 | | | | | | |
| |
|
When the world was young, the Anasazi roamed the Earth. They were more than
just a nomadic people, for they were part of the world itself. Where the
Anasazi roamed, plants flourished, game was plentiful and the races of Earth
thrived, as did peace among them.
But a shadow began to grow in the periphery of all the races. And soon,
Anger was given birth, followed by Hate and Malice. Colors began to mute
and weeds appeared in the world.
The Anasazi, though powerful as gods, could not adequately protect all the
peoples of the world. Soon armies were amassed, lines drawn and battles
begun. The world became at war with itself. No race of the Earth was safe,
even from itself.
For centuries the war raged. Gone from the knowledge of the world were the
High Arts, Trust and Compassion. In their place grew Weapon Smithing,
Dubiety and Indifference.
The wisest and most adept of the Anasazi was named Agot. Agot brought all
the Anasazi together, the first such meeting Time had ever witnessed. He
called upon the power of all of the Anasazi and built a castle three miles
high. Within its walls, a forge that drew upon the power of Earth's core
was constructed. It was time for the Anasazi to wage war against the
darkness that afflicted the races of the world. To this end, a mighty sword
was forged from the power of the Earth and of the Anasazi and the Sword of
Agot was born. A single sword with which to purify the world.
A Champion was chosen, cleansed by the Sword and known only as the First.
He was then given the Sword of Agot and told to ride all the lands of Earth,
striking all who he came in contact with. The First scourged the Earth and
purified all he came across for three hundred years. When he was done, he
returned and placed the Sword of Agot in the heart of the castle. With the
remaining power of the Anasazi, Agot sealed the castle to keep the races of
Earth safe from the temptation of power within.
The great castle slowly decayed into a mountain and became known as
Ancient's Keep. For seven thousand years, the world remained at peace and
the Sword of Agot passed into legend, secure in the heart of the mountain.
But the darkness was cunning and the First missed a few precious beings that
carried a shadow in their hearts. The shadow did not forget about the sword
or the castle and for seven thousand years planned and rebuilt its strength.
The Sword of Agot, the shadow decided, would be the vehicle with which to
reclaim the Earth. To this end, the shadow hoarded energy until it had
enough to cause the Earth to quake. The world trembled with such force that
that day was forever known as God's Shudder and the races of Earth knew fear
again.
The quake caused a great split in the Earth and it cracked Ancient's Keep
open, exposing its heart. No longer relegated to the stories of myth and
legend, the presence of the Sword of Agot became known to all the races. No
kingdom could withstand whomever possessed such power, should it fall into
the wrong hands. So once again, armies were amassed and now a race was born
to find and secure the Sword. For the only certainty was that each kingdom
believed the only way it could be at peace was if it possessed the Sword of
Agot. Once again a shadow appeared in the periphery of the races…
================================================
As mentioned earlier, this is a TL2 game utilizing magic. Each being
utilizing SP, has an initial limit of 50 CP for the powers (once in battle,
there's nothing to stop a unit from picking up a magic item which
technically puts it over the 50 CP limit). Additionally, each army is
allotted 1000 CP. The game is scheduled for Sunday, April 27. Jonathan,
once again, has graciously offered his home as the place where the carnage
will occur. Right now, there are four definites (Shaun, Dave, Jonathan and
myself) and one tentative (Neil). This game will involve teams, so if there
are others out there who want to play, please speak up within the next
couple of days, so we can determine how many armies there will be and who
the teams are...strategies must be devised and tactics thought out, not to
mention armies have to be assembled!
This is most definitely an equal opportunity game, so armies are encouraged
to be made up of multiple races.
Lastly, if you think the total army CP count should be modified (like to
1200 or 999.44), bring it up...and no, Shaun, you can't have 3000+ CP.
Oh, and one more thing...I think it would be helpful (necessary?) if at
least a couple of us worked on the scenery together, regardless of what team
you may ultimately be on. Any on-lookers are also welcome to build things,
if they so desire.
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Dan and I should be able to make it. This sounds fab! I might even play! :)
Jennifer
> Right now, there are four definites (Shaun, Dave, Jonathan and
> myself) and one tentative (Neil). This game will involve teams, so if
> there
> are others out there who want to play, please speak up within the next
> couple of days, so we can determine how many armies there will be and who
> the teams are...strategies must be devised and tactics thought out, not to
> mention armies have to be assembled!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
<snip>
> As mentioned earlier, this is a TL2 game utilizing magic. Each being
> utilizing SP, has an initial limit of 50 CP for the powers (once in battle,
> there's nothing to stop a unit from picking up a magic item which
> technically puts it over the 50 CP limit). Additionally, each army is
> allotted 1000 CP. The game is scheduled for Sunday, April 27. Jonathan,
> once again, has graciously offered his home as the place where the carnage
> will occur. Right now, there are four definites (Shaun, Dave, Jonathan and
> myself) and one tentative (Neil). This game will involve teams, so if there
> are others out there who want to play, please speak up within the next
> couple of days, so we can determine how many armies there will be and who
> the teams are...strategies must be devised and tactics thought out, not to
> mention armies have to be assembled!
