Response to moving the group over to a blog is uniformly negative.
And having looked at it a bit further now, it isn't really a format
that is well suited for the sorts of discussions that go on on the
list.

A better idea is probably to use the blog as a personal record of
rules questions and ideas (accessible so that other people can look
things up), but it'll be a personal weblog, rather than a group
project.

So consider the idea of the group weblog officially scrapped. I'll
keep my eye open for other ways that I can host the list that don't
involve Yahoo Groups, but it works well enough for now, and it's easy
for me to access.

That being said, does anyone have any thoughts on the Flexible PB
Stat?

-- Rodger

Attachments :

Anything that gets us off Yahoo I'm up for.

--- message from "rthorm" <dqn@earthlink.net> attached:

_____________________________________________________________
Sluggy.Net: The Sluggy Freelance Community!

_____________________________________________________________
Promote your group and strengthen ties to your members with email@yourgroup.org by Everyone.net http://www.everyone.net/?btn=tag

Does the Seagate Adventurers' Guild have a website?

--- In dq-rules@y..., "rthorm" <dqn@e...> wrote:
> Per the request of the authors of the Seagate Adventurers' Guild
copy
> of the rules (the file named rules.zip), we have removed the
document
> from the Files area.
>
> I believe that most people who are very interested in having a copy
of
> this already have one. If you do not have a copy and are
interested
> in obtainig one, I suggest that you contact the Seagate
Adventurers'
> Guild directly.
>
> -Rodger Thorm

...can be contacted through librarian@dq.sf.org.nz

--- In dq-rules@y..., "jcorey30" <jcorey30@y...> wrote:
> Does the Seagate Adventurers' Guild have a website?

It got me thinking...
I was flamed on another board (and perhaps rightly so, I am not sure
yet. I did not care for how it was done, but I am not sure I can say
the person was wrong) and I had a thought.

This community (DragonQuest) is very protective of private material.
Now obviously, people don't want their hard work stolen, and credit
taken for their work. But I would remind everyone that it is a game,
and one long out of print at that.

Here are a few examples:
About two years ago, I announced that I was trying to put together a
compendium of rules. I contacted several people, and asked if I
could use their stuff. The response was generally good. Most people
said yes. Though many that said yes wanted to make sure they
received proper credit. I asked if a simple inclusion on the cover
page was adequate, many hedged, and asked that they be included next
to the items they included. To sum up, the thought of keeping track
of who sent all the things I had accumulated over the years was
daunting. A lot of the stuff was gained from opinion posts... do I
include all of those? and who posted them?

Sea Gate asked that a copy of the rules they had converted to
electronic format be removed from this site. (not the rules they had
CREATED mind you. just converted to electronic format with some
house rule mods)

What if someone whose material I had included made the same request?
A lot of work for nothing.

(for those of you wondering, my tech writer friend bailed, real life
has intervened, and all of the above reasons have prevented me from
completing the compendium)

I have seen more than one flame war about stolen material over at the
townhall.

Now here is what I am NOT trying to do here:
- Start a flame war
- Suggest that anyone who wants to protect copyrighted material is in
some way not being friendly, or not within his or her rights, or a
valuable part of the community.

Here is what I am trying to suggest:

This is not the strongest online community... and it could be!
Perhaps if we were all a little more communitarian, the game would
benefit. When I conceived a compendium (before I realized what I was
getting into), I thought "wouldn't it be great to have something like
this, for everyone to share". I am not saying I am better than
anyone, who choses otherwise (let me reiterate that as many times as
needed). But if we were more interested in the community, and less
interested in ourselves, we might get far. Perhaps I am wrong. Call
me a commie (or a hypocrite) if you like :-P

Anyone else want to ring in on this one? am I way off base?

PS many people DO put the community very high on their list, and DO
work their ass off for it, Rodger Thorm, Snarafu, John K and others I
am forgetting... don't get me wrong.

I converted 85% of the entire DQ 2nd edition with pictures into MS Word
format and gave it to the DQ community. I have a website up that has some
rules and other crap that anyone is free to use. I personally feel I have
done quite a bit for a game I don't even play, though wish I had the time
and the individuals to play with. This game survives because I am not
nearly alone in doing things like this. Some people want credit, others
don't. I say create the stuff, give credit when you can, and if not, put
the material out there anyone. The odds that you will face a copyright law
suit from using the material of fellow gamers are astronomically low.

----- Original Message -----
From: "jcorey30" <jcorey30@yahoo.com>
To: <dq-rules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2002 1:34 PM
Subject: [dq-rules] Having recently been flamed...


> It got me thinking...
> I was flamed on another board (and perhaps rightly so, I am not sure
> yet. I did not care for how it was done, but I am not sure I can say
> the person was wrong) and I had a thought.
>
> This community (DragonQuest) is very protective of private material.
> Now obviously, people don't want their hard work stolen, and credit
> taken for their work. But I would remind everyone that it is a game,
> and one long out of print at that.
>
> Here are a few examples:
> About two years ago, I announced that I was trying to put together a
> compendium of rules. I contacted several people, and asked if I
> could use their stuff. The response was generally good. Most people
> said yes. Though many that said yes wanted to make sure they
> received proper credit. I asked if a simple inclusion on the cover
> page was adequate, many hedged, and asked that they be included next
> to the items they included. To sum up, the thought of keeping track
> of who sent all the things I had accumulated over the years was
> daunting. A lot of the stuff was gained from opinion posts... do I
> include all of those? and who posted them?
>
> Sea Gate asked that a copy of the rules they had converted to
> electronic format be removed from this site. (not the rules they had
> CREATED mind you. just converted to electronic format with some
> house rule mods)
>
> What if someone whose material I had included made the same request?
> A lot of work for nothing.
>
> (for those of you wondering, my tech writer friend bailed, real life
> has intervened, and all of the above reasons have prevented me from
> completing the compendium)
>
> I have seen more than one flame war about stolen material over at the
> townhall.
>
> Now here is what I am NOT trying to do here:
> - Start a flame war
> - Suggest that anyone who wants to protect copyrighted material is in
> some way not being friendly, or not within his or her rights, or a
> valuable part of the community.
>
> Here is what I am trying to suggest:
>
> This is not the strongest online community... and it could be!
> Perhaps if we were all a little more communitarian, the game would
> benefit. When I conceived a compendium (before I realized what I was
> getting into), I thought "wouldn't it be great to have something like
> this, for everyone to share". I am not saying I am better than
> anyone, who choses otherwise (let me reiterate that as many times as
> needed). But if we were more interested in the community, and less
> interested in ourselves, we might get far. Perhaps I am wrong. Call
> me a commie (or a hypocrite) if you like :-P
>
> Anyone else want to ring in on this one? am I way off base?
>
> PS many people DO put the community very high on their list, and DO
> work their ass off for it, Rodger Thorm, Snarafu, John K and others I
> am forgetting... don't get me wrong.
>
>
>
>
> To Post a message, send it to: dq-rules@eGroups.com
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: dq-rules-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>

I am definitely not an expert on this sort of thing. Having stated
that up front...

I understood that a published OPINION does not have to be credited -
much like a quote. There are no trademarks or copyrights associated
with posting an opinion.

A published IDEA on the other hand is different. Those are apparently
protected under U.S. and sometimes international law.

The guideline I have always used is to look at how the thing was
presented. If it is part of a conversation, then it is probably fair
game for free use. If it was a carefully considered post addressing
something specific, it probably should be credited.

One way to get around this is to publish your material anyway and
include a CYA about how you have tried to credit everybody (and that
means you should credit when you can) and that if anybody feels left
out AND CAN PROVE OWNERSHIP (leave out the highlight - that is the
CYA verbiage) that you will revise. If the publication is electronic,
this is fairly easy to do as long as you use software with some sort
of legacy protection so that you can modify it ten years from now.

How to handle the credits? I recommend a list in an appendix. Much
easier to maintain.

