Subject: MYSTARA-L Digest - 20 Aug 2002 to 21 Aug 2002 (#2002-217) From: Automatic digest processor Date: 22/08/2002, 17:00 To: Recipients of MYSTARA-L digests Reply-to: Mystara RPG Discussion There are 11 messages totalling 877 lines in this issue. Topics of the day: 1. Weapon Mastery (long) (6) 2. Dave Arneson is still doing Blackmoor (2) 3. Master of Hule Plans 4. Dragon scale armour 5. Combat Simulation ******************************************************************** The Other Worlds Homepage: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/OtherWorlds.asp The Mystara Homepage: http://www.dnd.starflung.com/ To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM with UNSUB MYSTARA-L in the body of the message. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 06:23:53 -0500 From: Mischa Gelman Subject: Re: Weapon Mastery (long) > If used strictly as written, the rules for Weapon Mastery can present > a serious challenge to game balance. The fighter class, especially, > is given a huge advantage; few high level fighters would need to fear > mages, as they could cut them down in a single round with multiple > attacks and increased damage And? Mages should be vulnerable beings, relying on the defense of others - at least that's been the norm for most of fantasy lit. > High level fighters could weather most > spells that a wizard could throw at them, by either making a routine > save, or simply absorbing some annoying damage. Except a meteor swarm would take out almost any fighter. So the odds are very balanced, which is the key issue. And it's not as if mages are hurt badly by the weapon mastery rule - a grand master with a non-magical dagger can do 64 points of damage in a round. > The next major change is regarding the Deflect ability. This was always one of my biggest concerns in regards to Weapon Mastery. Overall, I think most of your rules changes are fair. I just don't see there being a large problem with the original rules. - Mischa All works must become thus old and insipid which have ever tried to be "modern," which have consented to smell of time rather than eternity. Only those who have stooped to be in advance of their time will ever find themselves behind it. - G.K. Chesterton ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 06:53:53 -0500 From: George Hrabovsky Subject: Re: Weapon Mastery (long) I assume that a 25+ level mage has more going for him than poor weapon skills. Let's look at it. First, there is Meteor Swarm, 20d6 of damage that can't be saved against plus four more attacks of 20d6 save to half will crimp the style of anyone. This is an average of 70 hp from the impact, and another (assuming the fighter saves) 140 hp from the blast, even assuming he saves. This is a total of 210 damage from one spell. A level 25 fighter will have (assuming a +1 Con bonus) around a hundred hit points... I believe the phrase you want is DEAD FIGHTER. Let's assume that the mage doesn't have the big gun. Even so a lightning bolt or fireball will do 35 hp of damage with each shot. Oh, let's not forget the Cureall spell. And then there is monster summoning; a dragon would really ruin the fighter's whole day. And while the fighter is playing with summoned creatures the mage gets his whacks in. On the other hand, let's assume the mage has spell mastery and has upped the damage to d8s for his lightning bolt; then the average damage is not 70 hp; it is 90 saved to 45... I think that a prepared mage should be able to wipe out just about anyone with little modification. The same cannot be said for a fighter. In short, without the weapon mastery rules and optional rules in place fighters have little chance against a prepared foe; everyone has special abilities but them. When a L25 mage can dish out 10 hp of damage (minimum) up to 120 hp (max) per round and even with weapon mastery the fighter deals a minimum of 0 and a maximum of something like 100 hp; I think that is pretty balanced. While you are correct that a fighter who teleports right up next to a wizard can take him out in one round, in real gaming that doesn't happen often. The fighter has to get up to the mage. Unless the fighter is mounted (and that won't last long) the fighter must endure two spells before getting to the mage. Say LBolt and teleport (the mage is now further away again and can shoot the fighter again, and again, and so on. What makes you think a fighter is going to be able to get close to a high-level mage? Then, of course, there is my favorite; Projected Image. Sure the fighter goes