How does everyone handle grevious injuries against larger (or smaller) targets or against nonhumanoid ones. The table says its geared for man-sized.

I've always just winged it as instances come up. Keeping additional EN damage but ignoring some details (a human crushing the collar bone of an upright and active giant for instance).

Anybody else come up with any creative tables/rules to handle such circumstances?

Ted

Sorry for not replying sooner, I've been out of the habit of looking at these sites for a bit.

Thanks for the favourable comments, please give me feed back, its only been tested by me, and I knew what I meant when I wrote it. There isn't a newer version, other than a few minor points scribbled in pen, so carry on. Probably you will have more so it would be good to combine them.

Please let me know your thoughts

I have always regarded the divisions of the colleges to be cultural, equivalent to different fields of study that different "Universities" will separate into different colleges. The split of the 3 types of magic is more fundamental, I'd like to have limited the choice to Entity magic, but some deities in the classical/Egyptian pantheon didn't work just with Entity magic, the other pantheons did work as entity colleges.

The Druids were meant to be powerful and use all magic including bard. Yes I know this gross, I've never had a PC get anywhere near the power level. I'm hoping that sacrifice of at least 3MA points without the guarantee of the ritual being successful (so it could easily be more), and high minimum MAs will balance things out.

107.12 is an area open to abuse. The idea was that a small community would have need of a priest to meet their needs and if they were a priest of Seti, they should be able to do this. I suggest that the purification ritual needed between using spells of different facets is strictly enforced, but I can see players abusing this, and it may be better to disallow it.

Please keep in contact an tell me what you find and I'll check this site more often

David

--- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "tmckelvey77089" <tmckelvey77089@...> wrote:
>
> I'm just getting back into running my DQ campaign and I'm planning on making extensive use of the Spirits, Religions and Planes v1.3 rules (unless there's newer ones that I'm not aware of) that David Barrass, et al put together. I think its extremely valuable.
>
> One question that came to mind as I was reviewing them was in regards to the restriction on knowing multiple colleges of magic and how or if that is meant to apply to mage-priests of the pagan religions. The Druid rules (section 110)would seem to imply that the restriction doesn't apply, at least for those folks. They get access to Bardic College magic early on and eventually, upon achieving Druid status, access to one of several colleges. The rules don't say that they lose their Bardic college in the process.
>
> Also, section 107.12 states that in some religions a priest character can represent several aspects of a god, or even several gods, within certain restrictions. While he/she is limited to rank 3 priest in these secondary priest skills, it would allow them to have access to general knowledge of a 2nd or 3rd college(107.2). For instance a Priest that is primarily a servant of Seth - Lord of Deceipt (and therefore has access to Black Magics) but has a secondary skill as a priest of Seth - Lord of Fire (Fire Magics).
>
> I'm inclined to believe that the intent of these rules was to allow such multi-college access for pagan priests. This would give them a great deal of diverse power, but with lots of restrictions.
>
> I'd like to get some feedback from you folks on what you think.
>
> Thanks much,
> Ted
>

Thanks for the feedback David. I really like the rules. Been trying to find a good system for handling priests and religions.

I'm curious to know why you had some of the Egyptian gods as both pagan and POL.

Ted

--- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "dbarrass_2000" <david.barrass@...> wrote:
>
> Sorry for not replying sooner, I've been out of the habit of looking at these sites for a bit.
>
> Thanks for the favourable comments, please give me feed back, its only been tested by me, and I knew what I meant when I wrote it. There isn't a newer version, other than a few minor points scribbled in pen, so carry on. Probably you will have more so it would be good to combine them.
>
> Please let me know your thoughts
>
> I have always regarded the divisions of the colleges to be cultural, equivalent to different fields of study that different "Universities" will separate into different colleges. The split of the 3 types of magic is more fundamental, I'd like to have limited the choice to Entity magic, but some deities in the classical/Egyptian pantheon didn't work just with Entity magic, the other pantheons did work as entity colleges.
>
> The Druids were meant to be powerful and use all magic including bard. Yes I know this gross, I've never had a PC get anywhere near the power level. I'm hoping that sacrifice of at least 3MA points without the guarantee of the ritual being successful (so it could easily be more), and high minimum MAs will balance things out.
>
> 107.12 is an area open to abuse. The idea was that a small community would have need of a priest to meet their needs and if they were a priest of Seti, they should be able to do this. I suggest that the purification ritual needed between using spells of different facets is strictly enforced, but I can see players abusing this, and it may be better to disallow it.
>
> Please keep in contact an tell me what you find and I'll check this site more often
>
> David
>
> --- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "tmckelvey77089" <tmckelvey77089@> wrote:
> >
> > I'm just getting back into running my DQ campaign and I'm planning on making extensive use of the Spirits, Religions and Planes v1.3 rules (unless there's newer ones that I'm not aware of) that David Barrass, et al put together. I think its extremely valuable.
> >
> > One question that came to mind as I was reviewing them was in regards to the restriction on knowing multiple colleges of magic and how or if that is meant to apply to mage-priests of the pagan religions. The Druid rules (section 110)would seem to imply that the restriction doesn't apply, at least for those folks. They get access to Bardic College magic early on and eventually, upon achieving Druid status, access to one of several colleges. The rules don't say that they lose their Bardic college in the process.
> >
> > Also, section 107.12 states that in some religions a priest character can represent several aspects of a god, or even several gods, within certain restrictions. While he/she is limited to rank 3 priest in these secondary priest skills, it would allow them to have access to general knowledge of a 2nd or 3rd college(107.2). For instance a Priest that is primarily a servant of Seth - Lord of Deceipt (and therefore has access to Black Magics) but has a secondary skill as a priest of Seth - Lord of Fire (Fire Magics).
> >
> > I'm inclined to believe that the intent of these rules was to allow such multi-college access for pagan priests. This would give them a great deal of diverse power, but with lots of restrictions.
> >
> > I'd like to get some feedback from you folks on what you think.
> >
> > Thanks much,
> > Ted
> >
>

This goes back to my ideas behind this. Pagan deities are powered by faith and use magic to convince worshippers they are real, potent beings worthy of the sacrifices etc. The POLs found a different way, a more indirect way so couldn't use magic. But they were freer to behave as they wished, not bound to the belief of their worshippers. They do need exclusive worship by large numbers, and by suppressing magic they can get one over on their pagan rivals.

Aken in Egypt was the first to make the switch, but with the death of the Pharaoh Atenaken the religion failed. The pagan gods Osiris, Isis and Horus decided this was a good idea and also made the switch, with some success. The belief in the old pagan gods did not die out though, conservative elements still kept worshipping and sacrificing so the pagan gods reformed. So now there are two of Osiris, Isis and Horus, with very much the same attitudes, but opposed and rivals.

Actually if you look at the magic items associated with them in Arcane wisdom they have a distinct magic bias, but elements of the religion seemed more POL, so that's why I came up with the explanation, and rival gods claiming the exact same thing is always good for scenario seeds.

