Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Luke Kendall <luke@********.CANON.OZ.AU>
Subject: Our SR
Date: Mon, 30 May 1994 14:44:10 +1000
Some people in our group just noticed yet another problem in the SR
magic rules. It lets a character acquire even a power/weapon focus
at cost-of-materials + N karma points, where N = the power level.

In fact, one character (who'd been saving karma up for a long time,
preparing to acquire a Free Spirit as an Ally), could have afforded
a level 44 power focus (assuming the Enchanter knew the spell at that
level - which is admittedly inconceivable), or, say, 7 power 6 foci
and a power 2...

All because it's trivial to reduce the 1st-bonding cost to a multiplier
of 1 when creating magic items. This is in Grimoire I and II.

The point of this post, is to find out whether I'd be wasting my time
in typing up our local variations to the SR rules. They're a blend of
SR I, II, and random inspirations, while trying hard to stay SR.

I'd expect it to be half a dozen pages long; there are a dozen or two
changes we've made. Interested?

luke
Message no. 2
From: Paolo Marcucci <marcucci@***.TS.ASTRO.IT>
Subject: Our SR (fwd)
Date: Mon, 30 May 1994 09:42:27 METDST
>
> Some people in our group just noticed yet another problem in the SR
> magic rules. It lets a character acquire even a power/weapon focus
> at cost-of-materials + N karma points, where N = the power level.

Explain better, plz...

>
> In fact, one character (who'd been saving karma up for a long time,
> preparing to acquire a Free Spirit as an Ally), could have afforded
> a level 44 power focus (assuming the Enchanter knew the spell at that
> level - which is admittedly inconceivable), or, say, 7 power 6 foci
> and a power 2...
>
> All because it's trivial to reduce the 1st-bonding cost to a multiplier
> of 1 when creating magic items. This is in Grimoire I and II.

How?

>
> The point of this post, is to find out whether I'd be wasting my time
> in typing up our local variations to the SR rules. They're a blend of
> SR I, II, and random inspirations, while trying hard to stay SR.
>
> I'd expect it to be half a dozen pages long; there are a dozen or two
> changes we've made. Interested?
>
> luke
>

For sure, if it fix something without adding unnecessary complexity.

Bye, Paolo

--
______________________________________________________________________
Paolo Marcucci Osservatorio Astronomico di Trieste - Italy
marcucci@***.ts.astro.it http://www.oat.ts.astro.it/marcucci.html
(1.0.1) GCS/GMU d-- -p+ c++ l- u+ e* m+ s n-- h* f+? g- w+/++ t+ r+ x+
______________________________________________________________________
"Visual Basic: You'll shoot yourself in the foot, but you'll have so
much fun doing it that you won't care."
Message no. 3
From: Gurth <jweste%smtp@******.HZEELAND.NL>
Subject: Our SR - Reply
Date: Mon, 30 May 1994 11:25:07 +0200
>Some people in our group just noticed yet another problem in the SR
>magic rules. It lets a character acquire even a power/weapon focus
>at cost-of-materials + N karma points, where N = the power level.

>In fact, one character (who'd been saving karma up for a long time,
>preparing to acquire a Free Spirit as an Ally), could have afforded
>a level 44 power focus (assuming the Enchanter knew the spell at that
>level - which is admittedly inconceivable), or, say, 7 power 6 foci
>and a power 2...

>All because it's trivial to reduce the 1st-bonding cost to a multiplier
>of 1 when creating magic items. This is in Grimoire I and II.

Which page(s)?

The point of this post, is to find out whether I'd be wasting my time
in typing up our local variations to the SR rules. They're a blend of
SR I, II, and random inspirations, while trying hard to stay SR.

I'd expect it to be half a dozen pages long; there are a dozen or two
changes we've made. Interested?

luke
Message no. 4
From: Luke Kendall <luke@********.CANON.OZ.AU>
Subject: Re: Our SR - Reply
Date: Tue, 31 May 1994 11:53:08 +1000
Gurth:

>>All because it's trivial to reduce the 1st-bonding cost to a multiplier
>>of 1 when creating magic items. This is in Grimoire I and II.