up and wipes out the PI. This takes two rounds. After losing over 60% of his hp the fighter discovers he has been tricked and the mage is now two rounds away laughing at him. If the fighter is smart and the mage is dumb the mage deserves to die. If they are both smart the mage has a small chance of losing; the mage can afford to make a small mistake (teleporting away if things get too bad) while the fighter can't afford to make a single mistake. If the fighter is dumb he is dead. In short, I will take on your toughest fighter with a reasonably prepared mage any time (even a mere L20 mage can take out a L25 fighter without too much effort). I didn't have to give the mage anything to keep up with the fighters, it was the other way around. I was getting complaints from fighters who had to go up against NPC mages that there was no point in being a fighter (they also said that based on PC mages who were doing their own spell research). When the weapon mastery rules came out it was exactly what the fighters had been looking for. I agree about the AC system, which is why I used the AV system I described earlier. Stoneskin became a very popular spell after that. Even if you only increase the range of a spell, that translates to doing more damage. It gives the fighter another round of enduring the mage's spells to be able to get close enough to be effective. I agree that we are not too divergent in our views. Rather than taking things away from characters, I tend to give them so many things they can't do it all; after all my games tend to be very realistic in terms of opponents (lots of political connections and problems, lots of intrigue; there is nothing worse than trying to be straightforward about a mission and discovering all of your information is simply wrong!). I have no problems with throwing bones to my players... As it is, it was these problems that forced me to design my own game system that has its own internal balance while allowing players to develop their characters as they choose (within the limits set by the GM). Check out www.borigon.com and tell me what you think. I am rewriting what is up there so some suggestions may already be in place... George ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 13:07:29 +0100 From: Phillip Jones Subject: Re: Weapon Mastery (long) Hmm, I like it (well sort of :D). I'm not a particular big fan of what you have done to the weapon mastery rules, but the idea of possibly making other mastery classes (such as spell mastery) to balance them out with other classes. The only thing I do as regards weapon mastery IMC is to impose a trainer restriction. Basically I have them roll on percental dice to see what trainer they find available. Each roll is equivelent to a weeks worth of searching: % Trainer 01-05 Grand Master 06-20 Master 21-40 Expert 41-65 Skilled 66-95 Basic 96-00 No Trainer Available Note- This chart is only applicable in a city. For towns and villages, the DM rolls secretly and determines the highest level of trainer available there. If the character then rolls higher than that level of trainer, then it considered as a "No Trainer Available" result. (i.e the characters are looking for a weapon trainer in a town, the DM makes his secret roll and determines that the highest skill level of trainer available in this town is an Expert. The character then rolls his percental dice, and according to his dice roll he would have found a trainer with the Master skill level to train him. As the highest level available in this town is an expert, the DM announces that there is no trainer available.) I'll now be also using the following rules for other Masteries. Spell Mastery Spell mastery goes in 5 ranks from Basic to Grand Master, and uses the same Trainer Availabilty chart as shown above. Spell Mastery is split into 3 sub groups. Effect Mastery, Duration Mastery, Range Mastery. Effect Mastery: The effect of the spell is cast as if the caster is higher than he/she actually is. Obviously this only effects spells who has a variable effect based on the casters level. Basic: Standard spell casting Skilled: Effect is increased as if the caster is one level higher. Expert: Effect is increased as if the caster is two levels higher. Master: Effect is increased as if the caster is three levels higher. Grand Master: Effect is increased as if the caster is four levels higher. Note: If the effect is physical damage, the 20d6 maximum limit still applies. Duration Mastery: The duration of the spell is cast as if the caster is higher than he/she