David

--- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "tmckelvey77089" <tmckelvey77089@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the feedback David. I really like the rules. Been trying to find a good system for handling priests and religions.
>
> I'm curious to know why you had some of the Egyptian gods as both pagan and POL.
>
> Ted
>
>
> --- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "dbarrass_2000" <david.barrass@> wrote:
> >
> > Sorry for not replying sooner, I've been out of the habit of looking at these sites for a bit.
> >
> > Thanks for the favourable comments, please give me feed back, its only been tested by me, and I knew what I meant when I wrote it. There isn't a newer version, other than a few minor points scribbled in pen, so carry on. Probably you will have more so it would be good to combine them.
> >
> > Please let me know your thoughts
> >
> > I have always regarded the divisions of the colleges to be cultural, equivalent to different fields of study that different "Universities" will separate into different colleges. The split of the 3 types of magic is more fundamental, I'd like to have limited the choice to Entity magic, but some deities in the classical/Egyptian pantheon didn't work just with Entity magic, the other pantheons did work as entity colleges.
> >
> > The Druids were meant to be powerful and use all magic including bard. Yes I know this gross, I've never had a PC get anywhere near the power level. I'm hoping that sacrifice of at least 3MA points without the guarantee of the ritual being successful (so it could easily be more), and high minimum MAs will balance things out.
> >
> > 107.12 is an area open to abuse. The idea was that a small community would have need of a priest to meet their needs and if they were a priest of Seti, they should be able to do this. I suggest that the purification ritual needed between using spells of different facets is strictly enforced, but I can see players abusing this, and it may be better to disallow it.
> >
> > Please keep in contact an tell me what you find and I'll check this site more often
> >
> > David
> >
> > --- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "tmckelvey77089" <tmckelvey77089@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm just getting back into running my DQ campaign and I'm planning on making extensive use of the Spirits, Religions and Planes v1.3 rules (unless there's newer ones that I'm not aware of) that David Barrass, et al put together. I think its extremely valuable.
> > >
> > > One question that came to mind as I was reviewing them was in regards to the restriction on knowing multiple colleges of magic and how or if that is meant to apply to mage-priests of the pagan religions. The Druid rules (section 110)would seem to imply that the restriction doesn't apply, at least for those folks. They get access to Bardic College magic early on and eventually, upon achieving Druid status, access to one of several colleges. The rules don't say that they lose their Bardic college in the process.
> > >
> > > Also, section 107.12 states that in some religions a priest character can represent several aspects of a god, or even several gods, within certain restrictions. While he/she is limited to rank 3 priest in these secondary priest skills, it would allow them to have access to general knowledge of a 2nd or 3rd college(107.2). For instance a Priest that is primarily a servant of Seth - Lord of Deceipt (and therefore has access to Black Magics) but has a secondary skill as a priest of Seth - Lord of Fire (Fire Magics).
> > >
> > > I'm inclined to believe that the intent of these rules was to allow such multi-college access for pagan priests. This would give them a great deal of diverse power, but with lots of restrictions.
> > >
> > > I'd like to get some feedback from you folks on what you think.
> > >
> > > Thanks much,
> > > Ted
> > >
> >
>

One of the things about the DQ rules that always bothered me was the movement speeds, both TMR and Movement Rates.

By and large they all seem very slow in comparison to real world examples.

Examples:

Cheetah
Movement Rate/TMR = 1200/24

That works out to a running speed of about 40 mph, which is way off the real world speed of closer to 70. The listing for Cheetah ncludes a note that their Movement rate should be quartered after a few minutes due to tiring.

Quarterhorse
Movement Rate/TMR = 600/12

That puts the DQ Quarterhorse at about 20 mph, compared to its real world counterpart at about 45 mph

Most of the other creatures in DQ show similar disparities.

Has anyone tried to tweak these stats to make them more realistic? In the past I've simply let allowed extra Movement/TMR for flat out unencumbered running, but that doesnt really work very well. going through and changing all the TMR listings of all animals would by my next best option.

Interestingly, the humanoid TMR rates are some of the closest to real world examples.

Posted by: "tmckelvey77089" tmckelvey77089@yahoo.com tmckelvey77089

> One of the things about the DQ rules that always bothered me was the
> movement speeds, both TMR and Movement Rates.
> By and large they all seem very slow in comparison to real world
> examples.
>
> Examples:
> Cheetah
> Movement Rate/TMR = 1200/24
>
> That works out to a running speed of about 40 mph, which is way off
> the real world speed of closer to 70. The listing for Cheetah ncludes
> a note that their Movement rate should be quartered after a few
> minutes due to tiring.

70 is the TOP recorded speed, and IIRC - for only a few seconds...

> Quarterhorse
> Movement Rate/TMR = 600/12
>
> That puts the DQ Quarterhorse at about 20 mph, compared to its real
> world counterpart at about 45 mph

On a race track, or in an open field?

> Most of the other creatures in DQ show similar disparities.
>
> Has anyone tried to tweak these stats to make them more realistic?
> In the past I've simply let allowed extra Movement/TMR for flat out
> unencumbered running, but that doesnt really work very well. going
> through and changing all the TMR listings of all animals would by
> my next best option.
>
> Interestingly, the humanoid TMR rates are some of the closest to real
> world examples.

Most people are more familiar with those, I'd imagine.

To calculate the minimum MA needed for someone to learn a magic college I've traditionally totaled the general knowledge spells and rituals of the college then added 3 to cover the 2 counterspells and the ritual of purification (32.2). I originally excluded 32.1 Ritual Spell Preparation (because it was unranked General Knowledge).

I'm reconsidering that and may include it in the calculation to determine minimum MA.

Is that how you all have been calculating Minimum MA?

Including those 4 would place the minumum MA for Lesser Summonings at 20 and Shamanism (per "Things Spiritual" by David Barrass, et al) at 24...making them the two most demanding colleges (in that respect)in my campaign.

I never worried about it because the penalties for not having much MA
seemed to offset the problems or perceived imbalances.

Marty

On May 10, 2009, at 8:33 PM, tmckelvey77089 wrote:

> To calculate the minimum MA needed for someone to learn a magic
> college I've traditionally totaled the general knowledge spells and
> rituals of the college then added 3 to cover the 2 counterspells and
> the ritual of purification (32.2). I originally excluded 32.1
> Ritual Spell Preparation (because it was unranked General Knowledge).
>
> I'm reconsidering that and may include it in the calculation to
> determine minimum MA.
>
> Is that how you all have been calculating Minimum MA?
>
> Including those 4 would place the minumum MA for Lesser Summonings
> at 20 and Shamanism (per "Things Spiritual" by David Barrass, et al)
> at 24...making them the two most demanding colleges (in that
> respect)in my campaign.
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> To Post a message, send it to: dq-rules@eGroups.com
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: dq-rules-unsubscribe@eGroups.comYahoo
> ! Groups Links
>
>
>

David wrote:

"The Druids were meant to be powerful and use all magic including bard. Yes I know this gross, I've never had a PC get anywhere near the power level. I'm hoping that sacrifice of at least 3MA points without the guarantee of the ritual being successful (so it could easily be more), and high minimum MAs will balance things out."

Regarding the MA point sacrifice and its relation to the established minimum MA for the Druid and Ovate: I'm assuming that the intent is to have the minimum MA (12 for Ovate, 15 for Druid) requirement met
AFTER the sacrificed MA points are removed. i.e. The Bard would make sure they had at least a 13 MA before attempting Ovate, and an Ovate would make sure they had at least a 17 MA before attempting Druid. Am I correct in that assumption?