>
> This is most definitely an equal opportunity game, so armies are encouraged
> to be made up of multiple races.
Can I be the relay race?
> Lastly, if you think the total army CP count should be modified (like to
> 1200 or 999.44), bring it up...and no, Shaun, you can't have 3000+ CP.
>
> Oh, and one more thing...I think it would be helpful (necessary?) if at
> least a couple of us worked on the scenery together, regardless of what team
> you may ultimately be on. Any on-lookers are also welcome to build things,
> if they so desire.
The table I have is 4' x 8' with one 4' side against the wall. There is
also another table in the room that is 2' x 6' with one 6' side against the
wall.
I will be on vaction the two weeks prior to the game, but I will be taking
with me a large supply of legos to try and build some scenery and an army.
I am a little short on green bricks, but I have a lot of gray to build rock
out croppings with.
Jonathan
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> [snip sword story]
> ================================================
That said, is there any plot going on here concerning this here sword? Or
said '3-mile-high-castle'?
Is the goal to capture the sword? Might the sword be guarded by some 3rd
party? Perhaps capturing the sword is only useful insofar as it's a prime
butt-kicking sword?
> Lastly, if you think the total army CP count should be modified (like to
> 1200 or 999.44), bring it up...and no, Shaun, you can't have 3000+ CP.
So, just to be clear, we're saying 1000 CP per *team* not per *team member*,
I'm assuming.
> Oh, and one more thing...I think it would be helpful (necessary?) if at
> least a couple of us worked on the scenery together, regardless of what team
> you may ultimately be on. Any on-lookers are also welcome to build things,
> if they so desire.
It would be awesomely cool to have a rubble-shell of a once-great-castle
sitting there to fight around. If there is indeed a 'Sword of Agot' (is that
name inspired by the conversation at Picadilly?) that's in the game, I'm
thinking there'd be, say, 3 entrances (evenly spaced, one in the middle, one
on each end) to get to said sword? Dang. I just took apart one huge layout,
and I'm thinking about a 2nd one. Dang.
DaveE
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > [snip sword story]
> > ================================================
>
> That said, is there any plot going on here concerning this here sword? Or
> said '3-mile-high-castle'?
Oh yes! The Sword of Agot will be there for the taking, but it shouldn't be
the only thing to focus on...afterall, if you hack all of your opponents to
bits, there really is not need for the Sword. AND, the Sword will *not* be
so powerful that should someone get, the game is over. What I'm thinking
here - and this is just an idea - is that each team come up with some sort
of power or side affect for the sword. There will also be at least one
negative affect. Each one of these powers will be assigned a number(s) and
so when it is used, you will not necessarily get the desired outcome
(afterall, you haven't been cleansed, have you, hmmm?)
As for the castle/Ancient's Keep, I have an idea of something mountain-like
at the base with pieces of castle poking out the higher you get. This is
the main thing that I think would need multiple people to build...it's also
a call for BURPs and POOPs. It should definitely engourage warfare on and
around its surface.
> Is the goal to capture the sword? Might the sword be guarded by some 3rd
> party? Perhaps capturing the sword is only useful insofar as it's a prime
> butt-kicking sword?
See above.
> > Lastly, if you think the total army CP count should be modified (like to
> > 1200 or 999.44), bring it up...and no, Shaun, you can't have 3000+ CP.
>
> So, just to be clear, we're saying 1000 CP per *team* not per *team member*,
> I'm assuming.
Yes, 1000 CP per team, but, again, we can alter that count, if you think
that's best. The idea is to have large armies...troops, magic folk,
ballistae and the like. I would be fine with increasing the total count.
> > Oh, and one more thing...I think it would be helpful (necessary?) if at
> > least a couple of us worked on the scenery together, regardless of what team
> > you may ultimately be on. Any on-lookers are also welcome to build things,
> > if they so desire.
>
> It would be awesomely cool to have a rubble-shell of a once-great-castle
> sitting there to fight around. If there is indeed a 'Sword of Agot' (is that
> name inspired by the conversation at Picadilly?) that's in the game, I'm
> thinking there'd be, say, 3 entrances (evenly spaced, one in the middle, one
> on each end) to get to said sword? Dang. I just took apart one huge layout,
> and I'm thinking about a 2nd one. Dang.
Hmmm, I don't seem to recall the conversation you're referring to, but I
actually wrote the story before the weekend. I created 'Agot' by taking the
first letter of each word from the book I'm currently reading: A Game of
Thrones (by George R. R. Martin - it's remarkable). And, yes, it would be
cool to have something as you or I have described in the center of our
Little Earth.
- Joe
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> Oh yes! The Sword of Agot will be there for the taking, but it shouldn't be
> the only thing to focus on...afterall, if you hack all of your opponents to
> bits, there really is not need for the Sword. AND, the Sword will *not* be
> so powerful that should someone get, the game is over. What I'm thinking
> here - and this is just an idea - is that each team come up with some sort
> of power or side affect for the sword. There will also be at least one
> negative affect. Each one of these powers will be assigned a number(s) and
> so when it is used, you will not necessarily get the desired outcome
> (afterall, you haven't been cleansed, have you, hmmm?)