actually is. Obviously this only effects spells who has a variable duration based on the casters level. Basic: Standard spell casting Skilled: Duration is increased as if the caster is one level higher. Expert: Duration is increased as if the caster is two levels higher. Master: Duration is increased as if the caster is three levels higher. Grand Master: Duration is increased as if the caster is four levels higher. Range Mastery: The range of the spell is cast as if the caster is higher than he/she actually is. Obviously this only effects spells who has a variable range based on the casters level. Basic: Standard spell casting Skilled: Range is increased as if the caster is one level higher. Expert: Range is increased as if the caster is two levels higher. Master: Range is increased as if the caster is three levels higher. Grand Master: Range is increased as if the caster is four levels higher. Rogue Mastery Rogue mastery goes in 5 ranks from Basic to Grand Master, and uses the same Trainer Availabilty chart as shown above. Rogue Mastery is split into 5 sub groups. Trap Mastery, Stealth Mastery, Burgalry Mastery, Urban Crime Mastery, Silence Mastery. Trap Mastery: Thieves with this mastery specialize in the finding and removal of traps. Basic: Standard theif ability Skilled: Find Traps and Remove Traps are increased by 5%. Expert: Find Traps and Remove Traps are increased an additional 5% to a total bonus of 10%. Master: Find Traps and Remove Traps are increased an additional 5% to a total bonus of 15%. Grand Master: Find Traps and Remove Traps are increased an additional 5% to a total bonus of 20%. Stealth Mastery: Thieves with this mastery are masters of stealth. They specialize in moving silently and hiding in shadows. Basic: Standard theif ability Skilled: Move Silently and Hide in Shadows are increased by 5%. Expert: Move Silently and Hide in Shadows are increased an additional 5% to a total bonus of 10%. Master: Move Silently and Hide in Shadows are increased an additional 5% to a total bonus of 15%. Grand Master: Move Silently and Hide in Shadows are increased an additional 5% to a total bonus of 20%. Burgalry Mastery: Thieves with this mastery are experts in breaking into places and objects. They specialize in climbing walls and opening locks. Basic: Standard theif ability Skilled: Climb Walls and Open Locks are increased by 5%. Expert: Climb Walls and Open Locks are increased an additional 5% to a total bonus of 10%. Master: Climb Walls and Open Locks are increased an additional 5% to a total bonus of 15%. Grand Master: Climb Walls and Open Locks are increased an additional 5% to a total bonus of 20%. Urban Crime Mastery: Thieves with this mastery are masters of mugging and picking pockets. They specialize in the Pick Pockets and Hiding in Shadows skills. Basic: Standard theif ability Skilled: Hide in Shadows and Pick Pockets are increased by 5%. Expert: Hide in Shadows and Pick Pockets are increased an additional 5% to a total bonus of 10%. Master: Hide in Shadows and Pick Pockets are increased an additional 5% to a total bonus of 15%. Grand Master: Hide in Shadows and Pick Pockets are increased an additional 5% to a total bonus of 20%. Silence Mastery: Thieves with this mastery specialize in silence. They are experts in moving silently and are adept at picking up the slightest noise around them. Basic: Standard theif ability Skilled: Hear Noise and Move Silently are increased by 5%. Expert: Hear Noise and Move Silently are increased an additional 5% to a total bonus of 10%. Master: Hear Noise and Move Silently are increased an additional 5% to a total bonus of 15%. Grand Master: Hear Noise and Move Silently are increased an additional 5% to a total bonus of 20%. Thanks Dan :D Didn't think of this until I read your post :D Phil ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Eustace" To: Sent: Wednesday, August 21, 2002 4:30 AM Subject: [MYSTARA] Weapon Mastery (long) Weapon Mastery and Class Balance in OD&D by Daniel Eustace If used strictly as written, the rules for Weapon Mastery can present a serious challenge to game balance. The fighter class, especially, is given a huge advantage; few high level fighters would need to fear mages, as they could cut them down in a single round with multiple attacks and increased damage. High level fighters could weather most spells that a wizard could throw at them, by either making a routine save, or simply absorbing some annoying damage. Over the course of many years of gaming using the OD&D rules, I have established