if it's the other way around.

      Thanks


      On Sunday, June 5, 2016 4:57 PM, "phergus@gmail.com [dqn-list]" <dqn-list@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


       
      Good to see some DQ discussion still going on.  I've been out of the loop for a couple years but have never entirely stopped playing DQ.

      So are there any longstanding DQ GM's that actually do character generation per the original 2nd Ed or 3rd Ed rules?  Pretty sure we bailed on it not more than a year or two after 2nd Ed. came out

      Point Generation

      For most of the DQ GM's in our groups over the years we would give players 2 rolls on the 5.1 point generation table and let the players chose which result they wanted to use. Don't recall anyone ever complaining about not being able to reach the stat max they wanted to have.

      I do agree that rolling for stat points is outdated but that can be addressed by simply restating [5.1]:

      All characters begin with 90 Characteristic points and a Maximum characteristic (before racial mods) of 22. They can increase the Maximum by one (1) point by taking away two (2) Characteristic Points and conversely they can decrease the Maximum by one (1) point and gain two (2) Characteristic Points.

      The Player can chose exactly what he wants/needs. This way the various Maximum values for Characteristics are retained though the low and high CP totals are missing. No big loss in my opinion.

      Starting EP

      By the time most our group were in our mid-20s we were pretty much done with playing teenagers unless the campaign was driven around it.  Towards that end we always used a fixed amount to start with. I typically used 5000 EP to start characters with and didn't impose any limits on ranks that could be purchased or made the players take the [6.3] Racial EP Multiplier into account during character creation.

      Character Background

      I've used Jaquay's Central Casting - Heroes of Legend since it was released in '88 to generate the backgrounds for my player's characters. Generally I would have them roll while I looked up the results. If the rolls produced stuff too far out there for my campaign or just too boring I would have them roll again or push a roll to the next or previous entry.  Skills granted through CC HoL are fairly easily mapped to DQ skills by just dropping the granted Rank by 1 to match DQ's starting Rank of 0.  I got a lot of adventure hooks out of the backgrounds produced this way as a GM. As a player I found it frequently gave my character's with personalities I might not have come up with on my own.

      As far as a new version of DQ goes I definitely say dump the roll for starting XP and give the GM some suggestions for his campaign like 500 EP for truly newbie Mercenary class characters or 5000 EP for Mercenaries on the cusp of becoming Adventurers.

      For starting money, we typically used the DQ rules influenced by the results from the Central Casting book.

      For a new take on the DQ rules I would think taking out some of the randomness of it by either replacing [8.5] with fixed values modified by the results of the previous [8.x] rolls or at least flattening the table so that the worst case is 125 EP.

      Perception

      This is a definitely an overly important stat in DQ but I've never thought about what might be done to change that. Certainly starting characters (under strict rules or our house rules) suffer frequently wtih all of the various rolls that it factors into but by the same token they also miss all the time and fail to cast their spells even more often so we've also just felt that was the life of a starting adventurer. Perhaps an optional rule would allow players to transfer starting CPs to PC without penalty?

      I would say however that PC is the one stat that players consistently get maxed out in the various campaigns I have run and been in.  I don't think it is expensive at all.

      It might be better to find a way to reduce the impact Perception has on so many different skills and rolls.

      Racial Modifiers and the Racial EP Multiplier

      The Racial EP Multiplier is one aspect of the character rules that I have always hated but I never came up with an alternate idea with which to "maintain balance" so have always just gone with it.  Would like to see some alternatives to the annoying EP multiplier. It just feels like a punishment for having been lucky enough to get the race you wanted to play.






      Group: dqn-list Message: 3808 From: darkislephil Date: 6/19/2016
      Subject: Re: Making a DragonQuest Clone

      I don't know that it has to be one or the other.  T-1 Witchsight is based on Perception with modifiers for increased skill with it. Invisibility (S-8) says that the recipient of the spell can be detected by anyone who rolls PC or less.  EE adepts are just better at it than most assuming they raise their Witchsight talent.

      For the most part, assuming you're the GM, it's your game, your rules.  Which way did you go and why?


      ---In dqn-list@yahoogroups.com, <captainspaulding88@...> wrote :

      Hello,

      Can someone please tell me if Witchsight...