Thanks much,
Ted

--- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "dbarrass_2000" <david.barrass@...> wrote:
>
> This goes back to my ideas behind this. Pagan deities are powered by faith and use magic to convince worshippers they are real, potent beings worthy of the sacrifices etc. The POLs found a different way, a more indirect way so couldn't use magic. But they were freer to behave as they wished, not bound to the belief of their worshippers. They do need exclusive worship by large numbers, and by suppressing magic they can get one over on their pagan rivals.
>
> Aken in Egypt was the first to make the switch, but with the death of the Pharaoh Atenaken the religion failed. The pagan gods Osiris, Isis and Horus decided this was a good idea and also made the switch, with some success. The belief in the old pagan gods did not die out though, conservative elements still kept worshipping and sacrificing so the pagan gods reformed. So now there are two of Osiris, Isis and Horus, with very much the same attitudes, but opposed and rivals.
>
> Actually if you look at the magic items associated with them in Arcane wisdom they have a distinct magic bias, but elements of the religion seemed more POL, so that's why I came up with the explanation, and rival gods claiming the exact same thing is always good for scenario seeds.
>
> David
>
> --- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "tmckelvey77089" <tmckelvey77089@> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the feedback David. I really like the rules. Been trying to find a good system for handling priests and religions.
> >
> > I'm curious to know why you had some of the Egyptian gods as both pagan and POL.
> >
> > Ted
> >
> >
> > --- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "dbarrass_2000" <david.barrass@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Sorry for not replying sooner, I've been out of the habit of looking at these sites for a bit.
> > >
> > > Thanks for the favourable comments, please give me feed back, its only been tested by me, and I knew what I meant when I wrote it. There isn't a newer version, other than a few minor points scribbled in pen, so carry on. Probably you will have more so it would be good to combine them.
> > >
> > > Please let me know your thoughts
> > >
> > > I have always regarded the divisions of the colleges to be cultural, equivalent to different fields of study that different "Universities" will separate into different colleges. The split of the 3 types of magic is more fundamental, I'd like to have limited the choice to Entity magic, but some deities in the classical/Egyptian pantheon didn't work just with Entity magic, the other pantheons did work as entity colleges.
> > >
> > > The Druids were meant to be powerful and use all magic including bard. Yes I know this gross, I've never had a PC get anywhere near the power level. I'm hoping that sacrifice of at least 3MA points without the guarantee of the ritual being successful (so it could easily be more), and high minimum MAs will balance things out.
> > >
> > > 107.12 is an area open to abuse. The idea was that a small community would have need of a priest to meet their needs and if they were a priest of Seti, they should be able to do this. I suggest that the purification ritual needed between using spells of different facets is strictly enforced, but I can see players abusing this, and it may be better to disallow it.
> > >
> > > Please keep in contact an tell me what you find and I'll check this site more often
> > >
> > > David
> > >
> > > --- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "tmckelvey77089" <tmckelvey77089@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'm just getting back into running my DQ campaign and I'm planning on making extensive use of the Spirits, Religions and Planes v1.3 rules (unless there's newer ones that I'm not aware of) that David Barrass, et al put together. I think its extremely valuable.
> > > >
> > > > One question that came to mind as I was reviewing them was in regards to the restriction on knowing multiple colleges of magic and how or if that is meant to apply to mage-priests of the pagan religions. The Druid rules (section 110)would seem to imply that the restriction doesn't apply, at least for those folks. They get access to Bardic College magic early on and eventually, upon achieving Druid status, access to one of several colleges. The rules don't say that they lose their Bardic college in the process.
> > > >
> > > > Also, section 107.12 states that in some religions a priest character can represent several aspects of a god, or even several gods, within certain restrictions. While he/she is limited to rank 3 priest in these secondary priest skills, it would allow them to have access to general knowledge of a 2nd or 3rd college(107.2). For instance a Priest that is primarily a servant of Seth - Lord of Deceipt (and therefore has access to Black Magics) but has a secondary skill as a priest of Seth - Lord of Fire (Fire Magics).
> > > >
> > > > I'm inclined to believe that the intent of these rules was to allow such multi-college access for pagan priests. This would give them a great deal of diverse power, but with lots of restrictions.
> > > >
> > > > I'd like to get some feedback from you folks on what you think.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks much,
> > > > Ted
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

--- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "Ran Hardin" <dantalion64@...> wrote:

>
> I was digging around the other day and came across a draft of my
> changes to the DQ's character generation rules. While In The Day I
> felt that DQ's chargen was far superior to D&D, as time went on, I
> found that I disliked some elements, and so I set about changing them
> ot my taste.
>
> Essentially, I replaced the Point Generation Table with a point-buy
> system. Does anyone have an interest in seeing what I've monkeyed
> with? Or, has anyone had similar ideas they'd like to share?
>

I'd be very interested in seeing what you have? Been thinking of doing the same myself.

The real world examples I gave (cheetah and quarterhorse) are most likely in ideal conditions over a short term.

One of the things that got me thinking about making changes to some of the TMR numbers was the Cheetah. The Dragonquest listing for it gives a special rule for its TMR to be reduced after a short period of time, reflecting the Cheetah's fast sprint speed over the short haul. That implies that its rated TMR is full tilt boogie, which seemed far too slow.

I understand the Movement Rate is for use during the chase phase and therefore a long term average, but on the tactical level where TMR is involved they seemed slow.

--- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, Mike or Carmen Dugan <mikenmenchie@...> wrote:
>
> Posted by: "tmckelvey77089" tmckelvey77089@... tmckelvey77089
> > One of the things about the DQ rules that always bothered me was the
> > movement speeds, both TMR and Movement Rates.
> > By and large they all seem very slow in comparison to real world
> > examples.
> >
> > Examples:
> > Cheetah
> > Movement Rate/TMR = 1200/24
> >
> > That works out to a running speed of about 40 mph, which is way off
> > the real world speed of closer to 70. The listing for Cheetah ncludes
> > a note that their Movement rate should be quartered after a few
> > minutes due to tiring.
>
> 70 is the TOP recorded speed, and IIRC - for only a few seconds...
>
> > Quarterhorse
> > Movement Rate/TMR = 600/12
> >
> > That puts the DQ Quarterhorse at about 20 mph, compared to its real
> > world counterpart at about 45 mph
>
> On a race track, or in an open field?
>
> > Most of the other creatures in DQ show similar disparities.
> >
> > Has anyone tried to tweak these stats to make them more realistic?
> > In the past I've simply let allowed extra Movement/TMR for flat out
> > unencumbered running, but that doesnt really work very well. going
> > through and changing all the TMR listings of all animals would by
> > my next best option.
> >
> > Interestingly, the humanoid TMR rates are some of the closest to real
> > world examples.
>
> Most people are more familiar with those, I'd imagine.
>

--- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "tmckelvey77089" <tmckelvey77089@...> wrote:

>
> How does everyone handle grevious injuries against larger (or smaller) targets or against nonhumanoid ones. The table says its geared for man-sized.
>
> I've always just winged it as instances come up. Keeping additional EN damage but ignoring some details (a human crushing the collar bone of an upright and active giant for instance).
>
> Anybody else come up with any creative tables/rules to handle such circumstances?
>
> Ted
>

I never have. I've always winged it, too. Part of the problem is that many larger-sized creatures are non-humanoid, and results would have to be adjusted for insects/arachnoids, flying things, etc.

Hmmm... I've never given this much thought. My only explanation is that in combat, you're not *sprinting* to the exclusion of all else, but moving quickly while keeping ready to suddenly stop, attack, defend, change direction, etc., which is why it's called the *Tactical* Movement Rate. There are other RPGs that have rules providing for increased movement in combat at the expense of defensive capability... maybe double TMR with a -10 to defense? -15? More?

--- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "tmckelvey77089" <tmckelvey77089@...> wrote:
>
> The real world examples I gave (cheetah and quarterhorse) are most likely in ideal conditions over a short term.
>
> One of the things that got me thinking about making changes to some of the TMR numbers was the Cheetah. The Dragonquest listing for it gives a special rule for its TMR to be reduced after a short period of time, reflecting the Cheetah's fast sprint speed over the short haul. That implies that its rated TMR is full tilt boogie, which seemed far too slow.
>
> I understand the Movement Rate is for use during the chase phase and therefore a long term average, but on the tactical level where TMR is involved they seemed slow.
>
>
> --- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, Mike or Carmen Dugan <mikenmenchie@> wrote:
> >
> > Posted by: "tmckelvey77089" tmckelvey77089@ tmckelvey77089
> > > One of the things about the DQ rules that always bothered me was the
> > > movement speeds, both TMR and Movement Rates.
> > > By and large they all seem very slow in comparison to real world
> > > examples.
> > >
> > > Examples:
> > > Cheetah
> > > Movement Rate/TMR = 1200/24
> > >
> > > That works out to a running speed of about 40 mph, which is way off
> > > the real world speed of closer to 70. The listing for Cheetah ncludes
> > > a note that their Movement rate should be quartered after a few
> > > minutes due to tiring.
> >
> > 70 is the TOP recorded speed, and IIRC - for only a few seconds...
> >
> > > Quarterhorse
> > > Movement Rate/TMR = 600/12
> > >
> > > That puts the DQ Quarterhorse at about 20 mph, compared to its real
> > > world counterpart at about 45 mph
> >
> > On a race track, or in an open field?
> >
> > > Most of the other creatures in DQ show similar disparities.
> > >
> > > Has anyone tried to tweak these stats to make them more realistic?
> > > In the past I've simply let allowed extra Movement/TMR for flat out
> > > unencumbered running, but that doesnt really work very well. going
> > > through and changing all the TMR listings of all animals would by
> > > my next best option.
> > >
> > > Interestingly, the humanoid TMR rates are some of the closest to real
> > > world examples.
> >
> > Most people are more familiar with those, I'd imagine.
> >
>