Marty

>It got me thinking...
>I was flamed on another board (and perhaps rightly so, I am not sure
>yet. I did not care for how it was done, but I am not sure I can say
>the person was wrong) and I had a thought.
>
>This community (DragonQuest) is very protective of private material.
>Now obviously, people don't want their hard work stolen, and credit
>taken for their work. But I would remind everyone that it is a game,
>and one long out of print at that.
>
>Here are a few examples:
>About two years ago, I announced that I was trying to put together a
>compendium of rules. I contacted several people, and asked if I
>could use their stuff. The response was generally good. Most people
>said yes. Though many that said yes wanted to make sure they
>received proper credit. I asked if a simple inclusion on the cover
>page was adequate, many hedged, and asked that they be included next
>to the items they included. To sum up, the thought of keeping track
>of who sent all the things I had accumulated over the years was
>daunting. A lot of the stuff was gained from opinion posts... do I
>include all of those? and who posted them?
>
>Sea Gate asked that a copy of the rules they had converted to
>electronic format be removed from this site. (not the rules they had
>CREATED mind you. just converted to electronic format with some
>house rule mods)
>
>What if someone whose material I had included made the same request?
>A lot of work for nothing.
>
>(for those of you wondering, my tech writer friend bailed, real life
>has intervened, and all of the above reasons have prevented me from
>completing the compendium)
>
>I have seen more than one flame war about stolen material over at the
>townhall.
>
>Now here is what I am NOT trying to do here:
>- Start a flame war
>- Suggest that anyone who wants to protect copyrighted material is in
>some way not being friendly, or not within his or her rights, or a
>valuable part of the community.
>
>Here is what I am trying to suggest:
>
>This is not the strongest online community... and it could be!
>Perhaps if we were all a little more communitarian, the game would
>benefit. When I conceived a compendium (before I realized what I was
>getting into), I thought "wouldn't it be great to have something like
>this, for everyone to share". I am not saying I am better than
>anyone, who choses otherwise (let me reiterate that as many times as
>needed). But if we were more interested in the community, and less
>interested in ourselves, we might get far. Perhaps I am wrong. Call
>me a commie (or a hypocrite) if you like :-P
>
>Anyone else want to ring in on this one? am I way off base?
>
>PS many people DO put the community very high on their list, and DO
>work their ass off for it, Rodger Thorm, Snarafu, John K and others I
>am forgetting... don't get me wrong.
>
>
>
>
>To Post a message, send it to: dq-rules@eGroups.com
>To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: dq-rules-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

--
Always in motion is the future.
Yoda

I practice Ty-Fu, the art of slaughtering what I type.

"Learn from the mistakes of others. You won't live long enough to
make them all yourself."
Unknown

There's always someone better than you, but you're never as bad as
some think you are."
Rip Torn

Having recently done some flaming, I would suggest giving credit where
possible. In addition, I would also suggest not releasing or offering
material to others if that violates any understanding that you had with
the author or creator.

In addition, I would suggest that if you intend to break any such
agreement, do it privately, don't offer it in a public forum.

I think those might be some common sense guidelines.

Craig Brain

I have to agree with you John, I was wrong to be so discourteous in the
manner in which I responded to your post. For that I apologise. I sent a
what & why email to you last night when I got home from work, which I
hope explains my point of view on the situation properly, and what I
hope to achieve,

Regards

Craig Brain

Let's clear the fog...

NOTE: A lot has been written about this lately, so this this message is
general and not targeted at anyone, this is not a flame, it is just to
clarify things.

TO THE MATTER OF GATHERING RULES : Indeed, this is about 2 years ago when
the DQ Open Source project was proposed and I was pushing this project
quite a bit.
Back then we had a on-line meeting John Rauchert, John Corey and I about it
and my first task was to comb the net for new DQ materiel. It took 2 weeks
of hard work and I got I guess something like 90% of the DQ materiel out
there and GUESS WHAT! Along the way I dutyfully recorded the credit for
ALL of this materiel and still have it. I worked about another month or so
on the project and people volunteered to work on different sections of the
project, but alas, I suppose real life go in the way for most and I felt
the project was just too gigantic for just one person to pursue so I put a
hold on it at the time, expecting to continue some time in the future.

TO THE MATTER OF CREDIT : It is very important to respect people's wishes
for credits and distribution for the materiel they produce. It is called
trust. It is called recognition for sometimes very dedicated and long and
harduous work that required lots of research, testing, layout, proofing,
etc. It is only fair to make a stong effort to properly list credits, if
you don't known the credits, properly state so, ask around, research, etc.
If one does it any other way, it is called plagiarism, and THAT, is like a
fist in the face for intellectual property. One cannot use arguments as
"its old stuff..." or "who's gonna sue...", it is a matter that the owner
of the intellectual property is receiving a slap in the face. Most
gentleman and gentlewoman easily share their materiel when proper credit is
done, otherwise, why would they have published the materiel in the first
place. When people don't shared it is usually for one of these two
reasons: the trust factor(or I should say, lack of) and sometimes there is
just some stuff that is very dear to one person and they would just PREFER
not to share, not because they are "bad", it is just their preference.
Besides, if each party shares published/produced matieriel ( I personnally
do that a lot, and contribution goes both ways ), then everybody comes out
winners.


TO THE MATTER OF THE DQ COMMUNITY : The DQ Community consists mainly (I
wrote "mainly" not "all") of working adults with families now, we learned
to love DQ when we were teens, if we still were all teens, the community
would be much stronger, but as I mentionned above, for a lot of us real
life is geting in the way, we know a few of us even got kids in the past
2-3 years, now all that take a toll on the time we can dedicate to DQ.
Another big factor that is not helping is all those damned and addictive
computer games...


By the way the DQ Players Association is now 199 members strong, who will
be member 200 ???


DragonQuest forever! (I'm still waiting for suggestions for a slogan for
the DQPA, hint, hint...)

Eric

Eric (Snafaru) Labelle
WebMaster in interim
DragonQuest Players Association
http://www.dragonquest.org/
eric@iosphere.net

I think it's great that the DQPA has had nearly 200 folks join. How
many are still active? How many have joined in the last two years?

I usually monitor the Town Halls Forum, but that's been very quiet
for the last couple of months.

I've also been watching the problems that the Star Frontiers groups
have been going through with WoTC. One fellow who was authorised by
TSR to create and distribute PDFs of the SF stuff, on the condition
that he send a copy to TSR, was branded a pariah and thief by WoTC,
until he proved that he had been authorised. That web-site has now
disappeared.

We tend to look at groups that we are interested in, and ignore what
is happening in others - that's life. If WoTC is still clamping down
of folks in other groups that they have previously authorised, it
would pay for us to re-examine and have ready, our own letters of
permission.

Eric, I think that you will find that the material that you sought
permission to use, and the people that you gave credit to is fair.
The SF site posted all of that too, and it's gone now. The whole DQ
community, and especially new members need to be reminded or
informed of that.

FYI, the guy who got the nasty gram from WoTC was reported by
another member of the SF community, who wrote direct to the WoTC
legal eagles, and didn't even bother to tell or ask the site owner.
The first he knew was a letter from WoTC. The tone that was used in
the letters and emails he later recieved was less than polite.

Has there been a change in policy in WoTC about older games on the
net?

I'd like to add my own little bit of perspective to the whole question about publishing DragonQuest related materials. (And, I think I probably have a longer record than anyone else of doing so. That doesn't make me an expert, but I can tell you how I've been handling the issue.)

The DragonQuest Newsletter started out when several DragonQuest fans found each other in some of the newsgroups (rec.games.frp.misc et al) and decided to create a shared resource devoted specifically to DragonQuest. Articles were submitted to be shared with the whole DQ playing community. The DragonQuest Newsletter never offered any payment (other than peer recognition) to authors who submitted material, and ownership has always remained with the author.

The ownership statement we've had at the top of the DQN for a long time now reads: "All articles are copyrighted property of their respective
authors. Reproducing or republishing an article, in whole or in part, in any other forum requires permission of the author or the moderator." As much as possible, the original author is credited, and contact information (email address) is included for each article.

Most everything that has been run in the Newsletter has been submitted to us, so there is an explicit understanding that it is freely distributale. The authors have given their material to us with that end in mind.

Only a couple times have I come across something elsewhere on the web (for example, some things have been posted in the WebRPG forum), and I've written to the author and asked for permission to run it in the DQN as well. A large number of DQN readers don't regularly visit the WebRPG forum. I don't think that I've ever been turned down, either.