      1. Witchsight(T-1)The Adept has a Base Chance equal to his Perception +4 per
      Rank achieved with this talent DRAGONQUEST SECOND EDITION, PAGE 38 of seeing
      objects or entities which are normally invisible or which have been rendered
       invisible by magical means (i.e., such spells as WalkingUnseen, Blending,
      and Invisibility).

      trumps Mind Magic Invisibility

      8. Spell of Invisibility (S-8) RANGE:15 feet + 15 additional/Rank DURATION: 10 minutes + 10 additional/Rank
      EXPERIENCE MULTIPLE: 450
      BASE CHANCE: 15% RESIST: May not be resisted.
      EFFECTS:The Adept may cause the target of thisspell to become impossible to sense in
      any fashion unless the observer's Player rolls hisPerception or less on D100=

      I'm not sure if the stipulation in Invisibility about perception overrides witch sight,
       or if it's the other way around.

      Thanks

      Group: dqn-list Message: 3809 From: kaith_athanes Date: 7/5/2016
      Subject: Angels

      I remember several years back seeing a fan made college of magics very similar to Greater Summoning except that one could summon angels. I don't remember a lot of details except that it had the Archangels in it.  My websearch powers are failing me in my attempts to rediscover it, though. Does this sound familiar to anyone? Anyone know where I could find this again?

      Group: dqn-list Message: 3810 From: rthorm Date: 7/8/2016
      Subject: Re: Angels
      I'm not certain if any of this is exactly what you're looking for, and you may have already looked at all of these, but here's what I've found.  I suspect you were probably looking at one or another version of David Barrass' DQ Cathedral.  The most recent (as far as I can tell) is version 1.3, which you can find:

      https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/DQ-RULES/files
      Spirits religion and planes v1.3.pdf


      There are a couple other Powers of Light/religion in DQ articles others have written.  A couple of those can be found here:

      https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/dqn-list/files
      CollegeofWhiteMagicke.pdf
      Priests and Paladins for Dragonquest.pdf

      And there's also an archive of the progression of the DQ Cathedral which you can find all collected here:


      Hope that helps,  If there's something else, and you do find it, it would be nice to get it added to the various stables of collected DQ info.

        --Rodger

      Group: dqn-list Message: 3811 From: kaith_athanes Date: 7/8/2016
      Subject: Re: Angels

      I did thoroughly explore both this site and DQ-RULES before posting, but thank you for your efforts. My memory may not be even vaguely accurate after all this time, but I think it was part of the college of white magics. Not, sadly, the one you just linked, though. I know I have seen several versions on the interwebs over the years, though.


      It is also entirely possible that what I remember is the Ars Almadel, the angelic section of the Lesser Key of Solomon. Hell, Greater Summonings is pretty much just Ars Goetia with game stats. The nagging part of my memory says it was one of the MANY versions of white magic, though.


      Again, thanks for answering. If I do run across what I'm looking for, I will make certain it ends up in the files section here. I noticed during this search that most of the DQ fan sites are defunct.

      Group: dqn-list Message: 3812 From: David Novak Date: 7/8/2016
      Subject: Re: Angels
      Attachments :

        Were you looking for the ‘Different World’s #28’ Article by Paul Crabaugh? 

         

        The

        Angels

        The winged humanoid race called Angels for the DragonQuest role-playing game.

         

        By Paul Montgomery Crabaugh

        Different Worlds, #28, April 1983, p. 12

         


        One of the least-known races in the DragonQuest world, the Angels are humanoid flyers who normally keep to the highest peaks.  Whether they can be classed as “angels” as opposed to “devils” is unclear, even to the angels themselves; while they appear to be neither less nor more powerful than the other races, there is an ethereal, otherworldly atmosphere to them, and they seem to be possessed of considerable knowledge and wisdom.  Scholars are unsure whether they were once divine angels, perhaps fallen from grace, or whether they are an offshoot of the elves, with whom they have much in common.

        In game terms, the chance of being an angel player-character is 4%.  Although they normally live in secluded aeries which no one ever seems to discover, a few have occasionally ventured down to the flatlands, stirred by interest in the outside world.  An angel could join a party adventuring in a mountainous area.  Perhaps the angel would investigate the out of curiosity, then join the party of the greater curiosity.