See this post:

Alternate CharGen rules 

--- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "tmckelvey77089" <tmckelvey77089@...> wrote:
>
> --- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "Ran Hardin" dantalion64@ wrote:
> >
> > I was digging around the other day and came across a draft of my
> > changes to the DQ's character generation rules. While In The Day I
> > felt that DQ's chargen was far superior to D&D, as time went on, I
> > found that I disliked some elements, and so I set about changing them
> > ot my taste.
> >
> > Essentially, I replaced the Point Generation Table with a point-buy
> > system. Does anyone have an interest in seeing what I've monkeyed
> > with? Or, has anyone had similar ideas they'd like to share?
> >
>
>
> I'd be very interested in seeing what you have? Been thinking of doing the same myself.
>

--- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "Ran Hardin" <dantalion64@...> wrote:

>
> --- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "tmckelvey77089" <tmckelvey77089@> wrote:
> >
> > How does everyone handle grevious injuries against larger (or smaller) targets or against nonhumanoid ones. The table says its geared for man-sized.
> >
> > I've always just winged it as instances come up. Keeping additional EN damage but ignoring some details (a human crushing the collar bone of an upright and active giant for instance).
> >
> > Anybody else come up with any creative tables/rules to handle such circumstances?
> >
> > Ted
> >
> I've usually allowed my players to roll an additional die of damage if they managed to roll in the critical range for their weapon type. Then based upon how well they rolled, I would make up some description of the injury they managed to inflict, trying to keep it in the spirit of the original grievous injury descriptions.
> I never have. I've always winged it, too. Part of the problem is that many larger-sized creatures are non-humanoid, and results would have to be adjusted for insects/arachnoids, flying things, etc.
>

I've allowed my players to "run" thus doubling their TMRs, but only in a straight line, and they lose their entire defense.

--- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "Ran Hardin" <dantalion64@...> wrote:
>
> Hmmm... I've never given this much thought. My only explanation is that in combat, you're not *sprinting* to the exclusion of all else, but moving quickly while keeping ready to suddenly stop, attack, defend, change direction, etc., which is why it's called the *Tactical* Movement Rate. There are other RPGs that have rules providing for increased movement in combat at the expense of defensive capability... maybe double TMR with a -10 to defense? -15? More?
>
> --- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "tmckelvey77089" <tmckelvey77089@> wrote:
> >
> > The real world examples I gave (cheetah and quarterhorse) are most likely in ideal conditions over a short term.
> >
> > One of the things that got me thinking about making changes to some of the TMR numbers was the Cheetah. The Dragonquest listing for it gives a special rule for its TMR to be reduced after a short period of time, reflecting the Cheetah's fast sprint speed over the short haul. That implies that its rated TMR is full tilt boogie, which seemed far too slow.
> >
> > I understand the Movement Rate is for use during the chase phase and therefore a long term average, but on the tactical level where TMR is involved they seemed slow.
> >
> >
> > --- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, Mike or Carmen Dugan <mikenmenchie@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Posted by: "tmckelvey77089" tmckelvey77089@ tmckelvey77089
> > > > One of the things about the DQ rules that always bothered me was the
> > > > movement speeds, both TMR and Movement Rates.
> > > > By and large they all seem very slow in comparison to real world
> > > > examples.
> > > >
> > > > Examples:
> > > > Cheetah
> > > > Movement Rate/TMR = 1200/24
> > > >
> > > > That works out to a running speed of about 40 mph, which is way off
> > > > the real world speed of closer to 70. The listing for Cheetah ncludes
> > > > a note that their Movement rate should be quartered after a few
> > > > minutes due to tiring.
> > >
> > > 70 is the TOP recorded speed, and IIRC - for only a few seconds...
> > >
> > > > Quarterhorse
> > > > Movement Rate/TMR = 600/12
> > > >
> > > > That puts the DQ Quarterhorse at about 20 mph, compared to its real
> > > > world counterpart at about 45 mph
> > >
> > > On a race track, or in an open field?
> > >
> > > > Most of the other creatures in DQ show similar disparities.
> > > >
> > > > Has anyone tried to tweak these stats to make them more realistic?
> > > > In the past I've simply let allowed extra Movement/TMR for flat out
> > > > unencumbered running, but that doesnt really work very well. going
> > > > through and changing all the TMR listings of all animals would by
> > > > my next best option.
> > > >
> > > > Interestingly, the humanoid TMR rates are some of the closest to real
> > > > world examples.
> > >
> > > Most people are more familiar with those, I'd imagine.
> > >
> >
>

Here is the rule I use in my campaign:

The Maximum speed of a character in combat is his TMR doubled. A
character who is moving faster than his TMR during a round will be at a
minus to all of his actions during that round, a -5 per point of
movement over his TMR (i.e. a person with a TMR of 12 moving at 18,
would have a penalty on all actions other than running of -30). A figure
may crawl at a rate of ¼ of his TMR (round all fractions down).


Joe Peterson wrote:

>
>
> I've allowed my players to "run" thus doubling their TMRs, but only in
> a straight line, and they lose their entire defense.
>
> --- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com <mailto:dq-rules%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "Ran Hardin" <dantalion64@...> wrote:
> >
> > Hmmm... I've never given this much thought. My only explanation is
> that in combat, you're not *sprinting* to the exclusion of all else,
> but moving quickly while keeping ready to suddenly stop, attack,
> defend, change direction, etc., which is why it's called the
> *Tactical* Movement Rate. There are other RPGs that have rules
> providing for increased movement in combat at the expense of defensive
> capability... maybe double TMR with a -10 to defense? -15? More?
> >
> > --- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com <mailto:dq-rules%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "tmckelvey77089" <tmckelvey77089@> wrote:
> > >
> > > The real world examples I gave (cheetah and quarterhorse) are most
> likely in ideal conditions over a short term.
> > >
> > > One of the things that got me thinking about making changes to
> some of the TMR numbers was the Cheetah. The Dragonquest listing for
> it gives a special rule for its TMR to be reduced after a short period
> of time, reflecting the Cheetah's fast sprint speed over the short
> haul. That implies that its rated TMR is full tilt boogie, which
> seemed far too slow.
> > >
> > > I understand the Movement Rate is for use during the chase phase
> and therefore a long term average, but on the tactical level where TMR
> is involved they seemed slow.
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:dq-rules%40yahoogroups.com>, Mike or Carmen Dugan
> <mikenmenchie@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Posted by: "tmckelvey77089" tmckelvey77089@ tmckelvey77089
> > > > > One of the things about the DQ rules that always bothered me
> was the
> > > > > movement speeds, both TMR and Movement Rates.
> > > > > By and large they all seem very slow in comparison to real world
> > > > > examples.
> > > > >
> > > > > Examples:
> > > > > Cheetah
> > > > > Movement Rate/TMR = 1200/24
> > > > >
> > > > > That works out to a running speed of about 40 mph, which is
> way off
> > > > > the real world speed of closer to 70. The listing for Cheetah
> ncludes
> > > > > a note that their Movement rate should be quartered after a few
> > > > > minutes due to tiring.
> > > >
> > > > 70 is the TOP recorded speed, and IIRC - for only a few seconds...
> > > >
> > > > > Quarterhorse
> > > > > Movement Rate/TMR = 600/12
> > > > >
> > > > > That puts the DQ Quarterhorse at about 20 mph, compared to its
> real
> > > > > world counterpart at about 45 mph
> > > >
> > > > On a race track, or in an open field?
> > > >
> > > > > Most of the other creatures in DQ show similar disparities.
> > > > >
> > > > > Has anyone tried to tweak these stats to make them more
> realistic?
> > > > > In the past I've simply let allowed extra Movement/TMR for
> flat out
> > > > > unencumbered running, but that doesnt really work very well.
> going
> > > > > through and changing all the TMR listings of all animals would by
> > > > > my next best option.
> > > > >
> > > > > Interestingly, the humanoid TMR rates are some of the closest
> to real
> > > > > world examples.
> > > >
> > > > Most people are more familiar with those, I'd imagine.
>

well have know 'lightened' some of the skills
played it at a few UK cons and all gone down well
currently have 6 pregens i use in this capacity
have an excellent large laminated map of London 1865 to scribble on in game
 
could upload a few files if theres any interest
 
most rules chnages are in my head, so need to formally write them down
 
johnD
 

---

To: dq-rules@yahoogroups.com
From:
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2007 19:32:05 +0000
Subject: [dq-rules] Re: Victorian-Quest: rule changes / magic (long-ish)

---

View your Twitter and Flickr updates from one place – Learn more!