>Which page(s)?

I don't have the book with me. Look for the table giving karma costs;
near there is a table giving multiplier reductions for first bonding.

And the Asceticism option for Initiation is open to equal abuse, too.

But from the general lack of interest, it sounds like it's not worth my
effort. That's a relief, frankly.

luke
Message no. 5
From: Ivy Ryan <ivyryan@***.ORG>
Subject: Re: Our SR - Reply
Date: Tue, 31 May 1994 11:04:40 -0700
On Tue, 31 May 1994, Luke Kendall wrote:

> Gurth:
>
> >>All because it's trivial to reduce the 1st-bonding cost to a multiplier
> >>of 1 when creating magic items. This is in Grimoire I and II.
>
> >Which page(s)?
>
> I don't have the book with me. Look for the table giving karma costs;
> near there is a table giving multiplier reductions for first bonding.

Page 26, Grimoire II, right column. And I haven't found the cost to
reduce the First Bonding Karma required trivial at all. Fuersturm made a
Power 4-Weapon Focus 4 out of the sword the Harlequin threw us at the end
of the module, and it was X-pensive. In money, Orichalcum, time, and Karma.

>
> And the Asceticism option for Initiation is open to equal abuse, too.
>
Dunno, IMO anything that reduces a mage's natural value of a Physical
Attribute (Like, humans have a Racial Max for all Attributes of 6, If you
use asceticism and sacrifice Strength, you not only lose one Strength
point, but your Racial Max is now a 5) very open to abuse. Really,
Fuersturm has never used it, and never will. It;s bad ju-ju. Trading a
Permanent Attribute Max point for an Initiation just isn't a good deal.


> But from the general lack of interest, it sounds like it's not worth my
> effort. That's a relief, frankly.
>
> luke
>
Yeah, this dog got run into the ground not too long ago.
Ivy K
Message no. 6
From: Luke Kendall <luke@********.CANON.OZ.AU>
Subject: Re: Our SR - Reply
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 1994 10:11:04 +1000
On Tue, 31 May 1994, Luke Kendall wrote:

> Gurth:
>
> >>All because it's trivial to reduce the 1st-bonding cost to a multiplier
> >>of 1 when creating magic items. This is in Grimoire I and II.
>
> >Which page(s)?
>
> I don't have the book with me. Look for the table giving karma costs;
> near there is a table giving multiplier reductions for first bonding.

Page 47 or 48 in Grim I, I think.

Ivy Ryan:

>Page 26, Grimoire II, right column. And I haven't found the cost to
>reduce the First Bonding Karma required trivial at all. Fuersturm made a
>Power 4-Weapon Focus 4 out of the sword the Harlequin threw us at the end
>of the module, and it was X-pensive. In money, Orichalcum, time, and Karma.

I can't remember; there are three things that you can use if you are
having one made from scratch for you and using first bonding; one gives
you a -x4, the other a -x2, and if you want to put extra units of Orichalcum
in (there's no need: 7 - 6 = 1), you could.

>> And the Asceticism option for Initiation is open to equal abuse, too.

> (Like, humans have a Racial Max for all Attributes of 6, If you
> use asceticism and sacrifice Strength, you not only lose one Strength
> point, but your Racial Max is now a 5)

The technique is best for mages with no interest in Str (i.e. character
has a Str of 2). So you use the Asceticism option; then use 1 point of
Karma to buy Str back to 2; next initiation, do the same again. And
again, and again. That's cheap Initiation (abuse) in our book.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I really don't believe that
FASA appreciate just how powerful mages are in their game. Their books
don't show it, their modules don't show it.

luke
Message no. 7
From: Neal A Porter <nap@*****.PHYSICS.SWIN.OZ.AU>
Subject: Re: Our SR - Reply
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 1994 11:59:28 +1000
Luke Kendall wrote:

>> (Like, humans have a Racial Max for all Attributes of 6, If you
>> use asceticism and sacrifice Strength, you not only lose one Strength
>> point, but your Racial Max is now a 5)
>
>The technique is best for mages with no interest in Str (i.e. character
>has a Str of 2). So you use the Asceticism option; then use 1 point of
>Karma to buy Str back to 2; next initiation, do the same again. And
>again, and again. That's cheap Initiation (abuse) in our book.