        The life expectancy of an angel is similar to that of an elf – to great to be of interest to any but another angel.  Like elves, assume that PC angels are somewhere in their first millennium of life.

        Physically, angels resemble humans or elves, extremely slender, and averaging about five and a half feet tall.  There is considerable variation in details between angels, such as shape and construction of the wings, how much, if any, of the body is feathered, whether the feet are taloned, and so forth.  Coloration also varies quite widely.  They normally appear with only a bare weapon (and enough harness to hold it) and small bag holding a few possessions.

        Angels frequently seem rather distant from the concerns of the real world.  Humans sometimes say, bewildered at an angel’s lack of concern or unawareness of some major event, that they are not “of this plane”, and this may well be true, though the statement is not meant literally.  Angels do not normally initiate violence, but can fight when forced to with a determination and deadliness that astounds their foes.

        An angel’s Physical Strength and Endurance are both reduced by 3 because of their light bodily construction (needed to allow flight).  Their Willpower, Fatigue, and Physical Beauty are all increased by 2.

        An angel’s special abilities are (1) an angel may choose no Elemental college of magic save Air and Celestial, and no College of Entities at all.  (2) If one chooses the College of Air Magics, or the College of Naming, he pays only one-half the normal experience cost.  (3) If one chooses the College of Celestial Magics, he pays only three-quarters the normal experience cost.  (5) An angel may fly only if he currently suffers no FT loss on the Encumbrance chart, that is, he can fly only if he is traveling light.  (6) An angel walks at the speed and with the grace of an elf, and flies as does an eagle.  (7) All angels are intensely claustrophobic; one can tolerate a large room, but it becomes crowded, he becomes uneasy.  Small rooms will require a WP check by an angel before he could enter.  Broom closets, dungeons and other underground edifices, and similar places are unthinkable.  The only way an angel would enter such a place if bound and gagged, and such an event could well damage his or her mind.  (8) If an angel is flying in combat (which they prefer to do), the chance to hit him is reduced by 20% because of the difficulty in striking a flying object.  This is fortunate, because (9) angels cannot wear armor, although they can make use of shields if capable of flight while carrying the weight.

        They usually do not wear clothes although the reasons are unclear.  On espoused reason being that clothing would interfere with their flying, while other think that aversion is an aspect of their claustrophobia.  Still others suggest that the angels are averse to clothing because they are innocent of evil intent and dislike the deception implicit in body coverings.  In any event, this trait causes considerable disturbance among most of the other races, especially in view of the ethereal beauty of the angels, and can cause trouble in a typical civilized area.  Some angels have been known to wear clothing, especially light, find gowns.  Angels can obtain such gowns from their aeries, and if they know they will be venturing into “civilized” areas, they will generally bring such a gown along.

        Angels not only speak Common at Rank 10 (not 8), they also write it at the same rank.  Whether there is a separate language of Angelic is not known by other races.  (Referee’s note: you might settle this in your own mind and then secretly let any angel player-character know.  One interesting possibility is that there is such a language, but that mortal ears everyone except maybe elves – become hopelessly enthralled upon hearing it.)  Finally, angels resist cold and walk on snow (if they bother) as elves can do.

        That about covers it.  Properly handled, angels can make one of the more unusual races in RPGs because of the mystery of their origins and, frequently, their actions.

         

         

         

         

        From: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dqn-list@yahoogroups.com]
        Sent: Friday, July 08, 2016 12:21 PM
        To: dqn-list@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [DQN-list] Re: Angels

         

         

        I did thoroughly explore both this site and DQ-RULES before posting, but thank you for your efforts. My memory may not be even vaguely accurate after all this time, but I think it was part of the college of white magics. Not, sadly, the one you just linked, though. I know I have seen several versions on the interwebs over the years, though.

         

        It is also entirely possible that what I remember is the Ars Almadel, the angelic section of the Lesser Key of Solomon. Hell, Greater Summonings is pretty much just Ars Goetia with game stats. The nagging part of my memory says it was one of the MANY versions of white magic, though.

         

        Again, thanks for answering. If I do run across what I'm looking for, I will make certain it ends up in the files section here. I noticed during this search that most of the DQ fan sites are defunct.