My player has an AG of 26. Now the rules state that if the character has an Agility of 26 or higher he may combine various actions including melee attack with a charge.

Since this means that the character gains two attacks how should this be handled? My player has suggested that both attacks get the same penalty [-10% from a weapon in a primary hand]. I've always understood the rule to be suggesting an increase of -10% with each attack. e.g. first attack -10%, next attack -20%.

What do you think?

Attachments :

Hi,

First of all, he need to have AG 26 Modify. That mean, with equipment and armor discounts.

And them, no penalty apply. Follow the rules from the book. He can combine certain kind of actions descripted there.

Enjoy.

Gabriel.

________________________________

De: dq-rules@yahoogroups.com en nombre de christopherdargan
Enviado el: dom 06/09/2009 6:55
Para: dq-rules@yahoogroups.com
Asunto: [dq-rules] I have a problem




My player has an AG of 26. Now the rules state that if the character has an Agility of 26 or higher he may combine various actions including melee attack with a charge.

Since this means that the character gains two attacks how should this be handled? My player has suggested that both attacks get the same penalty [-10% from a weapon in a primary hand]. I've always understood the rule to be suggesting an increase of -10% with each attack. e.g. first attack -10%, next attack -20%.

What do you think?

Hi guys, good to see there is some fife in this old forum :)

How do u use double and triple effects for spell damage? I was thinking of a house rule where instead of double damage a player could elect to damage endurance for normal damage, or for a triple effect could do double damage to endurance instead of the effect to fatigue.

In short imagine a earth mage casts earth hammer at rnk20 for a triple effect d10+15 X 3 damage (ouch) what I dont like is he(or she) could never kill with the spell with even the most successfull attack, due maily to the fatigue having to be overcome first. So I was thinking of the above house rule, or would u suggest something else?

I find the book rule to multipling the range also a strange one, as a player would rarely attempt a spell beyond its casting range, but thats another tale.

Thanks for your thoughts in advance

Les

There are already instant death spells in the book. So it takes two spells
to kill someone, big deal.

~Jeffery~

----- Original Message -----
From: "lesnicholls71" <leslienicholls@blueyonder.co.uk>
To: <dq-rules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 4:41 AM
Subject: [dq-rules] Double and triple spell effects


> Hi guys, good to see there is some fife in this old forum :)
>
> How do u use double and triple effects for spell damage? I was thinking
> of a house rule where instead of double damage a player could elect to
> damage endurance for normal damage, or for a triple effect could do double
> damage to endurance instead of the effect to fatigue.
>
> In short imagine a earth mage casts earth hammer at rnk20 for a triple
> effect d10+15 X 3 damage (ouch) what I dont like is he(or she) could
> never kill with the spell with even the most successfull attack, due maily
> to the fatigue having to be overcome first. So I was thinking of the
> above house rule, or would u suggest something else?
>
> I find the book rule to multipling the range also a strange one, as a
> player would rarely attempt a spell beyond its casting range, but thats
> another tale.
>
> Thanks for your thoughts in advance
>
> Les
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> To Post a message, send it to: dq-rules@eGroups.com
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
> dq-rules-unsubscribe@eGroups.comYahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

always disliked that to
 
sword can do 13 damage an effectively down someone for good
spell can do 36 points damage and not down them for good
 
DQ is a marvellous beast but does have some wierd anomalies in its thinking, i feel
 
john

---

To: dq-rules@yahoogroups.com
From: igmod@comcast.net
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2009 06:34:36 -0700
Subject: Re: [dq-rules] Double and triple spell effects

 

IMO, Targeting Endurance with a spell is too powerful. You are trying to turn a low Exp Mult attack spell into a death spell by a backdoor rule on targeting endurance. If the mage wants to kill a target in one casting, use the death spell (Sinking Doom).

However, you are free to create whatever rules float your boat in your own game.

Mark

--- On Wed, 9/9/09, dq-rules@yahoogroups.com <dq-rules@yahoogroups.com> wrote:

> 1. Double and triple spell effects
>     Posted by: "lesnicholls71" leslienicholls@blueyonder.co.uk
> lesnicholls71
>     Date: Wed Sep 9, 2009 4:42 am ((PDT))
>
> Hi guys, good to see there is some fife in this old forum
> :)
>
> How do u use double and triple effects for spell
> damage?  I was thinking of a house rule where instead
> of double damage a player could elect to damage endurance
> for normal damage, or for a triple effect could do double
> damage to endurance instead of the  effect to
> fatigue.   
>
> In short imagine a earth mage casts earth hammer at rnk20
> for a triple effect d10+15  X  3 damage
> (ouch)  what I dont like is he(or she) could never kill
> with the spell with even the most successfull attack, due
> maily to the fatigue having to be overcome first.  So I
> was thinking of the above house rule, or would u suggest
> something else?
>
> I find the book rule to multipling the range also a strange
> one, as a player would rarely attempt a spell beyond its
> casting range, but thats another tale.
>
> Thanks for your thoughts in advance
>
> Les

As Gabriel said, it is a Modified Agility of 26 or above.

---

> [15.3] Figures with modified Agilities of
> 26 and above may combine any two of
> the following actions in a single Pulse:
> Melee attack, Evade, Withdraw, Pass.
> Close and Grapple, Grapple. Charge,
> Charge and Close. Retreat, and Fire.

And there would be no penalties. They are just that fast.

Myself, I have always made them take one action on their IV and then the 2nd after everyone else in the melee group or unengaged group.

--- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "christopherdargan" <imperium1@...> wrote:
>
> My player has an AG of 26. Now the rules state that if the character has an Agility of 26 or higher he may combine various actions including melee attack with a charge.
>
> Since this means that the character gains two attacks how should this be handled? My player has suggested that both attacks get the same penalty [-10% from a weapon in a primary hand]. I've always understood the rule to be suggesting an increase of -10% with each attack. e.g. first attack -10%, next attack -20%.
>
> What do you think?
>

That is one of the oddities of DQ. One good sword hit can kill anyone but a blast of fire with a total greater than both EN & FT combined merely makes a guy tired.

Here is an idea. How about on a double or triple effect you apply the damage as two or three separate damage totals. Would still take a triple effect to actually kill someone unless the adept is quite skilled.

Example: Rank 10 Bolt of Fire. (D-5)+10 damage. Say against a mediocre EN 15 / FT 20 human and a better than average damage roll of (7-5)+10 for 12 pts. On a double both would be used up on FT. 20-12 for 8 and then 8 - 12 for 0 FT. A triple effect would pretty much guarantee taking an average foe out of the fight at the very least.

--- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "lesnicholls71" <leslienicholls@...> wrote:
>
> Hi guys, good to see there is some fife in this old forum :)
>
> How do u use double and triple effects for spell damage? I was thinking of a house rule where instead of double damage a player could elect to damage endurance for normal damage, or for a triple effect could do double damage to endurance instead of the effect to fatigue.
>
> In short imagine a earth mage casts earth hammer at rnk20 for a triple effect d10+15 X 3 damage (ouch) what I dont like is he(or she) could never kill with the spell with even the most successfull attack, due maily to the fatigue having to be overcome first. So I was thinking of the above house rule, or would u suggest something else?
>
> I find the book rule to multipling the range also a strange one, as a player would rarely attempt a spell beyond its casting range, but thats another tale.
>
> Thanks for your thoughts in advance
>
> Les
>

I've always counted those against MA requirements for a college.