If Hasbro/WotC/TSR/SPI wrote to me tomorrow and wanted to issue a compilation of all past DQNs for sale, we'd have to get explicit permission from each author and work out payment before any article could be published. But for a less commercial use, I think it's certainly possible to be more lenient. I was contacted by some Australian players some years ago who wanted to print out copies of the DQN to hand out at a gaming convention (or maybe they were going to sell them for a nominal cost to cover copying costs). In that instance, they contacted me, as moderator of the DQN, for permission to do this, which I was willing to grant. They didn't go back to every individual author, and I think that was reasonable in that circumstance. If anyone whose material was used thinks that granting this permission was wrong, then I appologize to them.

As far as John Corey's compilation project goes, he did contact me for permission to use my materials when he started setting things up, and I agreed to let him use the things I had written. As far as I am concerned, that permission still stands. And as far as keeping track of the permissions, I think that a reasonable and good faith effort is all that is required on John's part.

I will admit that I had dreams of getting "Poor Brendan's Almanac" published when I started working on it in the late 80s, and it took some time for me to get comfortable with freely releasing it when I finally did publish it on the web. But, I realized that I wasn't going to make any money from it. And I wanted to share it with other people who would appreciate it (which is, at the core, I think why we all write: we want to share our ideas and know that others find them useful).

If you still plan to go ahead with this project John, my recommendation would be that you post a message to a couple of the major DQ forums (I think that WebRPG and the DQN would cover most anyone who has written something that you would be using) and ask for current contact info for the authors you are looking for. I think that identifying either the author (by name or pseudonym) or the title of the article should dredge up most of the people you want to contact. If you have articles for which you do not have explicit permission, set those in a separate directory and keep trying, or keep them aside until you do contact the authors for explicit permission. With the web, publishing is a fluid thing, and you can continue to revise and adjust the content constantly.

To answer John's original question, I don't think that the original idea of a shared base of knowledge is a bad one at all. In part, I think the problem is one of officialness; there is no canon. With SPI long gone and dead, there is no one to judge what is 'official' DQ and what is not, and some reluctance (my own included, it must be admitted) to publish based on that.

This is certainly interesting. Particularly the part where WoTC went
after the Star Frontiers guy. I think that is the nail in the coffin
of publishing a rules compendium. That is really unfortunate.

I think there are other ways I can contribute to the game...

Thanks for everyone's input!

--- In dq-rules@y..., "brainz_at_ti" <morbius@c...> wrote:
> I think it's great that the DQPA has had nearly 200 folks join. How
> many are still active? How many have joined in the last two years?
>
> I usually monitor the Town Halls Forum, but that's been very quiet
> for the last couple of months.
>
> I've also been watching the problems that the Star Frontiers groups
> have been going through with WoTC. One fellow who was authorised by
> TSR to create and distribute PDFs of the SF stuff, on the condition
> that he send a copy to TSR, was branded a pariah and thief by WoTC,
> until he proved that he had been authorised. That web-site has now
> disappeared.
>
> We tend to look at groups that we are interested in, and ignore
what
> is happening in others - that's life. If WoTC is still clamping
down
> of folks in other groups that they have previously authorised, it
> would pay for us to re-examine and have ready, our own letters of
> permission.
>
> Eric, I think that you will find that the material that you sought
> permission to use, and the people that you gave credit to is fair.
> The SF site posted all of that too, and it's gone now. The whole DQ
> community, and especially new members need to be reminded or
> informed of that.
>
> FYI, the guy who got the nasty gram from WoTC was reported by
> another member of the SF community, who wrote direct to the WoTC
> legal eagles, and didn't even bother to tell or ask the site owner.
> The first he knew was a letter from WoTC. The tone that was used in
> the letters and emails he later recieved was less than polite.
>
> Has there been a change in policy in WoTC about older games on the
> net?

One interesting thing that has come out of "ownership" debate is that
people are hanging on to adventures. They are making them, and then
not publishing them. Not a new adventure in about 5 years as someone
pointed out.

So i propose that we post some adventures here! I have many that I
could post, with the following caveat. I am a pretty loosey-goosey
GM... I tend to make a rough outline, throw together some NPCs and
wing it. BUT, these scenarios might be good for some ideas (or at
least a laugh. One of my players is still pissed that i had the
audacity to name a group of 3 Succubi after the Power Puff girls).

Let me know if this is something that people would find useful.
Might encourage others to do the same.

Juanc

I have every intention of publishing new adventures.

When I started my new campaign here, I had a weak idea that didn't go
very far for the first adventure (always difficult pulling together a
group of *VERY* different characters). That led to me running the
Water Works adventure (surprisingly, none of them had been through it
yet, nor had read it).

I've also had a couple of loosey-goosey episodes I've run, as well,
which set out some of the background in the campaign (same world as my
old campaign, but it is now about 40 years later, and in a different
region, about 300-400 miles south of the center of the old campaign)
which, even if I did write some stuff down, would be worthless to
anyone else.

Then I came up with an adventure which was basically a sequel to the
Water Works which I am trying to write up in a somewhat finished form.
And Daniel Allbutt and I have talked about continuing the 'Works'
series. (He wrote to me some years back and asked the deceptively
simple question, "If there is a Water Works, shouldn't there also have
been a Gas Works, an Earth Works, and a Fire Works as well...?")
Progress has been slow on that, but since it's in the new campaign, I
have some added impetus now.

The latest adventure was unrelated, and was pretty sketchy, but could
be outlined, and others might find it useful. We just finished it
last weekend, so it's fairly fresh.

I've tried to advocate getting material out there, even if it isn't
finished, just so that others can see it and maybe do something with
it. So I'll try to take this opportunity and lead by example.

Only, I'd suggest posting things as files, so that players can more
easily steer clear of them, if their GMs are possibly going to use
them.

As for names of NPCs, my players would tell you I've done much worse
over the years. (Like the adventure at the edge of the world many
years ago where the came across references to four demons (not any of
the standard DQ ones - these were different): Two of them were
called 'Leaf,' one whose name meant 'Average' or 'Common,' and the
last whose name was 'Bonham.' That's probably obscure enough to take
you at least a few minutes to figure out.)

--Rodger Thorm

--- In dq-rules@y..., "jcorey30" <jcorey30@y...> wrote:

> So i propose that we post some adventures here! I have many that I
> could post, with the following caveat. I am a pretty loosey-goosey
> GM... I tend to make a rough outline, throw together some NPCs and
> wing it. BUT, these scenarios might be good for some ideas (or at
> least a laugh. One of my players is still pissed that i had the
> audacity to name a group of 3 Succubi after the Power Puff girls).
>
> Let me know if this is something that people would find useful.
> Might encourage others to do the same.
>
> Juanc

On Sun, 16 Jun 2002 08:28:05 -0700, Rodger Thorm<dqn@earthlink.net> wrote:

>With SPI long gone and dead, there is no one to judge what is 'official' DQ and what is not, and some reluctance (my own included, it must be admitted) to publish based on that.

I don't think that's hard to decide at all. "Official" is what was actually
printed, with a further modifier of being qualified for each edition;
"Official 3rd edition" and "official 2nd edition" being not quite the same
thing after all.

Technically, "Arcane Wisdom" is not "official", except for those portions of
it which were reprinted in 3rd edition and elsewhere (issues of Ares
magazine, for example). However, the combined publication of "Arcane
Wisdom" was so close to being published that I'm happy to call it "official
2nd edition material".

Everything else is "house rules".

In my DQ game, for example, I base everything on 2nd edition, supplemented
by stuff "stolen" from other works, modified by what my experience says
"works" and "doesn't work" (in terms of rules and play balance). The whole
mess comprises my "house rules" and works for me and my players; if someone
were to "officially" publish a new edition of DQ I would find that
interesting, but barring any new ideas I could steal for my own game it
wouldn't have any great impact on the game as I play it now.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au ICQ 6563830
Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 SCA #80160
"Rock and roll Martian."
ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ

It was clear from the outset that SPI intended for
DragonQuest to expand beyond the base rules in what
was initially published (the original game system).
The twelve colleges of magic and the handful of skills
and abilities was the beginning, not the extent of
what DragonQuest was meant to be.

We can certainly take the narrow view that only things
that came out with SPI's imprimatur are official DQ,
and that nothing else matters. Personally, I *do*
take Arcane Wisdom as part of the core DQ canon; the
playtest photocopy that was circulated was a finished
product. It was ready to be printed. It was done.