several house rules to harmonize the weapon mastery rules with similar benefits for other classes. For starters, I'll focus on the Weapon Mastery rules themselves. The first thing was to halve all of the hit roll bonuses for increased mastery levels. High level characters already can hit quite easily, so an additional + 8 to hit for a Grand Master seems excessive, and renders low Armor Classes moot. Here are the revised values: Unskilled No Bonus Basic No Bonus Skilled +1 Expert +2 Master +3 vs. Primary, +2 vs. Secondary Grand Master +4 vs. Primary, +3vs. Secondary I reduce the number of weapon choices available to Magic-Users, as follows: one weapon to start, one additional choice at levels 6, 11, 17, 23, 30 & 36. This reflects the fact that mages are dedicated to spell casting and not to weapons training. The next major change is regarding the Deflect ability. This rule does not play well (a simple save vs. DR to completely avoid an attack). Characters are hard enough to hit as it is, and when they can gain a saving throw to avoid combat damage altogether, it is a serious imbalance. However, it is reasonable that the weapons with this special ability (swords, staff, pole axe, club) would be useful in parrying attacks. My solution was to count the Deflect ability as a fighter's combat option to parry (-4 to AC, forego attacks). This gives other classes, and fighters below 9th level who gain knowledge in these weapons, the opportunity to defend themselves. I use the number of attacks able to be deflected as the "deflect factor". Higher deflect factors yield greater parrying ability, as follows: Deflect Factor Bonus to AC 1 -4 2 -6 3 -8 4 -10 If a character can already Parry as a Name level fighter, than I grant him an additional -4 bonus to AC, for a maximum possible bonus of -14. If the character wishes to exercise multiple attacks along with parrying, just use the AC Bonus as a fraction of the possible attacks. For example, a fighter with 2 attacks, and an AC bonus of -10 when parrying, could parry 1/2 and get a -5 AC bonus and make 1 attack. The same character, with 3 attacks, could parry 2/3 and gain a -7 AC bonus (round to nearest whole number). I also adjusted the damage for the normal sword, since it seemed high relative to comparable weapons. The revised damages are as follows: BS 1d8 SK 1d10 EX 1d12+1 MS P: 2d6+4 S: 2d4+4 GM P: 2d6+8 S: 2d4+8 Aside from the modifications to the weapon mastery system, I made a significant change to spell casting by having ability score bonuses directly affect every spell that is cast. A fighter's strength score comes into play in every single round of combat; the additional hit probability and increased damage for an 18 STR fighter is of much value. However, in game play, an INT 10 wizard may not be much less effective than an INT 18 wizard. The same goes for clerics with various WIS scores. With the following system, the ability score bonuses become a key factor in most situations. The INT modifier (WIS for clerics) will affect all spells cast, by penalizing the Saving Throw vs. the spell (i.e. 18 INT = save at -3). Additionally, the modifier is added to each die used to determine the spell's effects (damage, # affected, etc.), *up to the maximum for that die* (in other words, maximum of 6 for each d6 rolled. So for 18 INT, a roll of 3-6 would = 6). This system increases the effectiveness of spells based on the caster's abilities. Why wouldn't an 18 INT wizard be able to cast a Fire Ball better than a 13 INT one? This translates that into game play. Here's an example of how the average damage would be altered using this system for a 10-die Fire Ball: INT Modifier Avg. Damage 9-12 -- 35 13-15 +1 43 16-17 +2 50 18 +3 55 Note that this system also applies to clerical healing spells, so that clerics of higher WIS will heal greater damage (due to their increased understanding of the cosmos, faith, etc.). This tends to balance out encounters between spell-casters and fighters, so that each should rightly fear the other. Since OD&D clerics have limited offensive spell abilities, I granted the ability to simply receive spells (instead of picking them each morning) once certain levels are achieved. This gives the cleric greater flexibility with regards to spell selection, and if a rare spell is suddenly needed, the cleric can cast it. By 36th level, the cleric does not need to mediate for spells at all, but can simply cast as needed up to the maximum possible for each spell level. Cleric's Level Can Freely Cast 9 1st Level Spells 14 2nd " 