It is pretty rare however for anyone starting an adept to not have 20 or so in MA in our campaigns.

--- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "tmckelvey77089" <tmckelvey77089@...> wrote:
>
> To calculate the minimum MA needed for someone to learn a magic college I've traditionally totaled the general knowledge spells and rituals of the college then added 3 to cover the 2 counterspells and the ritual of purification (32.2). I originally excluded 32.1 Ritual Spell Preparation (because it was unranked General Knowledge).
>
> I'm reconsidering that and may include it in the calculation to determine minimum MA.
>
> Is that how you all have been calculating Minimum MA?
>
> Including those 4 would place the minumum MA for Lesser Summonings at 20 and Shamanism (per "Things Spiritual" by David Barrass, et al) at 24...making them the two most demanding colleges (in that respect)in my campaign.
>

That's the way I do it.

~Jeffery~

----- Original Message -----
From: "darkislephil" <darkislephil@yahoo.com>
To: <dq-rules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 7:13 PM
Subject: [dq-rules] Re: I have a problem


> As Gabriel said, it is a Modified Agility of 26 or above.
>
> ---
>> [15.3] Figures with modified Agilities of
>> 26 and above may combine any two of
>> the following actions in a single Pulse:
>> Melee attack, Evade, Withdraw, Pass.
>> Close and Grapple, Grapple. Charge,
>> Charge and Close. Retreat, and Fire.
>
> And there would be no penalties. They are just that fast.
>
> Myself, I have always made them take one action on their IV and then the
> 2nd after everyone else in the melee group or unengaged group.
>
>
>
> --- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "christopherdargan" <imperium1@...>
> wrote:
>>
>> My player has an AG of 26. Now the rules state that if the character has
>> an Agility of 26 or higher he may combine various actions including melee
>> attack with a charge.
>>
>> Since this means that the character gains two attacks how should this be
>> handled? My player has suggested that both attacks get the same penalty
>> [-10% from a weapon in a primary hand]. I've always understood the rule
>> to be suggesting an increase of -10% with each attack. e.g. first
>> attack -10%, next attack -20%.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> To Post a message, send it to: dq-rules@eGroups.com
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
> dq-rules-unsubscribe@eGroups.comYahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

NOTE: There may be some funky formatting when I post this. I cut and
pasted this from a word file and it went kinda wonky.


Here are the rules we use in my campaign. We have been using these
rules since the 80's and they have served us well. Note this applies to
both Weapons and Magical damage.

*_DAMAGE EFFECTS:_*

If hit is a normal fatigue shot, armor reduces damage taken. If hit is
large enough so there are points left after fatigue is gone, the rest of
the damage is ignored.


If fatigue hit does more than 20 points in a single shot, damage left
after fatigue is gone bleeds over at 3 for 1 (i.e. 6 points of damage
would do 2 points of endurance damage).


If Fatigue hit does more than 40 points in a single shot damage bleeds
over into endurance at 1 for 1.


If shot is a critical hit damage goes straight to Endurance and armor
doesn't help. In addition armor is reduced by one point of protection
if weapon is a class B or C weapon. Exception: Unarmed Combat does not
reduce armor protection.


If shot is a Grievous wound person rolls on grievous wound table to see
if it is indeed. If so, result is inflicted on target. Armor is also
reduced if Applicable. A person may declare a grievous wound hit his
shield (if Carried) if he desires. If so, the grievous is ignored and
the shield is destroyed. The target must declare this before the result
of the grievous is rolled.






Mark D wrote:

>
>
> IMO, Targeting Endurance with a spell is too powerful. You are trying
> to turn a low Exp Mult attack spell into a death spell by a backdoor
> rule on targeting endurance. If the mage wants to kill a target in one
> casting, use the death spell (Sinking Doom).
>
> However, you are free to create whatever rules float your boat in your
> own game.
>
> Mark
>
> --- On Wed, 9/9/09, dq-rules@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:dq-rules%40yahoogroups.com> <dq-rules@yahoogroups.com
> <mailto:dq-rules%40yahoogroups.com>> wrote:
>
> > 1. Double and triple spell effects
> > Posted by: "lesnicholls71" leslienicholls@blueyonder.co.uk
> <mailto:leslienicholls%40blueyonder.co.uk>
> > lesnicholls71
> > Date: Wed Sep 9, 2009 4:42 am ((PDT))
> >
> > Hi guys, good to see there is some fife in this old forum
> > :)
> >
> > How do u use double and triple effects for spell
> > damage? I was thinking of a house rule where instead
> > of double damage a player could elect to damage endurance
> > for normal damage, or for a triple effect could do double
> > damage to endurance instead of the effect to
> > fatigue.
> >
> > In short imagine a earth mage casts earth hammer at rnk20
> > for a triple effect d10+15 X 3 damage
> > (ouch) what I dont like is he(or she) could never kill
> > with the spell with even the most successfull attack, due
> > maily to the fatigue having to be overcome first. So I
> > was thinking of the above house rule, or would u suggest
> > something else?
> >
> > I find the book rule to multipling the range also a strange
> > one, as a player would rarely attempt a spell beyond its
> > casting range, but thats another tale.
> >
> > Thanks for your thoughts in advance
> >
> > Les
>
>

Hmmmm. Along that line of thought, one GM I played under used a 1:1 bleed over from a damage source from Fatigue to Endurance all the time for everything. That didn't work so bad...a bit more deadly, but it is a much better approach than targeting Endurance specifically with spells (double and triple effects) as Les suggested. Under this way, any damage could effectively drop people in one hit if the source did enough damage to overcome the target's current Fatigue and Endurance combined.

Mark

--- On Fri, 9/11/09, dq-rules@yahoogroups.com <dq-rules@yahoogroups.com> wrote:


> 2a. Re: Double and triple spell effects
>     Posted by: "Jason Winter" JasonWinter@scicable.com
> pheyn_vyata
>     Date: Thu Sep 10, 2009 12:30 pm ((PDT))
>
> NOTE: There may be some funky formatting when I post
> this.  I cut and
> pasted this from a word file and it went kinda wonky.
>
>
> Here are the rules we use in my campaign.  We have
> been using these
> rules since the 80's and they have served us well. 
> Note this applies to
> both Weapons and Magical damage.
>
> *_DAMAGE EFFECTS:_*
>
> If hit is a normal fatigue shot, armor reduces damage
> taken.  If hit is
> large enough so there are points left after fatigue is
> gone, the rest of
> the damage is ignored.
>
>
> If fatigue hit does more than 20 points in a single shot,
> damage left
> after fatigue is gone bleeds over at 3 for 1 (i.e. 6 points
> of damage
> would do 2 points of endurance damage).
>
>
> If Fatigue hit does more than 40 points in a single shot
> damage bleeds
> over into endurance at 1 for 1.
>
>
> If shot is a critical hit damage goes straight to Endurance
> and armor
> doesn't help.  In addition armor is reduced by one
> point of protection
> if weapon is a class B or C weapon.  Exception:
> Unarmed Combat does not
> reduce armor protection.
>
>
> If shot is a Grievous wound person rolls on grievous wound
> table to see
> if it is indeed.  If so, result is inflicted on
> target.  Armor is also
> reduced if Applicable.  A person may declare a
> grievous wound hit his
> shield (if Carried) if he desires.  If so, the
> grievous is ignored and
> the shield is destroyed. The target must declare this
> before the result
> of the grievous is rolled.

That's what I do (in a campaign that is DQ-inspired but not quite DQ).

I have a Q on another subject. What do folks think about the balance,
as characters grow stronger, between spells and the ability resist
them? I read the rules as saying that resistance generally does not
increase (except for the one-time big pulse from learning the relevant
counterspell).

Chaim


Hmmmm. Along that line of thought, one GM I played under used a 1:1
bleed over from a damage source from Fatigue to Endurance all the time
for everything. That didn't work so bad...a bit more deadly, but it is a
much better approach than targeting Endurance specifically with spells
(double and triple effects) as Les suggested. Under this way, any damage
could effectively drop people in one hit if the source did enough damage
to overcome the target's current Fatigue and Endurance combined.