If we accept the view that there can be no new
material for DQ, then there is no point to any of the
discussion boards or newsgroups or the Newsletter.
Everything is set, and there is no point to creating
anything new. I don't accept that position or agree
with it. The very existence of the dq-rules group is
completely counter to that in principle.

Now that the parent company is gone and the system is
orphaned, I feel it is completely reasonable to
maintain the system and to continue to develop the
core of what is official DQ.

The idea of having the DQ-rules list was to bring
additional rules out for general review and
suggestions from other GMs and players. Ideally, as
in the Open Source software movement, the idea was
that "many eyes make shallow bugs" i.e. that problems
can be readily discovered and repaired through group
action. For that to be a useful process, however,
versioning is required, and the document (whether
computer code or games rules) has to be a changing
entity, rather than a fixed, final document.

I think that it is useful to keep producing new
material for DQ, as well as to revisit and revise the
existing rules.

'House rules' are fine, and every group finds what
suits them best from within the canon set. For
example, the rules for fatigue loss during the day for
overland travel get ignored in my campaign, as do the
rules for required practice to maintain skills. In my
campaign, Illusions don't exist. There has not been
an Illusionist character, and I don't use Illusionist
NPCs. It doesn't suit my campaign or my style as a
GM. I don't think I'm a bad DQ GM; these are just my
personal adaptations.

But that doesn't necessarily mean that they should be
deleted, nor on the other hand should all new rules be
automatically added. Some changes are better than the
original rules they revise and should be included;
some new rules cover material that was not addressed
in the original published set, and should also be
included.

There is still a place for an 'official' canon of
growing and adapting DQ rules. Having an 'official'
set of rules which is constantly being reviewed and
adapted is a project for the DQ community as a whole.
GMs will still choose what to adapt for their own
campaigns. I don't expect that would ever change.
But let's have an organized system to pull things
together and clearly identify that these things are
for everyone to use and to be shared. Let's identify
the authors and at the same time allow others to
fairly use the material that has been produced for
everyone. There's room for NEW 'official' DQ.

(Please don't take this a picking on you or flaming
you Bruce. I completely agree with the validity of
your position as well, on one level. But I also think
that a broader position needs to be considered, as
I've outlined above.)

--- Bruce Probst <bprobst@netspace.net.au> wrote:

> On Sun, 16 Jun 2002 08:28:05 -0700, Rodger
> Thorm<dqn@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >With SPI long gone and dead, there is no one to
> judge what is 'official' DQ and what is not, and
> some reluctance (my own included, it must be
> admitted) to publish based on that.
>
> I don't think that's hard to decide at all.
> "Official" is what was actually
> printed, with a further modifier of being qualified
> for each edition;
> "Official 3rd edition" and "official 2nd edition"
> being not quite the same
> thing after all.
>
> Technically, "Arcane Wisdom" is not "official",
> except for those portions of
> it which were reprinted in 3rd edition and elsewhere
> (issues of Ares
> magazine, for example). However, the combined
> publication of "Arcane
> Wisdom" was so close to being published that I'm
> happy to call it "official
> 2nd edition material".
>
> Everything else is "house rules".
>
> In my DQ game, for example, I base everything on 2nd
> edition, supplemented
> by stuff "stolen" from other works, modified by what
> my experience says
> "works" and "doesn't work" (in terms of rules and
> play balance). The whole
> mess comprises my "house rules" and works for me and
> my players; if someone
> were to "officially" publish a new edition of DQ I
> would find that
> interesting, but barring any new ideas I could steal
> for my own game it
> wouldn't have any great impact on the game as I play
> it now.
>
>

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

> Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au
> ICQ 6563830
> Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 SCA #80160
> "Rock and roll Martian."
> ASL FAQ
> http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ
>
>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

Rodger Thorm wrote:

> It was clear from the outset that SPI intended for
> DragonQuest to expand beyond the base rules in what
> was initially published (the original game system).
> The twelve colleges of magic and the handful of skills
> and abilities was the beginning, not the extent of
> what DragonQuest was meant to be.
>
> We can certainly take the narrow view that only things
> that came out with SPI's imprimatur are official DQ,
> and that nothing else matters. Personally, I *do*
> take Arcane Wisdom as part of the core DQ canon; the
> playtest photocopy that was circulated was a finished
> product. It was ready to be printed. It was done.
>
> If we accept the view that there can be no new
> material for DQ, then there is no point to any of the
> discussion boards or newsgroups or the Newsletter.
> Everything is set, and there is no point to creating
> anything new. I don't accept that position or agree
> with it. The very existence of the dq-rules group is
> completely counter to that in principle.
>
> Now that the parent company is gone and the system is
> orphaned, I feel it is completely reasonable to
> maintain the system and to continue to develop the
> core of what is official DQ.

I've lurked here for some time and really come to respect the work that
you've done preserving DQ. I think it's fabulous that you, and so many
others, care so much about this game.
However, I think that dedication perhaps blinds you to some of what was
said in the previous posts. First, I think the question isn't one of
"are house rules bad". The question was, "What's really official?"
Well, you answered that yourself when you said the original publishers
are no more. In effect, there can not be any new official material
because the source of official material is no longer.
Second, as to the question of Arcane Wisdom... Well, I think anyone who
knows the publishing history of the game and Arcane Wisdom would accept
that as official material that just didn't get released.
Third, *any* role-playing game usually has rules that aren't used by
actual players. That fact, however, does not make the officially
published rules any less official or published. Nor does that make
house rules any better or worse. Of course, in the case of a an
orphaned RPG, house rules are the only thing active at all. The rest is
quite set in stone by default.

In short, the idea of what is "official" and what isn't doesn't really
matter in the case of DQ. Unless, of course, it's going to be published
again, which, according to my last inquiries at Hasbro/Wizards of the
Coast, it is not. And, they do still own the copyright to that, and
anything else copyrighted (sp?) by TSR. That's just how the die rolls,
as it were.
I hope that none of that stops folks from making more house rules and
playing this fabulous RPG.

Keep up the *great* work everyone!
Jim Hoffman


--
"The future isn't what it used to be."
-Arthur C. Clarke

On Mon, 17 Jun 2002 09:37:23 -0700 (PDT), Rodger Thorm
<rodger_thorm@yahoo.com> wrote:

>We can certainly take the narrow view that only things
>that came out with SPI's imprimatur are official DQ

What else can be considered "official"?

>If we accept the view that there can be no new
>material for DQ, then there is no point to any of the
>discussion boards or newsgroups or the Newsletter.

I never said there can be no new material. I said (well, implied) that
there can be no new *official* material.

Put it this way: if you put out some new DQ rules and call them "official",
and somebody *else* puts out conflicting rules and also calls them
"official", which of these conflicting rules sets is officially official?
Answer: neither, unless one of the parties acquires actual legal ownership
of the game system (which doesn't seem likely to happen).

(In case you think of saying "that can't happen", I can tell you that I have
access to at least three completely different sets of DQ rules for
"hunting". Furthermore, I don't especially like *any* of them as written,
and steal bits and pieces from each -- amongst other things -- to make the
"hunting" rules I use in my game.)

In other words, it's all house rules. Why is that a problem?

>Everything is set, and there is no point to creating
>anything new. I don't accept that position or agree
>with it. The very existence of the dq-rules group is
>completely counter to that in principle.

I don't understand your point. You can discuss a dead game, and suggest
improvements, and discuss stuff with other people, without any of it being
"official".

>Now that the parent company is gone and the system is
>orphaned, I feel it is completely reasonable to
>maintain the system and to continue to develop the
>core of what is official DQ.

It's not *legal* to claim you own it when you don't. (It's also not
*ethical*.)

As for the DQ community *needing* an "official" set of updated rules:
nonsense. Unless somebody sets up an international tournament, with cash
prizes, and all play "strictly by the rules", it doesn't matter a fig.
We're not talking a professional sport here. As you pointed out yourself,
each GM uses what he likes and ignores the rest.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au ICQ 6563830
Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 SCA #80160
"Rock and roll Martian."
ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ

One of my players put together a quick reference of the combat rules
(Combat Rules Summary.doc). I have found it helpful in two ways.
1) good introduction for new players
2) Good for keeping the game from getting bogged down when in the
middle of a fight.