18 3rd " 23 4th " 27 5th " 32 6th " 36 7th " For thieves, I made three modifications; two are technical changes affecting rules, and the third is an interpretative difference. Since a fighter or MU with this system could most likely slay a thief in a single round, with the right die rolls, a thief should be able to do likewise, when in his own element. This leads to the following increased Back Stabbing damage: Level 1 x2 Level 12 x3 Level 24 x4 Level 36 x5 The second change is to the Pick Pockets skill. I changed the -5% per level of the victim, to -5% per level of the victim *above 8th*. This gives a Master thief a much more realistic chance to ply his trade on his colleagues of similar level. The last change, is simply to be very liberal with regards to the practicing of Thief's Skills. Thieves need to rely on stealth and the practice of their skills to thrive, so I let them get away with quite a bit. For example, a ring could be slipped off of a victim's finger (Pick Pockets), or a thief could Hide in Shadows, if he won initiative after a successful Backstab. These adjustments make thieves feared as much as the other character types. When used together, these modifications work to balance out the additional power granted by Weapon Mastery, so that all classes become formidable in their own right. It really works quite nicely at high levels, but I have also used the system with PCs starting from 1st level, with good results. A further addition to these rules is Spell Mastery, the ability for spell-casters to improve selected elements of their magic. Spell Mastery will be described fully in a companion article. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 05:49:46 -0700 From: Hammer of Ulric Subject: Re: Dave Arneson is still doing Blackmoor But where is he doing it? His website, which used to be part of jovianclouds.com, has vanished with no sign of a forwarding address. Hammer of Ulric ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 06:10:54 -0700 From: Kar Ess Subject: Re: Dave Arneson is still doing Blackmoor Try this site http://www.tc.umn.edu/~mcco0212/blackmoor/bio.html KS --- Hammer of Ulric wrote: > But where is he doing it? > > His website, which used to be part of jovianclouds.com, has vanished > with > no sign of a forwarding address. > > Hammer of Ulric > > ******************************************************************** > The Other Worlds Homepage: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/OtherWorlds.asp > The Mystara Homepage: http://www.dnd.starflung.com/ > To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM > with UNSUB MYSTARA-L in the body of the message. > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 23:22:07 +0000 From: Agathokles Subject: Re: Master of Hule Plans Jonathan wrote: > > However it is for me impossible to get Wrath of the Immortals (WotI). > > I read an article called "End of The Known World" where there is a Time > Line > of the main event that take place during those years. A warning: the "End of the Known World" article (and the other Dark Mystara article as well) was written in order to give a very different outcome to the Wrath of the Immortals, so it does not represent what was in the official WotI timeline. Your best approximation to the official timeline would be Daniel Boese's Timeline of Mystara, which you can find in the History section of the Vaults of Pandius. > Why the Dark Elves invade Alfheim and why in this momment? This is as in the original timeline. The Shadow Elves have been plotting their revenge for years, and have been manipulated by Atzanteotl (who is allied to Bozdogan in the Wrath affair) in order to perform their attack with this timing (which is useful for Atzanteotl and Bozdogan's plans, since it will keep Ilsundal and Mealiden busy for a long time). > Why Alfheim could'nt do nothing to stop them? 1) The Shadow Elves were helped by Atzanteotl, who modified their spells, giving them the power to ruin the Canolbarth forest. 