Simple solution. If they reduce the attribute then never let them increase
it again. This includes karma expendature, spell increases etc. Now this
isn't covered anywhere in rules so if you believe that players are abusing
the system then abuse them back. Remember the GM has the final say on
anything. If you don't like something change it.

>
>I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I really don't believe that
>FASA appreciate just how powerful mages are in their game. Their books
>don't show it, their modules don't show it.


Ah.... but remember they have never listed stats for Ehran or H, nor any
for the Great Dragons. And some of the things they have these guys doing
striked me as rather powerful. Like that Great Dragon that burnt Tehran.
Its lot that they ignore the powerful mages, its just that the powerful mages
seldom like being noticed.

A'Deus.
Message no. 8
From: Tim Skirvin <tskirvin@********.UNI.UIUC.EDU>
Subject: Re: Our SR - Reply
Date: Tue, 31 May 1994 21:54:51 -0500
> The technique is best for mages with no interest in Str (i.e.
> character has a Str of 2). So you use the Asceticism option; then
> use 1 point of Karma to buy Str back to 2; next initiation, do the
> same again. And again, and again. That's cheap Initiation (abuse)
> in our book.

Mainly, this probably wouldn't make much sense in a role-playing way.
Also, don't forget that, while you go down a point, it doesn't COUNT as going
down a point...it would still cost 3 points to buy it back the first time,
4 the second, and so on. Also, I'm pretty sure it says something about not
being able to use the same technique twice...

Oh, and it would cost 2 to buy it back, in your (wrong) example.

-------------Tim Skirvin (tskirvin@********.uni.uiuc.edu-------------
"He's NOT a gibbering idiot - he's cured of gibbering, he's just an
idiot now." -- Jane, "Waiting for God"
Message no. 9
From: Dylan Northrup <northrup@*****.CAS.USF.EDU>
Subject: Re: Our SR - Reply
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 1994 09:09:18 -0400
On Wed, 1 Jun 1994, Neal A Porter wrote:

> Luke Kendall wrote:
>
> >I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I really don't believe that
> >FASA appreciate just how powerful mages are in their game. Their books
> >don't show it, their modules don't show it.
>
> Ah.... but remember they have never listed stats for Ehran or H, nor any
> for the Great Dragons. And some of the things they have these guys doing
> striked me as rather powerful. Like that Great Dragon that burnt Tehran.

To paraphrase from Harlequin: There are no stats listed for Ehran or
Harlequin. 'They do not need any. If either of these characters wishes to
perform an action, roll the dice and let them succeed.'

I would imagine that most of the Great Dragons are in this category as
well. In Night's Pawn, it took the force of an entire company (or two)
to injure a dragon. These guys were using mortars, lasers, rocket
launchers, etc. That is a lot of damage! And they did not kill it, they
just wounded it. And, I do not believe that he was a Great Dragon
either.

A good rule of thumb: If they lived in the fourth age, they don't need stats.