Send me any comments if you have them

Thanks
John

Has anyone found, or made, any good firearms rules for DragonQuest? I'm
talking about flintlocks and muskets and the like, not "modern" weapons.
I sort of had an idea for a world setting and I'd like to include this
kind of thing. Hmm, that would mean that I'd need permission to
redistribute, with credit, of course.

Thanks in advance!
Jim
--
"The future isn't what it used to be."
-Arthur C. Clarke

Hail ! Hail ! Hail !

The DQPA is proud to annouce our 200th member Verne Wetherholt.

Verne is on the Board of Director with GameBase7, a national gaming club
with over 300 members. GameBase7 sponsors this living DragonQuest group
under the title "Shadow of the Dragon", look for it at Origins' or
Gencon's. They are running 11 events at Origins (Verne tells me some seats
are still open, pre-register at originsgames.com) and 15 events at Gencon
this year. The group has 7 gamemasters for DragonQuest and Verne tells me
they are always looking for more.

Verne was an advisor to Klug and Pickens for the 3rd Edition and is
currently running a living DragonQuest campaign (using 3rd Ed. rules) with
over 120 registered players.

DragonQuest forever!

Eric (Snafaru) Labelle
WebMaster in interim
DragonQuest Players Association
http://www.dragonquest.org/
e-mail: eric@iosphere.net

Hullo, Eric,

On Wed, 26 Jun 2002 22:15:28 -0400, Eric Labelle wrote:

>Hail ! Hail ! Hail !
>The DQPA is proud to annouce our 200th member Verne Wetherholt.

This is terrific news, and it's nice to hear about milestones like
this. The DRAGONQUEST community seems to be one that will never die,
despite the fact that the game is still out of print (even though
copies show up for sale on various auction blocks every so often).
It's good to see that the DQPA is still around as well, since I had
been worried about this during the last couple of years and all. Now,
if we could somehow resurrect the DQN, life would be good once more.
<g>

Keep up the good work, Eric. :)

.....And through this deep and dreamless sleep, the silent stars go by. (A. Camus)

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane

Attachments :

Joy! Now that we've got all this man power, lets do something with it!

--- message from "John M. Kahane" <jkahane@comnet.ca> attached:

_____________________________________________________________
Sluggy.Net: The Sluggy Freelance Community!

_____________________________________________________________
Promote your group and strengthen ties to your members with email@yourgroup.org by Everyone.net http://www.everyone.net/?btn=tag

Not entirely resurrected, but I'm working on it.

--Rodger

--- "John M. Kahane" <jkahane@comnet.ca> wrote:

Now,

> if we could somehow resurrect the DQN, life would be
> good once more.
> <g>

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Autos - Get free new car price quotes
http://autos.yahoo.com

Hi Everyone,

I made some "discoveries" about the magic system that I was
previously unaware of. Actually, i am a little embarassed by a
couple of them. These aren't questions per se, but comments.
Feedback is welcome. I am also posting them to see if anyone else
made these goofs.
1) Mages get an exp discount for an MA above 15 on all general
knowledge spells. I did not know this, and boy was my Hero level
fire mage pissed off when he found out! I did not give him the exp
back, but that is ok, because…
2) I did not know that spells invested in items (rings, amulets
etc) still had to be prepared! My Fire Mage was walking around with
so much jewelry; he looked like 'B.A.' Baracus with a flamethrower.
Given the number of times he saved the party's butt with fireballs in
consecutive pulses, I almost decided to declare everyone in the party
retroactively dead!
3) This was my own "house rule", but I used to allow desperate
characters to use endurance to cast spells. Does anyone else play
this way? This makes it incredibly risky for the spell caster…


Just some random thoughts.
JuanC

1 Oops
2. Really?
On 3, completely agreed and used this, adds to the tension and drama.
'mages' often tendedn to have good stamina but not so hot endurance.
Turning that last bit of life energy to magic energy just seemed to 'work'
on a 'game' level

JohnD

>From: "jcorey30" <jcorey30@yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: dq-rules@yahoogroups.com
>To: dq-rules@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [dq-rules] Three things magical
>Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2002 20:59:28 -0000
>
>Hi Everyone,
>
>I made some "discoveries" about the magic system that I was
>previously unaware of. Actually, i am a little embarassed by a
>couple of them. These aren't questions per se, but comments.
>Feedback is welcome. I am also posting them to see if anyone else
>made these goofs.
>1) Mages get an exp discount for an MA above 15 on all general
>knowledge spells. I did not know this, and boy was my Hero level
>fire mage pissed off when he found out! I did not give him the exp
>back, but that is ok, because�
>2) I did not know that spells invested in items (rings, amulets
>etc) still had to be prepared! My Fire Mage was walking around with
>so much jewelry; he looked like 'B.A.' Baracus with a flamethrower.
>Given the number of times he saved the party's butt with fireballs in
>consecutive pulses, I almost decided to declare everyone in the party
>retroactively dead!
>3) This was my own "house rule", but I used to allow desperate
>characters to use endurance to cast spells. Does anyone else play
>this way? This makes it incredibly risky for the spell caster�
>
>
>Just some random thoughts.
>JuanC
>

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

On Mon, 22 Jul 2002 20:59:28 -0000, "jcorey30" <jcorey30@yahoo.com> wrote:

>1) Mages get an exp discount for an MA above 15 on all general
>knowledge spells. I did not know this, and boy was my Hero level
>fire mage pissed off when he found out! I did not give him the exp
>back, but that is ok, because…

Easy to miss because (a) it's only in 3rd edition (and one of the few 3rd
ed. changes I actually like) and (b) even in that edition, it's hidden in
the XP costs section ....

>2) I did not know that spells invested in items (rings, amulets
>etc) still had to be prepared! My Fire Mage was walking around with
>so much jewelry; he looked like 'B.A.' Baracus with a flamethrower.
>Given the number of times he saved the party's butt with fireballs in
>consecutive pulses, I almost decided to declare everyone in the party
>retroactively dead!

No, invested items do *not* have to be prepared; however; I don't blame you
if you're reading the 3rd ed. rules and asking "where does it say that?"
This is a clarification from Arcane Wisdom.

>3) This was my own "house rule", but I used to allow desperate
>characters to use endurance to cast spells. Does anyone else play
>this way? This makes it incredibly risky for the spell caster…

I do not and would not use such a rule.

I have a different house rule though: adepts can expend *extra* FT to cast a
spell. Each additional point raises the chance of success by 5%, but also
incurs a risk of an "overload". The chance is (extra FT spent, squared).
We're still muddling on the exact effects of an overload; we don't want them
to be just like a normal backfire, but we don't want them either too trivial
or too horrible. The point of the rule is to allow the adept to cast those
hard-too-cast spells if/when they need to ... at risk of something
unfortunate happening, and of course at the risk of running out of FT to
cast *other* spells. (It also makes the "spend 2x/3x/etc. FT" backfire
results potentially *very* nasty!)

----------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au ICQ 6563830
Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 SCA #80160
"Well, look at that. 'Breach hull, all die.' Even had it underlined."
ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ

1) I agree that it's an easy one to miss. But it's in the 2nd Ed. as well,
in the box for MAGIC back in the experience point tables. I had rules-lawyers
in the campaign who pounced on that one early on.

2) I agree with Bruce (and others) who've said it does not need to be
prepared. I tried to quickly find something that explicitly stated so (one
way or the other) but couldn't find it. It may be, as Bruce says, in Arcane
Wisdom (I didn't check there).

3) I think the idea of allowing a desperate mage to cast from Endurance is
more a matter of style and of campaign tone than of rules. As a 'desperation'
move, it probably doesn't come up too often, but when it does, it's probably a
fairly heroic moment. Personally, I might allow that to a character who had
*mastered* (ie Rk 6+) a spell, but I wouldn't let a character with only Rank 1
try it.

I don't like the idea of putting more FT into a spell to increase cast
chance. More power usually doesn't increase precision. However, if you're
going to do that, I'd suggest the following:
a) If the spell is not cast successfully, there is an automatic backfire (ie
miss the Cast Chance by 1 or more), plus the points spent in casting are
subtracted from EN rather than FT.
b) If the spell is cast successfully, but made it by less than (20 - Rank)
then a backfire also occurs as well (but subtract 30 from backfire roll;
result less than 01 means no backfire effect). If backfire effect is 26-56,
the spell follows the backfire. [Ex. Aahz casts E&E Rk 8 Charm with increased
FT, but his modified roll is only 7 under Cast Chance, so the spell is
successful, but he also suffers a backfire. The backfire roll is (77 - 30 =
47), so the spell takes effect on a random character in range.]