2) There are many more SE than surface elves (some 500.000 against only 75.000). Moreover, Darokin wasn't able to help. > Who is the Dark Hin? The Dark Hin are a creation of the Mailing List (you'll find the original files at the Vaults). I incorporated the "Night of Hell" events in my Dark Mystara setting, because they help breaking up Darokin (and therefore explaining why Darokin's response to the SE takeover was basically non-existent). > Why Thyatis didn't do anything? > What about Alphatia? They're covered in the other file (Dark Mystara II, the Empires). As others said, Alphatia and Thyatis were locked in a war that lasted for the whole period, until Thyatis's armies were defeated, and Alphatia was destroyed by Rad's Doomsday Device. > Why the explotion of the meteor cause that during one day magic dissapear? It's not the explosion, but the tampering of Rad and the Brotherhood of Radiance with the NoS. > If Bozdogan is indirectly doing all this mess, where are the other > Immortals? Many of them (like Ixion, Valerias, Vanya, Rad, and Alphatia) are directly involved in the war between Alphatia and the Thyatis/Glantri/Heldannic Knights coalition. The elven Immortals are locked up in the SE takeover of Alfheim. In the Dark Mystara version, other Immortals not mentioned in WotI work behind the scene to undo the mess made by the more active Immortals (forming a new Council as well). > Maybe some od this questions seems to have not apparently relation. But > somehow I think that all this events (the invasion of the Dark Elves, the > apparition of the Dark Hin, etc.) where planed with anticipation by someone > (maybe Bozdogan, I don't know). Yes. In both timelines, the events are somewhat coordinated by the various Immortals. In the End of the Known World there are just some extra events (like the Dark Hin invasion), and some heavy-handed "tweakings", like Canolbarth being petrified and the collapse of Darokin. -- Giampaolo Agosta agathokles@libero.it agosta@elet.polimi.it http://digilander.iol.it/agathokles ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 22:22:55 -0400 From: Dan Eustace Subject: Re: Weapon Mastery (long) > I assume that a 25+ level mage has more going for him than poor weapon > skills. Let's look at it. > > First, there is Meteor Swarm, 20d6 of damage that can't be saved against > plus four more attacks of 20d6 save to half will crimp the style of anyone. > This is an average of 70 hp from the impact, and another (assuming the > fighter saves) 140 hp from the blast, even assuming he saves. This is a > total of 210 damage from one spell. A level 25 fighter will have (assuming a > +1 Con bonus) around a hundred hit points... I believe the phrase you want > is DEAD FIGHTER. Is this what it does in AD&D? I use the OD&D rules where it does 8d6 impact + 8d6 blast, with only 1 meteor/target. This usually won't kill the F25 right away, but it will do major damage, esp. if the other 3 meteors hit within the blast radius. > Let's assume that the mage doesn't have the big gun. Even so a lightning > bolt or fireball will do 35 hp of damage with each shot. But if the MU only gets 1 shot, then its all over, as I already outlined. > Oh, let's not forget the Cureall spell. Heal will help, but the MU will have to get away from the fighter 1st. > And then there is monster summoning; a dragon would really ruin the > fighter's whole day. And while the fighter is playing with summoned > creatures the mage gets his whacks in. Yes, that is a good set of spells to use, but if the fighter can bypass the creatures and go right at the mage it might not matter. It would depend on the terrain and what other magics were available to both of them. > On the other hand, let's assume the mage has spell mastery and has upped the > damage to d8s for his lightning bolt; then the average damage is not 70 hp; > it is 90 saved to 45... > > I think that a prepared mage should be able to wipe out just about anyone > with little modification. The same cannot be said for a fighter. In short, > without the weapon mastery rules and optional rules in place fighters have > little chance against a prepared foe; everyone has special abilities but > them. When a L25 mage can dish out 10 hp of damage (minimum) up to 120 hp > (max) per round and even with weapon mastery the fighter deals a minimum of > 0 and a maximum of something like 100 hp; I think that is pretty balanced. > While you are correct that a fighter who teleports right up next to a wizard > can take him out in one round, in real gaming that doesn't happen often. The > fighter has to get up to the mage. Unless the fighter is mounted (and that > won't last long) the fighter must endure two spells before getting to the > mage. Say LBolt and teleport (the mage is now further away again and can > shoot the fighter again, and again, and so on. > What makes you think a fighter is going to be able to get close to a > high-level mage? The point about the mounts is absolutely true. That's why hi-level PCs IMC have their MU (from the PC party or hired as a magist) put a permanent fly on