Doc X
*****************************************************************************
* Dylan Northrup <northrup@*****.cas.usf.edu> * I'm not a computer genius *
*********************************************** I just play one in the lab *
* "It doesn't have to be like this. All we have to do is keep talking" *
* -- Steven Hawking / ***************************************************
* Pink Floyd * <http://www.cas.usf.edu/dylan.html>; * KIBO #7 *
*****************************************************************************
Message no. 10
From: Ivy Ryan <ivyryan@***.ORG>
Subject: Re: Our SR - Reply
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 1994 07:44:40 -0700
On Wed, 1 Jun 1994, Luke Kendall wrote:

> On Tue, 31 May 1994, Luke Kendall wrote:
>
> > Gurth:
> >
> > >>All because it's trivial to reduce the 1st-bonding cost to a multiplier
> > >>of 1 when creating magic items. This is in Grimoire I and II.
> >
> > >Which page(s)?
> >
> > I don't have the book with me. Look for the table giving karma costs;
> > near there is a table giving multiplier reductions for first bonding.
>
> Page 47 or 48 in Grim I, I think.
>
> Ivy Ryan:
>
> >Page 26, Grimoire II, right column. And I haven't found the cost to
> >reduce the First Bonding Karma required trivial at all. Fuersturm made a
> >Power 4-Weapon Focus 4 out of the sword the Harlequin threw us at the end
> >of the module, and it was X-pensive. In money, Orichalcum, time, and Karma.
>
> I can't remember; there are three things that you can use if you are
> having one made from scratch for you and using first bonding; one gives
> you a -x4, the other a -x2, and if you want to put extra units of Orichalcum
> in (there's no need: 7 - 6 = 1), you could.

Virgin Telesma (didn't count for Fuersturm but) -2 x Rating
One Arcanum -1 x Rating
Two Arcanum -2 x Rating
Three Arcanum -4 x Rating (these Arcanum are X-pensive!)
Orichalcum (per extra unit) -1 x Rating (Orichalcum is X-pensive too!)
If the GM is at all reasonable, this is very expensive. And extra
successes can get difficult.

>
> >> And the Asceticism option for Initiation is open to equal abuse, too.
>
> > (Like, humans have a Racial Max for all Attributes of 6, If you
> > use asceticism and sacrifice Strength, you not only lose one Strength
> > point, but your Racial Max is now a 5)
>
> The technique is best for mages with no interest in Str (i.e. character
> has a Str of 2). So you use the Asceticism option; then use 1 point of
> Karma to buy Str back to 2; next initiation, do the same again. And
> again, and again. That's cheap Initiation (abuse) in our book.
>
Yeah, you can do it. But then your Racial Max Strength is a 2 also. Not
a good idea at all. Like, what if you have to fight something?


> I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I really don't believe that
> FASA appreciate just how powerful mages are in their game. Their books
> don't show it, their modules don't show it.
>
> luke
>
Take my word for it Luke, FASA, and Paul Hume are quite aware of the
power of mages. That's why a GM has to run a tight ship. There are
plenty of counters to mages, If (!) the GM uses them. I've been through
the same thing. I learned the whole thing, and mages can be taken out
easily.
Ivy
Message no. 11
From: Luke Kendall <luke@********.CANON.OZ.AU>
Subject: Re: Our SR - Reply
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 1994 14:51:27 +1000
Neal A Porter wrote:

> Remember the GM has the final say on anything. If you don't like
> something change it.

No need to state the obvious. Maybe you missed the start of this thread?
`Our SR' is about our group's local mod.s to the SR rules. I just mentioned
a _couple_ of the problems that I haven't seen other people ever mention.

>>I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I really don't believe that
>>FASA appreciate just how powerful mages are in their game. Their books
>>don't show it, their modules don't show it.

> Ah.... but remember they have never listed stats for Ehran or H, nor any
> for the Great Dragons. And some of the things they have these guys doing
> striked me as rather powerful. Like that Great Dragon that burnt Tehran.
> Its lot that they ignore the powerful mages, its just that the powerful mages
> seldom like being noticed.

You misunderstand. When I say that FASA don't understand the power of mages,
I mean that their modules are often destroyed by the intelligent application
of their own magic rules; likewise, the plotlines in their stories often
fall apart for the same reason. E.g.: why didn't they contact a mage to
Heal the guy? To analyse the device? To mindprobe the girl? To do a
Sending to locate the person? To get a Shaman to talk to a Hearth spirit?