--Rodger



On Tue, 23 Jul 2002 19:22:35 +1000 Bruce Probst <bprobst@netspace.net.au>
wrote:

On Mon, 22 Jul 2002 20:59:28 -0000, "jcorey30" <jcorey30@yahoo.com> wrote:

>1) Mages get an exp discount for an MA above 15 on all general
>knowledge spells. I did not know this, and boy was my Hero level
>fire mage pissed off when he found out! I did not give him the exp
>back, but that is ok, because�

Easy to miss because (a) it's only in 3rd edition (and one of the few 3rd
ed. changes I actually like) and (b) even in that edition, it's hidden in
the XP costs section ....

>2) I did not know that spells invested in items (rings, amulets
>etc) still had to be prepared! My Fire Mage was walking around with
>so much jewelry; he looked like 'B.A.' Baracus with a flamethrower.
>Given the number of times he saved the party's butt with fireballs in
>consecutive pulses, I almost decided to declare everyone in the party
>retroactively dead!

No, invested items do *not* have to be prepared; however; I don't blame you
if you're reading the 3rd ed. rules and asking "where does it say that?"
This is a clarification from Arcane Wisdom.

>3) This was my own "house rule", but I used to allow desperate
>characters to use endurance to cast spells. Does anyone else play
>this way? This makes it incredibly risky for the spell caster�

I do not and would not use such a rule.

I have a different house rule though: adepts can expend *extra* FT to cast a
spell. Each additional point raises the chance of success by 5%, but also
incurs a risk of an "overload". The chance is (extra FT spent, squared).
We're still muddling on the exact effects of an overload; we don't want them
to be just like a normal backfire, but we don't want them either too trivial
or too horrible. The point of the rule is to allow the adept to cast those
hard-too-cast spells if/when they need to ... at risk of something
unfortunate happening, and of course at the risk of running out of FT to
cast *other* spells. (It also makes the "spend 2x/3x/etc. FT" backfire
results potentially *very* nasty!)

----------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au ICQ 6563830
Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 SCA #80160
"Well, look at that. 'Breach hull, all die.' Even had it underlined."
ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Free $5 Love Reading
Risk Free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/NsdPZD/PfREAA/Ey.GAA/H_ewlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To Post a message, send it to: dq-rules@eGroups.com
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: dq-rules-unsubscribe@eGroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

According to the handy-dandy AW published by the DQPA:
" It takes only one pulse for the spell stored ina the object to be
activated and released"
So I guess my biggest opps, is not checking the rules when my
player tells me something.

--- In dq-rules@y..., "jcorey30" <jcorey30@y...> wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I made some "discoveries" about the magic system that I was
> previously unaware of. Actually, i am a little embarassed by a
> couple of them. These aren't questions per se, but comments.
> Feedback is welcome. I am also posting them to see if
anyone else
> made these goofs.
> 1) Mages get an exp discount for an MA above 15 on all
general
> knowledge spells. I did not know this, and boy was my Hero
level
> fire mage pissed off when he found out! I did not give him the
exp
> back, but that is ok, because…
> 2) I did not know that spells invested in items (rings, amulets
> etc) still had to be prepared! My Fire Mage was walking around
with
> so much jewelry; he looked like 'B.A.' Baracus with a
flamethrower.
> Given the number of times he saved the party's butt with
fireballs in
> consecutive pulses, I almost decided to declare everyone in
the party
> retroactively dead!
> 3) This was my own "house rule", but I used to allow
desperate
> characters to use endurance to cast spells. Does anyone else
play
> this way? This makes it incredibly risky for the spell caster…
>
>
> Just some random thoughts.
> JuanC

1) I did not find it in my 2nd ed hard back.. are you using the
Bantam as reference?

--- In dq-rules@y..., Rodger Thorm<dqn@e...> wrote:
> 1) I agree that it's an easy one to miss. But it's in the 2nd Ed.
as well,
> in the box for MAGIC back in the experience point tables. I had
rules-lawyers
> in the campaign who pounced on that one early on.
>
> 2) I agree with Bruce (and others) who've said it does not
need to be
> prepared. I tried to quickly find something that explicitly stated
so (one
> way or the other) but couldn't find it. It may be, as Bruce says,
in Arcane
> Wisdom (I didn't check there).
>
> 3) I think the idea of allowing a desperate mage to cast from
Endurance is
> more a matter of style and of campaign tone than of rules. As
a 'desperation'
> move, it probably doesn't come up too often, but when it does,
it's probably a
> fairly heroic moment. Personally, I might allow that to a
character who had
> *mastered* (ie Rk 6+) a spell, but I wouldn't let a character with
only Rank 1
> try it.
>
> I don't like the idea of putting more FT into a spell to increase
cast
> chance. More power usually doesn't increase precision.
However, if you're
> going to do that, I'd suggest the following:
> a) If the spell is not cast successfully, there is an automatic
backfire (ie
> miss the Cast Chance by 1 or more), plus the points spent in
casting are
> subtracted from EN rather than FT.
> b) If the spell is cast successfully, but made it by less than (20
- Rank)
> then a backfire also occurs as well (but subtract 30 from
backfire roll;
> result less than 01 means no backfire effect). If backfire effect
is 26-56,
> the spell follows the backfire. [Ex. Aahz casts E&E Rk 8 Charm
with increased
> FT, but his modified roll is only 7 under Cast Chance, so the
spell is
> successful, but he also suffers a backfire. The backfire roll is
(77 - 30 =
> 47), so the spell takes effect on a random character in range.]
>
> --Rodger
>
>
>
> On Tue, 23 Jul 2002 19:22:35 +1000 Bruce Probst <
bprobst@n...>
> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 22 Jul 2002 20:59:28 -0000, "jcorey30" <
jcorey30@y...> wrote:
>
> >1) Mages get an exp discount for an MA above 15 on all
general
> >knowledge spells. I did not know this, and boy was my Hero
level
> >fire mage pissed off when he found out! I did not give him the
exp
> >back, but that is ok, because…
>
> Easy to miss because (a) it's only in 3rd edition (and one of the
few 3rd
> ed. changes I actually like) and (b) even in that edition, it's
hidden in
> the XP costs section ....
>
> >2) I did not know that spells invested in items (rings, amulets
> >etc) still had to be prepared! My Fire Mage was walking
around with
> >so much jewelry; he looked like 'B.A.' Baracus with a
flamethrower.
> >Given the number of times he saved the party's butt with
fireballs in
> >consecutive pulses, I almost decided to declare everyone in
the party
> >retroactively dead!
>
> No, invested items do *not* have to be prepared; however; I
don't blame you
> if you're reading the 3rd ed. rules and asking "where does it
say that?"
> This is a clarification from Arcane Wisdom.
>
> >3) This was my own "house rule", but I used to allow
desperate
> >characters to use endurance to cast spells. Does anyone
else play
> >this way? This makes it incredibly risky for the spell caster…
>
> I do not and would not use such a rule.
>
> I have a different house rule though: adepts can expend *extra*
FT to cast a
> spell. Each additional point raises the chance of success by
5%, but also
> incurs a risk of an "overload". The chance is (extra FT spent,
squared).
> We're still muddling on the exact effects of an overload; we
don't want them
> to be just like a normal backfire, but we don't want them either
too trivial
> or too horrible. The point of the rule is to allow the adept to
cast those
> hard-too-cast spells if/when they need to ... at risk of
something
> unfortunate happening, and of course at the risk of running out
of FT to
> cast *other* spells. (It also makes the "spend 2x/3x/etc. FT"
backfire
> results potentially *very* nasty!)
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> Bruce Probst bprobst@n... ICQ 6563830
> Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 SCA #80160
> "Well, look at that. 'Breach hull, all die.' Even had it
underlined."
> ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/
ASLFAQ
>
>
>
> To Post a message, send it to: dq-rules@e...
> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: dq-rules-
unsubscribe@e...
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/
info/terms/

--- jcorey30 <jcorey30@yahoo.com> wrote:

> 1) I did not find it in my 2nd ed hard back.. are
> you using the
> Bantam as reference?