Mark



--
Chaim Kaufmann
Associate Professor
International Relations
Lehigh University
ck07@lehigh.edu

Allow the characters to purchase of Ritual of Enchantment. Of course it
affects more than MR.

~Jeffery~

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chaim Kaufmann" <ck07@lehigh.edu>
To: <dq-rules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2009 6:04 PM
Subject: [dq-rules] DQ rules


> That's what I do (in a campaign that is DQ-inspired but not quite DQ).
>
> I have a Q on another subject. What do folks think about the balance,
> as characters grow stronger, between spells and the ability resist
> them? I read the rules as saying that resistance generally does not
> increase (except for the one-time big pulse from learning the relevant
> counterspell).
>
> Chaim
>
>
> Hmmmm. Along that line of thought, one GM I played under used a 1:1
> bleed over from a damage source from Fatigue to Endurance all the time
> for everything. That didn't work so bad...a bit more deadly, but it is a
> much better approach than targeting Endurance specifically with spells
> (double and triple effects) as Les suggested. Under this way, any damage
> could effectively drop people in one hit if the source did enough damage
> to overcome the target's current Fatigue and Endurance combined.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> --
> Chaim Kaufmann
> Associate Professor
> International Relations
> Lehigh University
> ck07@lehigh.edu
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> To Post a message, send it to: dq-rules@eGroups.com
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
> dq-rules-unsubscribe@eGroups.comYahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

--- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, Chaim Kaufmann <ck07@...> wrote:

> I have a Q on another subject. What do folks think about
> the balance, as characters grow stronger, between spells
> and the ability resist them?

Never really seen it as an issue. Any non-adept has 25% minimum resistance and more likely 30-35% if they are smart enough to put any points in their Willpower.

Given that an Adept's chance of casting most damage spells starts low and creeps up very slowly do you really want what few spells your player adepts successfully cast getting resisted all the time? (If the PCs get to raise their resistance so do the NPCs.)

Of course with counter-spells and invested items with counter-spells the adventuring group has options to improve their defenses against spell-casters. Just requires they invest some time and/or money.

Hello all,

Last contact had with old school RPGs was via D&D in the early to mid 80s. Looking at getting back into it and after being introduced to the DragonQuest rules, liked what I saw and tracked down a copy (ended up with a decent 1st edition set).

What are the differences between 1st and 2nd edition? I've also heard that DQ was mangled in 3rd ed. by TSR, is this true? Finally, with all of the OGL old school D&D clones floating around out there, I am curious to know if anyone has attempted this with DQ.

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

From: paladin3970

To: dq-rules@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Monday, November 09, 2009 5:03 PM

Subject: [dq-rules] Noob questions

 

Hello all,

Last contact had with old school RPGs was via D&D in the early to mid 80s. Looking at getting back into it and after being introduced to the DragonQuest rules, liked what I saw and tracked down a copy (ended up with a decent 1st edition set).

What are the differences between 1st and 2nd edition? I've also heard that DQ was mangled in 3rd ed. by TSR, is this true? Finally, with all of the OGL old school D&D clones floating around out there, I am curious to know if anyone has attempted this with DQ.

Yup - still remember my first Dungeons and Dragons Basic Set (1st ed). Played that for about a year before having to replace it with a string of Tom Moldvay editions. I say "string" because that was about the time my mother decided that D&D was bad and started trashing them. It became a game of cat and mouse keeping them hidden :) Would play at lunch in the school library. Those were the days!

Finally gave up because I got tired of blowing what money I could scratch together to buy a new set.

Thanks for the info!

--- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "Les nicholls" <leslienicholls@...> wrote:
>
> Excellent another RPG elder joins us :) I'm not sure what was changed betwen the 2 issues wp*2+ft to get out of stun was 1 change from wp+ft. A great source of information is DQWiki which has TONNS of Dq stuff, I think they have lists of updates and errata there also like the following website I will link for u:
>
> http://portalkeepersofgrayrock.com/
>
>
> Les
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: paladin3970
> To: dq-rules@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, November 09, 2009 5:03 PM
> Subject: [dq-rules] Noob questions
>
>
>
> Hello all,
>
> Last contact had with old school RPGs was via D&D in the early to mid 80s. Looking at getting back into it and after being introduced to the DragonQuest rules, liked what I saw and tracked down a copy (ended up with a decent 1st edition set).
>
> What are the differences between 1st and 2nd edition? I've also heard that DQ was mangled in 3rd ed. by TSR, is this true? Finally, with all of the OGL old school D&D clones floating around out there, I am curious to know if anyone has attempted this with DQ.
>

The only difference between 1st & 2nd are the combat rules. 2nd simplifies
them.

~Jeffery~

----- Original Message -----
From: "paladin3970" <paladin3970@yahoo.com>
To: <dq-rules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, November 09, 2009 9:03 AM
Subject: [dq-rules] Noob questions


> Hello all,
>
> Last contact had with old school RPGs was via D&D in the early to mid 80s.
> Looking at getting back into it and after being introduced to the
> DragonQuest rules, liked what I saw and tracked down a copy (ended up with
> a decent 1st edition set).
>
> What are the differences between 1st and 2nd edition? I've also heard that
> DQ was mangled in 3rd ed. by TSR, is this true? Finally, with all of the
> OGL old school D&D clones floating around out there, I am curious to know
> if anyone has attempted this with DQ.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> To Post a message, send it to: dq-rules@eGroups.com
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to:
> dq-rules-unsubscribe@eGroups.comYahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

Since I am easing back into RPGs, I have been meandering about the web to what there is to see. Ran across the "retro-clone" RPGs such as Labyrinth Lord - now that's some old school stuff!

Got me to wondering, has anyone attempted this with DragonQuest? Seems to me that what is happening is a restating of the rules in a different wording.

Just curious.

Hi, all! Report from Denver, Colorado, USA: New DragonQuest campaign under way. Players and GM (me) having a great time! Gaming session number 3 set for next Thursday night. Thanks for all the great materials posted to this and the other DQ groups on Yahoo!

Question: I note on the weapon table that both dagger and hand axe have a range of 8. That's feet, right? Doesn't that seem a bit short? Since a hex on the tactical display is 5 feet, side to side, could a dagger thrown 8 feet go beyond an adjacent hex? I think 10 feet would make more sense since it would allow the dagger to travel from the center of the figure's hex, through an adjacent hex, and to the center of the next hex along its path.

Any rule interpretations or house rules on this?

Thanks in advance!

- Brock

Brock,

The weapon ranges in the table are in Hexes and not feet.

--- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, "brockrwood" <brockrwood@...> wrote:
> Question: I note on the weapon table that both dagger and hand axe have a range of 8. That's feet, right? Doesn't that seem a bit short? Since a hex on the tactical display is 5 feet, side to side, could a dagger thrown 8 feet go beyond an adjacent hex? I think 10 feet would make more sense since it would allow the dagger to travel from the center of the figure's hex, through an adjacent hex, and to the center of the next hex along its path.

The range is hexes, not feet. And remember the distance modifier is per
hex, not per 5 hexes as it is with bows and crossbows.

RT

brockrwood wrote:

> Hi, all! Report from Denver, Colorado, USA: New DragonQuest campaign under way. Players and GM (me) having a great time! Gaming session number 3 set for next Thursday night. Thanks for all the great materials posted to this and the other DQ groups on Yahoo!
>
> Question: I note on the weapon table that both dagger and hand axe have a range of 8. That's feet, right? Doesn't that seem a bit short? Since a hex on the tactical display is 5 feet, side to side, could a dagger thrown 8 feet go beyond an adjacent hex? I think 10 feet would make more sense since it would allow the dagger to travel from the center of the figure's hex, through an adjacent hex, and to the center of the next hex along its path.
>
> Any rule interpretations or house rules on this?
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> - Brock

Thanks, Dennis, Rodger, and Paul!