them. This lets them get up to opponents very quickly, and doesn't allow much room for error on the part of a MU being attacked. If they have alot of open space, an MU can gain the advantage by the tactics you described, and by dispelling the F's fly... > Then, of course, there is my favorite; Projected Image. Sure the fighter > goes up and wipes out the PI. This takes two rounds. After losing over 60% > of his hp the fighter discovers he has been tricked and the mage is now two > rounds away laughing at him. Yes, I've used this spell to good effect,as well. > If the fighter is smart and the mage is dumb the mage deserves to die. If > they are both smart the mage has a small chance of losing; the mage can > afford to make a small mistake (teleporting away if things get too bad) > while the fighter can't afford to make a single mistake. If the fighter is > dumb he is dead. > > In short, I will take on your toughest fighter with a reasonably prepared > mage any time (even a mere L20 mage can take out a L25 fighter without too > much effort). Again, only if he can stay away from him. In closed quarters, the MU might not have enough room to work. Once the fighter reaches him, the MU is dead. The same might not be true if it's the other way around. It would take at least 2 rounds for the MU to kill the F, in most cases (a magic missile followed by PWK, or similar). > I didn't have to give the mage anything to keep up with the fighters, it was > the other way around. I was getting complaints from fighters who had to go > up against NPC mages that there was no point in being a fighter (they also > said that based on PC mages who were doing their own spell research). When > the weapon mastery rules came out it was exactly what the fighters had been > looking for. You could be right. The PCs IMC were around 7-10 level when I started using WM. It did not take long for me to notice how out of whack the deflect made things, so I ditched that. I didn't implement the other adjustments for some time (L20+ ?), when it became apparent that IMC fighters clearly had the upper hand. Maybe w/o WM, MUs would have been dominant at higher levels. > I agree about the AC system, which is why I used the AV system I described > earlier. Stoneskin became a very popular spell after that. Yes, I find AV an intriguing possibility, but after so long with the same rules and house rules, I'm hesitant to radically change anything, since what I have works well. I would like to try it in a different campaign, to see how it is. > Even if you only increase the range of a spell, that translates to doing > more damage. It gives the fighter another round of enduring the mage's > spells to be able to get close enough to be effective. Agreed. That's why I also use Spell Mastery which can increase range. > I agree that we are not too divergent in our views. Rather than taking > things away from characters, I tend to give them so many things they can't > do it all; after all my games tend to be very realistic in terms of > opponents (lots of political connections and problems, lots of intrigue; > there is nothing worse than trying to be straightforward about a mission and > discovering all of your information is simply wrong!). I have no problems > with throwing bones to my players... Yes. You give them one thing, and then it needs to be counter-balanced with something else down the road. I also put limits on haste/speed (only x2), giant str (extra die of dmg, or limited uses if true x2 dmg), # of magic missiles, and plenty of other things that needed tweaking. I don't forsee major changes, but I'm constantly trying to improve and refine things. > As it is, it was these problems that forced me to design my own game system > that has its own internal balance while allowing players to develop their > characters as they choose (within the limits set by the GM). Check out > www.borigon.com and tell me what you think. I am rewriting what is up there > so some suggestions may already be in place... Yeah, I've looked at it before and it seems good. I don't recall the details, but it seemed balanced and flexible. I'll check-out your current version when I get the chance. Dan ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 22:33:38 -0400 From: Dan Eustace Subject: Re: Weapon Mastery (long) And it's not as if mages are hurt > badly by the weapon mastery rule - a grand master with a non-magical > dagger can do 64 points of damage in a round. Not really, (unless he's hasted!) a MU will only get 1 attack/round, so he could do 16, or 32 if scoring x2 dmg (on a 17-20). ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 00:30:22 -0400 From: Dan Eustace Subject: Re: Weapon Mastery (long) > Spell Mastery > Spell mastery goes in 5 ranks from Basic to Grand Master, and uses the same > Trainer Availabilty chart as shown above. Spell Mastery is split into 3 sub > groups. Effect Mastery, Duration Mastery, Range Mastery. Here is what I use for spell mastery in range, duration, and saving throws: BS as normal SK x1.5 range/duration, spell levels 1-6 (1-4 for clerical), saves -2 EX x1.5 range/dur, spell levels 7-9 (5-7), saves -5 MS x2 range/dur, levels 1-6 (1-4), saves -7 GM x2 range/dur, levels 7-9 (5-7), saves -10 Spell masters aren't all that common, IMC, however. Mostly they'd be in Alphatia or Glantri. A PC MU36 is EX in Range, and MS in Duration, BS in Saves. The saving throw thing works good, since high level PCs need 2's in everything. Add in magical protections, and modest penalties get cancelled out. This way, a MS or GM in saves can at least force them to make a "real" saving throw. It keeps everyone on their toes. > Rogue Mastery > Rogue mastery goes in 5 ranks from Basic to Grand Master, and uses the same > Trainer Availabilty chart as shown above. Rogue Mastery is split into 5 sub > groups. Trap Mastery, Stealth Mastery, Burgalry Mastery, Urban Crime > Mastery, Silence Mastery. I like this idea! I may adopt a version of this. > Thanks Dan :D Didn't think of this until I read your post :D > Phil No problem. That's why I posted the article, to spark discussion and share ideas, and hopefully to help generate new ideas! That's what the list is for! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 00:11:21 -0600 From: Angelo Bertolli Subject: Re: Dragon scale armour I guess I just try to imagine what kind of armor could be made out of scales. Basically 2 come to mind: scale mail and plate mail which is then covered with the scales. Something like red dragon scales will give a +2 to save vs fire attacks. If enchanted, they would have a resist fire effect. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Larry" Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 9:21 PM Subject: Re: Dragon scale armour > IMC armor made from dargons is equal to scale mail. As > for gaining protection form dragon attacks or the PC > gaining the same protections that a dragon gets i dont > alow that because the dragon dosent get its protection > from its armor alone, its the whole make up of the > dragon that gives its imunitey powers from. > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2002 00:28:14 -0600 From: Angelo Bertolli Subject: Combat Simulation I agree that there is an advantage to keeping the rules relatively simple. In fact, I don't know if I agree with people about abstracting hit points to anything that makes "sense," but I do think that making combat more realistic falls short unless you make it ENTIRELY realistic. Just fixing one little conceptual problem in the way a real (though fantasy) fight fight "should" occur seems to introduce more problems elsewhere. For example the way AD&D decided it was realistic to allow 2 shots with a bow instead of one, may be accurate in and of itself, but if you're going to make changes like that, is it really realistic that people are making an attack every 10 seconds? But then some people abstract that out to be, they make one "good" attack every 10 seconds and all the rest is manuvering. But it still seems kind of ridiculous. I think I'll be happy as long as 1) game balance is kept and 2) the rules are kept relatively simple (you get a turn, I get a turn -- it IS a game after all). I gave up on caring about whether battles in D&D made sense years ago. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jonathan L." Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 4:02 PM Subject: Re: Enchanting Armour > Pretty good for me. > > I think that D&D is so great for many reasons. One of them is the simple > game rules. > Maybe adding to this something to make more difficult to hit the enemy (not > just using the AC) could be better. > Or maybe making more powerfull armors. > > I think that in a combat the armor is very important as a last instance. The > first thing you use to defend yourself is the sword and moving to avoid the > attack. > You don't defend yourself using your armor!! > > Jonathan > ------------------------------ End of MYSTARA-L Digest - 20 Aug 2002 to 21 Aug 2002 (#2002-217) ****************************************************************