I just looked in my copy of 2nd ed., which is the
Bantam edition, and the XP reduction for high MA is
there in Table 87.8, Experience Point Cost Chart.
Always interesting discussing games rules when there
are potentially -four- different versions of those
rules floating around. :>

Mort

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com

Hullo, JohnC,

On Mon, 22 Jul 2002 20:59:28 -0000, jcorey30 wrote:

>I made some "discoveries" about the magic system that I was previously
>unaware of. Actually, i am a little embarassed by a couple of them.

Don't worry...happens to all of us. :)

>1) Mages get an exp discount for an MA above 15 on all general
>knowledge spells. I did not know this, and boy was my Hero level fire
>mage pissed off when he found out! I did not give him the exp back,
>but that is ok, because…

Ahh, err...yes, that is indeed in the 2nd Edition rules, but it's
easy to miss, because it's in the section of Experience Points tables
at the back of the book, in the boxed text on Magic. Like I said, easy
to miss.

>2) I did not know that spells invested in items (rings, amulets etc)
>still had to be prepared! My Fire Mage was walking around with so much
>jewelry; he looked like 'B.A.' Baracus with a flamethrower. Given the
>number of times he saved the party's butt with fireballs in consecutive
>pulses, I almost decided to declare everyone in the party retroactively dead!

Actually, not true. Spells invested in items do not have to be
prepared. This was clarified in Arcane Wisdom.

>3) This was my own "house rule", but I used to allow desperate
>characters to use endurance to cast spells. Does anyone else play this
>way? This makes it incredibly risky for the spell caster…

Maybe so, but it's not a rule that I like and it's certainly not
one that I would want to use in a campaign that I play in or run.
Calling it a Desperation move or some such would probably work, but it
depends on how easily characters in the campaign regain Endurance. To
me that's more a matter of campaign style than it is rules, to be
honest.

....."The dragon in these mountains isn't the only thing we should worry about."
- Orgius Klane, scout

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane

Yes, Bantam softcover.

On Wed, 24 Jul 2002 01:36:46 -0000 jcorey30 <jcorey30@yahoo.com> wrote:

1) I did not find it in my 2nd ed hard back.. are you using the
Bantam as reference?

I think we can chalk that one up as another difference ( I just
double-checked) between the Bantam book, and the SPI Hardcover.
There is no reference to the EXP discount in 87.8 in the hardcover.
Thanks for verifying!

--- In dq-rules@y..., Rodger Thorm<dqn@e...> wrote:
> Yes, Bantam softcover.
>
> On Wed, 24 Jul 2002 01:36:46 -0000 jcorey30 <jcorey30@y...> wrote:
>
> 1) I did not find it in my 2nd ed hard back.. are you using the
> Bantam as reference?

So, mages with invested items can use those items repeatedly. At
this point, my mage almost never has to cast a spell the old
fashioned way.

How do you folks handle this in your campaigns

John

I simply don't dish out very powerful magic items. That's simply a
difference in GMing. I prefer low to mid magic campaigns. If I were faced
with a powerful item that was causing the game to become imbalanced I'd have
to think of a way to remove said item from the character's possession. There
are myriad ways in which to do this from the clich�, but ever-useful
thievery, to incarceration where the PC's items are removed while they are
in jail. A dishonest guard could pawn the item or perhaps an honest mistake
could lead to it being lost. There are a few articles online that pertain to
such a topic. The majority of them can be found under the Monty Haul
campaign topic.

Regards,
Paul

>From: "jcorey30" <jcorey30@yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: dq-rules@yahoogroups.com
>To: dq-rules@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [dq-rules] Magic. Same topic, Different thread
>Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 19:03:58 -0000
>
>So, mages with invested items can use those items repeatedly. At
>this point, my mage almost never has to cast a spell the old
>fashioned way.
>
>How do you folks handle this in your campaigns
>
>John
>

_________________________________________________________________
Join the world�s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com

This is an excellent point Paul. BUT!
What if the mage is investing and using his own items? He simply
puts 3 charges of Fireball in a necklace, and wha-lah instant death!.

--- In dq-rules@y..., "Paul Pishnak" <sergeantp@h...> wrote:
> I simply don't dish out very powerful magic items. That's simply a
> difference in GMing. I prefer low to mid magic campaigns. If I were
faced
> with a powerful item that was causing the game to become imbalanced
I'd have
> to think of a way to remove said item from the character's
possession. There
> are myriad ways in which to do this from the cliché, but ever-
useful
> thievery, to incarceration where the PC's items are removed while
they are
> in jail. A dishonest guard could pawn the item or perhaps an honest
mistake
> could lead to it being lost. There are a few articles online that
pertain to
> such a topic. The majority of them can be found under the Monty
Haul
> campaign topic.
>
> Regards,
> Paul
>
>
> >From: "jcorey30" <jcorey30@y...>
> >Reply-To: dq-rules@y...
> >To: dq-rules@y...
> >Subject: [dq-rules] Magic. Same topic, Different thread
> >Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 19:03:58 -0000
> >
> >So, mages with invested items can use those items repeatedly. At
> >this point, my mage almost never has to cast a spell the old
> >fashioned way.
> >
> >How do you folks handle this in your campaigns
> >
> >John
> >
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Join the world's largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
> http://www.hotmail.com

Excellent counter point!

I would hesitate to change the rules, but should any of my players
start using the ability to excess causing some imbalance I would
consider altering the rules for that ability/skill. My alternate
means of dealing with this might be to introduce some counter spells
from a foe but this would be a short-term patch and not an overall
fix.

A nice mind mage could be an effective nemesis to perhaps curb the
investor. Curses might be entertaining too. It's more of a matter of
being more creative with the rules rather then altering them for one
player who might be making things a little less enjoyable for the GM
and fellow players. Wish I had my rulebook in front of me to give
more specifics, but alas I'm at the office.

--- In dq-rules@y..., "jcorey30" <jcorey30@y...> wrote:
> This is an excellent point Paul. BUT!
> What if the mage is investing and using his own items? He simply
> puts 3 charges of Fireball in a necklace, and wha-lah instant
death!.

worldoffargoth wrote:

> Excellent counter point!
>
> I would hesitate to change the rules, but should any of my players start
> using the ability to excess causing some imbalance I would consider
> altering the rules for that ability/skill. My alternate means of
> dealing with this might be to introduce some counter spells from a
> foe but this would be a short-term patch and not an overall fix.
>
> A nice mind mage could be an effective nemesis to perhaps curb the

investor.

> Curses might be entertaining too. It's more of a matter of being
> more creative with the rules rather then altering them for one player
> who might be making things a little less enjoyable for the GM and
> fellow players. Wish I had my rulebook in front of me to give more
> specifics, but alas I'm at the office.

I have a simple solution to that. Just don't tell them if the
Investment Ritual was successful until they're in the middle of the
adventure! After all, the rule book doesn't say how or when the
character performing the ritual would know if they were successful. Or,
if you want to be "fair", maybe some of the spells worked and some
didn't, but the character won't know which "charge" works until they try
to use it in combat. Sort of like finding a dud round in the chamber of
your revolver. Might encourage the characters to rely less on charging
up lots of magic items before heading off into battle.

And, yes, when I was actively GMing, my players both loved and feared
me. I was harsh, but I was fair (i.e.. I was harsh to everyone equally!)

Cheers!
Jim
--
"You taught me language; and my profit on't
Is, I know how to curse: the red plague rid you,
For learning me your language!"
-William Shakespeare, The Tempest Act I
Scene 2 verse 363

Hm, the Investment Ritual has been a source of
difficulty in my group in the past. Not so much the
business about not needing to prepare the invested
spell, but rather the fact that it makes no
restrictions on what kind of objects can be invested.
As I understand it, before I joined the group, they
had people investing spells into every piece of
clothing they were wearing, sometimes down to
individual pieces of thread. That sorta broke the
system to pieces after a while.

As a result, we instituted a house rule. An object to
be invested by 32.3 must first be Prepared for
investment by a Shaper. At a cost. A steep cost.
Monetary expense rather sharply curtailed the number
of investable items in the party.