My goof. I saw the range for long bow (180) and the range for composite bow (225) and assumed, foolishly, that the distances for ranged weapons were stated in feet, not believing that a bow could have the long range implied if the distances were stated in hexes.

I did, after some searching through the rulebook, find this issue defined in section 20.2. Sorry, this is a "RTFM" question, huh?

So the maximum range for a hand axe or dagger, when thrown, is 40 feet, with a significant accuracy penalty for each hex through which it travels.

Still, the range and accuracy of the long bow and composite bow in DragonQuest is pretty darned good. At a distance of 100 feet (20 hexes), the penalty for distance is only -9. Not bad.

Just FYI, here is what wikipedia says about the range of the English Longbow:


--- snip ---

Range

The range of the medieval weapon is unknown, with estimates from 165 to 228 m (180 to 249 yds). Modern longbows have a useful range up to 180 m (200 yd). A 667N(150 lbf) Mary Rose replica longbow was able to shoot a 53.6 g (1.9 oz) arrow 328.0 m (360 yd) and a 95.9 g (3.3 oz) a distance of 249.9 m (272 yd).[12] A flight arrow of a professional archer of Edward III's time would reach 400yds. It is also well known that no practice range was allowed to be less than 220yds by order of Henry VIII.[13]

The longbow had a long range and high accuracy, but not both at the same time. Most of the longer range shooting mentioned in stories was not marksmanship, but rather thousands of archers launching volleys of arrows at an entire army. Longbowmen armies would aim at an area and shoot a rain of arrows hitting indiscriminately at anyone in the area, a decidedly un-chivalrous but highly effective means of combat. An archer could hit a person at 165 m (180 yards) "part of the time" and could always hit an army.[citation needed]

"At the siege of Abergavenny in 1182 the Welsh arrows penetrated an oak door four inches thick. They were allowed to remain there as a curiosity, and Gerald (Giraldus Cambrensis) himself saw them six years later in 1188 when he passed the castle, with the iron points just showing on the inner side of the door. A knight of William de Braose was hit by one which went through the skirt of his hauberk,his mail hose, his thigh, and then through the leather and wood of his saddle into his horse; when he swerved round, another arrow pinned him the same way by the other leg.[14]

--- snip ---

- Brock

--- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, Rodger Thorm <rthorm@...> wrote:
>
> The range is hexes, not feet. And remember the distance modifier is per
> hex, not per 5 hexes as it is with bows and crossbows.
>
> RT
>
> brockrwood wrote:
> > Hi, all! Report from Denver, Colorado, USA: New DragonQuest campaign under way. Players and GM (me) having a great time! Gaming session number 3 set for next Thursday night. Thanks for all the great materials posted to this and the other DQ groups on Yahoo!
> >
> > Question: I note on the weapon table that both dagger and hand axe have a range of 8. That's feet, right? Doesn't that seem a bit short? Since a hex on the tactical display is 5 feet, side to side, could a dagger thrown 8 feet go beyond an adjacent hex? I think 10 feet would make more sense since it would allow the dagger to travel from the center of the figure's hex, through an adjacent hex, and to the center of the next hex along its path.
> >
> > Any rule interpretations or house rules on this?
> >
> > Thanks in advance!
> >
> > - Brock
>

FWIW,

In my own game I have used--based on my own reading of the relevant
military history, and as a usable maximum range at which one might hit
something by better than chance--300' to 400' for shortbows, 600' for
longbows, various numbers in that range for composite bows. For
selfbows (hand-pulled crossbows), 240' or 300'. For wound crossbows,
400' to 1000' depending on size.

Chaim Kaufmann



--
Chaim Kaufmann
Associate Professor
International Relations
Lehigh University
ck07@lehigh.edu

I'm trying to find a good way to handle characters being able to learn specific sub-skills, which are normally encompassed by a Major Skill.

For instance, say somebody wants to learn to be able to pick a lock but doesnt want to learn the entire Thief or Spy skill.

I'd be interested in knowing how others have handled this situation.

> I'm trying to find a good way to handle characters being able to learn
> specific sub-skills, which are normally encompassed by a Major Skill.
>
> For instance, say somebody wants to learn to be able to pick a lock but
> doesnt want to learn the entire Thief or Spy skill.
>
> I'd be interested in knowing how others have handled this situation.
>

The equivalent of "cross-class" have always been a bit of an issue in DQ.
The game system breaks down spells and weapons into individual skills but
everything else is profession-based.

Perhaps one option would be to break up the skills into individual
subskills each with their own experience point cost and with a 'bulk
discount' for purchasing the entire set.

I'm trying to find a good way to handle characters being able to learn specific sub-skills, which are normally encompassed by a Major Skill. For instance, say somebody wants to learn to be able to pick a lock but doesnt want to learn the entire Thief or Spy skill. I'd be interested in knowing how others have handled this situation. *****   I liked the suggestion of breaking professions into sub-classes. That would seem to work for a lot of situations besides this example. But we have always taken the simple but awkward position of requiring purchase of the entire profession set, on the basis of finding someone to teach the skill would require entering into training (of some sort) for the whole kit. Who is going to teach the character to pick locks? If you don't have sub-classes, then it would have to be a full-kit thief... which would lead to an introduction to each of the other sub-class skills as well (like it or not...) Not the best answer, but the simplest.

--- In dq-rules@yahoogroups.com, lev@... wrote:

>
> > I'm trying to find a good way to handle characters being able to learn
> > specific sub-skills, which are normally encompassed by a Major Skill.
> >
> > For instance, say somebody wants to learn to be able to pick a lock but
> > doesnt want to learn the entire Thief or Spy skill.
> >
> > I'd be interested in knowing how others have handled this situation.
> >
>
> The equivalent of "cross-class" have always been a bit of an issue in DQ.
> The game system breaks down spells and weapons into individual skills but
> everything else is profession-based.
>
> Perhaps one option would be to break up the skills into individual
> subskills each with their own experience point cost and with a 'bulk
> discount' for purchasing the entire set.
>

Personally, I *like* the profession-based approach in DQ. It makes it easy on the GM, as I don't have to track so many skills for each player. Can some of these skills seem a lot like character "classes" from D&D? Yes, but so be it. You can still have multiple "professions" if you wish.

Just thinking out loud: It would be tedious, but you could identify each separate sub-skill included in the DQ skill in question and then create an experience point cost chart for each of these sub-skills. I would adjust the experience point costs on the new chart for each sub-skill so that the cost of buying all of the sub-skills ndividually is *more* than the cost of the buying the DQ skill that includes all of the sub-skills. The DQ skill should give you a "package" discount, no?

Continuing to think out loud: If you do the above, what you are really doing is taking a specific sub-skill out of a DQ skill and making it an "adventure" skill, such as stealth or horsemanship riding. Many people have added various adventure skills to the game as house rules and this is actually encouraged by the game designers in the 2nd edition rulebook. Climbing, jumping, and swimming are three such skills and some have even been mentioned in magazines and on web sites. I like some of the new adventure skills are handled in the "DQ Open Source" document. You can download it at the http://www.zimlab.com/dq web site run by DQ guru, "Snafaru."

Last thought: I would be careful about creating a separate, new adventure skill that is already included as a sub-skill in a DQ skill if it doesn't make sense for the sub-skill to exist outside of the "profession" DQ skill. For example, some of the sub-skills included within the DQ alchemy skill seem like they would be hard to learn and/or practice unless you were taking on alchemy as a "profession" and were expending money and time to keep your alchemical lab stocked, go to guild meetings, find teachers, etcetera.

- Brock

A player in my DragonQuest campaign wanted to play a D&D "cleric" type of character. Oddly, although there are many references (both explicit and implied) to religious themes in DQ, there is no "cleric" skill in the game. Did the designers intentionally leave this up to the GM? Were the designers actively trying to steer clear of religion when they designed the game?

The solution the player and I came up with was to let him play a mage of the "White Magic" college. This college is included in the "DQ Open Source" document.

Have any of you come up with a different solution?

- Brock

Our folks have usually gone a "Druidic" path with the college of earth magics. Allows a healer focus and can be role played as a faith system.

Sent from my iPhone