It's still one of my 2 favourite role-playing systems, though, of the thirty
or forty I've tried. Though of course I mean SR with our local mods.

My impression, from this particular discussion, is that everybody else
makes the changes (they see as necessary) as a matter of course. If
everyone mailed their local mods, we could spend the next six months
arguing about which was best. Which seems a lot of work for little gain.

luke
Message no. 12
From: Stainless Steel Rat <ratinox@***.NEU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Our SR - Reply
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 1994 16:25:45 -0400
>>>>> "Luke" == Luke Kendall <luke@********.CANON.OZ.AU>
writes:

Luke> You misunderstand. When I say that FASA don't understand the power
Luke> of mages, I mean that their modules are often destroyed by the
Luke> intelligent application of their own magic rules; likewise, the
Luke> plotlines in their stories often fall apart for the same reason.
Luke> E.g.: why didn't they contact a mage to Heal the guy? To analyse the
Luke> device? To mindprobe the girl? To do a Sending to locate the
Luke> person? To get a Shaman to talk to a Hearth spirit?

The excuse is that mages are supposed to be rare, and finding the right
type of mage can be difficult, if not impossible.

\||| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||/
== Rat <ratinox@***.neu.edu> WWW Page: http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/ratinox ==
==I have one prejudice, and that is against stupidity. Use your mind, think!==
== --Zoner <megazone@***.wpi.edu> ==
/||| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||\
Message no. 13
From: Ivy Ryan <ivyryan@***.ORG>
Subject: Re: Our SR - Reply
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 1994 18:14:58 -0700
On Wed, 1 Jun 1994, Luke Kendall wrote:

> Neal A Porter wrote:
>
> > Remember the GM has the final say on anything. If you don't like
>
> No need to state the obvious. Maybe you missed the start of this thread?
>
> >>I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I really don't believe that
>
> > Ah.... but remember they have never listed stats for Ehran or H, nor any
>
> You misunderstand. When I say that FASA don't understand the power of mages,
>
> It's still one of my 2 favourite role-playing systems, though, of the thirty
>
> My impression, from this particular discussion, is that everybody else
> makes the changes (they see as necessary) as a matter of course. If
>
> luke
>
Amazingly enough, Luke, I GM SRII right out of the box. Just as the game
was written. And, I have never had a mage destroy the plot-line of a
module either. The person (Deirdre) who GMs for me does it straight
too. And I have never been able to destroy a plot line either.
Of course, we play it right by the rules too. All the rules. And we
take a restrictive reading on every question. The game works well as it
comes from FASA, IMO. 8)
Ivy
P.S. If I 'was' to change anything, it'd just be doubling the ranges for
every firearm except the Shotgun and the SMG. That and get some more
realistic vehicle rules in there. The rest is great!
Message no. 14
From: Micah Levy <M.Levy@**.UCL.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: Our SR - Reply
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 1994 11:57:16 +0100
> Ah.... but remember they have never listed stats for Ehran or H, nor any
> for the Great Dragons. And some of the things they have these guys doing
> striked me as rather powerful. Like that Great Dragon that burnt Tehran.
> Its lot that they ignore the powerful mages, its just that the powerful mages
> seldom like being noticed.
>
> A'Deus.


actually, In Dragon #199, Tom Dowd did a write-up on Dunkelzahn + almost
complete stats.
Like, level of initiation 12+.
Magic- 20 (That means Level 14 initiation)
and Physical and Mental attributes as well as Threat rating (10 I think).
Great article, gave Dunk's history and dropped some hints at the very end (you
know the type)

That's one issue that's well worth getting just for the write-up.


||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|| ||
|| Micah Levy ||
|| Department of Computer Science ||
|| University College London ||
|| ||
|| http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/people/malevy.html ||
|| M.Levy@**.ucl.ac.uk ||
|| GCS d--@ -p+ c++ l(!) u++ e+ m- s n+ h* f g+(-) w t+ r++ y? ||
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Our SR, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!