We also tend to run fairly magic-item-sparse campaigns
(by which I mean -permanently- magical items) and keep
character incomes at reasonable levels. That seems to
keep things in check these days. One final rule we
instituted is that items could only be prepared to
store spells of a specific College, General -or-
Special. So, even if players found a Prepared item,
it wasn't necessarily prepared for investment from a
college they belonged to. And if you want an NPC mage
to invest spells for you, well, that just costs money
too. Viva la capitalism. :>

Mort



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
http://health.yahoo.com

As investments are easy to produce once the character finally manage
to learn the ritual it was easy, and reasonable, for the character to
churn them out. Consequently this had a negative effect on the game.

To resolve this issue we made the following changes:
1. Increase in cost.
Cant remember how must, but wasnt too imposing.
2. Substantial increase in time.
Time to produce = (Spell rank - investment rank) days (Min one)

In further play it seemed a reasonable solution.

Terry

On Thu, 25 Jul 2002 19:03:58 -0000, "jcorey30" <jcorey30@yahoo.com> wrote:

>So, mages with invested items can use those items repeatedly. At
>this point, my mage almost never has to cast a spell the old
>fashioned way.

Well, until the investments run out.

>How do you folks handle this in your campaigns

There's a couple of approaches to take.

The 2nd ed. rules made no restrictions on what could be used as an
"investable item". Thus, a handful of pebbles could actually be a handful
of potent magic items.

The 3rd ed. rules introduced a severe restriction on what could be used, and
how much magic could be stored in it.

Having played extensively with the former rules, I've come to the conclusion
that it's Too Much Too Easy. The 3rd ed. rules are a little too much the
other way; without access to a Shaper, you'll *never* have invested items.

I'm currently cogitating on something in-between; something that will
effectively limit how many investments someone can carry, without making it
Too Hard to get them in the first place.

My preliminary thoughts (and that's all they are at this point):

* A shaper can make an Investable Item out of anything that he could Prepare
(as per the numerous Shaper Preparation rituals). A non-shaper can only use
a smaller subset of things ... precious metals? Of a minimum size/weight?
Note that the 3rd ed. rules suggest wands, staves etc. without indicating
*why* such items are preferred.

* An Investable Item can only have a limited no. of "charges" invested
within it. Pretty much how the 3rd edition rules have it.

* Aside from size/weight, perhaps there should be a limit on how many
Invested Items an individual can carry and use.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au ICQ 6563830
Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 SCA #80160
"A planet where apes evolved from men?"
ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ

Hullo, JohnC,

On Thu, 25 Jul 2002 19:03:58 -0000, jcorey30 wrote:

>So, mages with invested items can use those items repeatedly. At this point,
>my mage almost never has to cast a spell the old fashioned way. How do
>you folks handle this in your campaigns?

There are many ways to handle this sort of thing in one's
campaign. It's important to bear in mind that a Mage has to invest
the item(s) in question, and this takes time. And of course, one of
the best (if not the easiest) way to this is to use a policy of no
high-level magic items. Depends on the style of magic that one
prefers, I guess.

I suspect that everyone will have a different take on this,
based on how magic is perceived and works in their campaigns.

....."You crippled our ship, endangered our lives, disrupted our plans. Are
you now the arbiter of our justice system as well? - Salis (FS; DR)

JohnK
e-mail: jkahane@comnet.ca
web page: http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane

thanks to everyone for giving me their ideas on the investment thing,
and on the other topics. It is obvious that several other GMs have
run into this as well.

John

As these things tend to do, it took me longer than I had hoped to get
the outline of my Medford adventure pulled together and in presentable
form, but it's done.

I'd like to direct everyone who is interested in sharing adventure
ideas over to the DQN-list for that, however. The DQ-rules group
should concentrate on the game mechanics (and especially new rules or
revised and improved versions of existing rules). The DQN-list group
already has a file of Adventures, and further contributions are always
welcome.

The Medford adventure can be found at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dqn-list/files/Adventures/Medford.txt

--Rodger Thorm

--- In dq-rules@y..., "rthorm" <dqn@e...> wrote:
> I have every intention of publishing new adventures.
>
> When I started my new campaign here, I had a weak idea that didn't go
> very far for the first adventure (always difficult pulling together a
> group of *VERY* different characters). That led to me running the
> Water Works adventure (surprisingly, none of them had been through it
> yet, nor had read it).
>
> I've also had a couple of loosey-goosey episodes I've run, as well,
> which set out some of the background in the campaign (same world as my
> old campaign, but it is now about 40 years later, and in a different
> region, about 300-400 miles south of the center of the old campaign)
> which, even if I did write some stuff down, would be worthless to
> anyone else.
>
> Then I came up with an adventure which was basically a sequel to the
> Water Works which I am trying to write up in a somewhat finished form.
> And Daniel Allbutt and I have talked about continuing the 'Works'
> series. (He wrote to me some years back and asked the deceptively
> simple question, "If there is a Water Works, shouldn't there also have
> been a Gas Works, an Earth Works, and a Fire Works as well...?")
> Progress has been slow on that, but since it's in the new campaign, I
> have some added impetus now.
>
> The latest adventure was unrelated, and was pretty sketchy, but could
> be outlined, and others might find it useful. We just finished it
> last weekend, so it's fairly fresh.
>
> I've tried to advocate getting material out there, even if it isn't
> finished, just so that others can see it and maybe do something with
> it. So I'll try to take this opportunity and lead by example.
>
> Only, I'd suggest posting things as files, so that players can more
> easily steer clear of them, if their GMs are possibly going to use
> them.
>
> As for names of NPCs, my players would tell you I've done much worse
> over the years. (Like the adventure at the edge of the world many
> years ago where the came across references to four demons (not any of
> the standard DQ ones - these were different): Two of them were
> called 'Leaf,' one whose name meant 'Average' or 'Common,' and the
> last whose name was 'Bonham.' That's probably obscure enough to take
> you at least a few minutes to figure out.)
>
> --Rodger Thorm
>
> --- In dq-rules@y..., "jcorey30" <jcorey30@y...> wrote:
>
> > So i propose that we post some adventures here! I have many that I
> > could post, with the following caveat. I am a pretty loosey-goosey
> > GM... I tend to make a rough outline, throw together some NPCs and
> > wing it. BUT, these scenarios might be good for some ideas (or at
> > least a laugh. One of my players is still pissed that i had the
> > audacity to name a group of 3 Succubi after the Power Puff girls).
> >
> > Let me know if this is something that people would find useful.
> > Might encourage others to do the same.
> >
> > Juanc

Hi, I'm amazed and delighted to see such and active group devoted to
dragonquest. I thought I was a voice crying in the wilderness. I
haven't GMed for some years now (children, I guess you know how it
is) but I did make some rules up. I've posted them on the web for
people to have a look at, go to
http://helios.bto.ed.ac.uk/bto/dq/
let me know if you think its useful and what needs to be changed
and/or added

Thanks
David Barrass
now where did I put my D10s....

David,

I have downloaded the material, but have not had a chance to look at
it yet and probably will not until I return from GenCon next week.

One thing that I did notice was a typo on the webpage. You have
misspelled the word supplement. Not a huge crime, as these things go,
but I thought you might want to know about it.

Marty

>Hi, I'm amazed and delighted to see such and active group devoted to
>dragonquest. I thought I was a voice crying in the wilderness. I
>haven't GMed for some years now (children, I guess you know how it
>is) but I did make some rules up. I've posted them on the web for
>people to have a look at, go to
>http://helios.bto.ed.ac.uk/bto/dq/
>let me know if you think its useful and what needs to be changed
>and/or added

--
Always in motion is the future.
Yoda

I practice Ty-Fu, the art of slaughtering what I type.

"Learn from the mistakes of others. You won't live long enough to
make them all yourself."
Unknown

There's always someone better than you, but you're never as bad as
some think you are."
Rip Torn

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the dq-rules
group.

File : /documents/Bantam PDFs/DQBook1a.pdf
Uploaded by : runeshaper <runeshaper@yahoo.com>
Description :

You can access this file at the URL

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dq-rules/files/documents/Bantam%20PDFs/DQBook1a.pdf

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit

http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files

Regards,

runeshaper <runeshaper@yahoo.com>

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the dq-rules
group.

File : /documents/Bantam PDFs/DQBook1b.pdf
Uploaded by : runeshaper <runeshaper@yahoo.com>
Description :

You can access this file at the URL

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dq-rules/files/documents/Bantam%20PDFs/DQBook1b.pdf

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit

http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files

Regards,

runeshaper <runeshaper@yahoo.com>