Ahh, cool :)
Yeah, that's more or less what I thought would be cool-- the sword is really
helpful, but if you're restricted to running up to enemies and slashing
them, it doesn't prevent you from being killed along the way or whatever.
> As for the castle/Ancient's Keep, I have an idea of something mountain-like
> at the base with pieces of castle poking out the higher you get. This is
> the main thing that I think would need multiple people to build...it's also
> a call for BURPs and POOPs. It should definitely engourage warfare on and
> around its surface.
I've probably got enough BURPs for the whole project if need be... Wow. I
just checked Peeron-- I should have 176 BURPs (Grey/Dk Grey rectangular &
triangular). Dang. I didn't realize I had so many.
> I would be fine with increasing the total count.
I'd actually be inclined to lower the max SP/CP allotment per character,
assuming I understand it right. As I understand it you can have 50 CP for
your SP allotment per character? So I could have a trooper who cost 25
points, and 50 points of SP's on top of that? If that's the case I could see
someone (aka me) going nutso and buying 13 troops who all maxxed out their
CP limits who were super-hard to kill. IIRC it's 20 CP to get that 'hover
flight' like Ram Man, and then 30 extra points to spend on more SP's to do
highly damaging things, not including whatever you might have equipment-wise.
I guess I should say I'm envisioning characters being about as powerful
(maybe a bit more) than the superheros in the Super-game we played a while
back; which were mostly 27CP (base) + a max of 23 CP's spent on SP's.
I'm thinking maybe... hmm... I guess you could fix it in one or more of a
few ways:
#1 - lower the SP's CP limit per troop to, say... 30 CP max spent on SP's?
#2 - set a ratio limit for magic users (like, oh, I dunno, 7 non-magic
troops per 1 magic troop?)
#2a - set a ratio limit for magic users based on their SP-- IE ratio
increases by 2 for every 10 CP spent on SP's?
#3 - have an SP limit per team? IE each team is limited to, I dunno, 200
CP's spent on SP's?
#4 - similar to the ratio idea, maybe each team can have a max of 1 50
CP-on-SP character, 3 30 CP-on-SP characters, 10 10 CP-on-SP characters or
whatnot?
#5 - set the *total* CP limit per character to 50 CP, including any spent on
SP's (that way you're less inclined to have *champions* running around with
mega SP's, since you can cram more SP's into a trooper/hero than a champion)
> Hmmm, I don't seem to recall the conversation you're referring to, but I
> actually wrote the story before the weekend. I created 'Agot' by taking the
> first letter of each word from the book I'm currently reading: A Game of
> Thrones
Heh, I was thinking: "Toga! Toga! Toga!" (backwards)
> And, yes, it would be
> cool to have something as you or I have described in the center of our
> Little Earth.
Note on the sword-- if it's more or less "up for grabs", it'll go pretty
quick, is my guess. Spend a bunch of points on hover-flight like Ram Man and
people can go right in and snatch it. Hmm... I'm thinking 'traps'. Or some
3rd party guard who you don't want to take on all alone...
DaveE
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
<SNIP>
> > (afterall, you haven't been cleansed, have you, hmmm?)
>
> Ahh, cool :)
>
> Yeah, that's more or less what I thought would be cool-- the sword is really
> helpful, but if you're restricted to running up to enemies and slashing
> them, it doesn't prevent you from being killed along the way or whatever.
Exactly...it's good to have, but you still are not invulnerable from flying
cows and what not.
> > As for the castle/Ancient's Keep, I have an idea of something mountain-like
> > at the base with pieces of castle poking out the higher you get. This is
> > the main thing that I think would need multiple people to build...it's also
> > a call for BURPs and POOPs. It should definitely engourage warfare on and
> > around its surface.
>
> I've probably got enough BURPs for the whole project if need be... Wow. I
> just checked Peeron-- I should have 176 BURPs (Grey/Dk Grey rectangular &
> triangular). Dang. I didn't realize I had so many.
Woa...it's to bad they don't make any in green and brown, but we can easily
add bits and pieces of earth and vegitation once the general structure it there.
> > I would be fine with increasing the total count.
>
> I'd actually be inclined to lower the max SP/CP allotment per character,
> assuming I understand it right. As I understand it you can have 50 CP for
> your SP allotment per character? So I could have a trooper who cost 25
> points, and 50 points of SP's on top of that? If that's the case I could see
> someone (aka me) going nutso and buying 13 troops who all maxxed out their
> CP limits who were super-hard to kill. IIRC it's 20 CP to get that 'hover
> flight' like Ram Man, and then 30 extra points to spend on more SP's to do
> highly damaging things, not including whatever you might have equipment-wise.
>
> I guess I should say I'm envisioning characters being about as powerful
> (maybe a bit more) than the superheros in the Super-game we played a while
> back; which were mostly 27CP (base) + a max of 23 CP's spent on SP's.
Actually, yes...any unit should be limited to a maximum of 50 CP that is
utilizing SP, including the cost of the unit itself is what I was thinking
(but didn't state that way), but a true cap specifically on SP for a given
unit/weapon is probably a better idea. What we don't want is a cheezy way
of getting around the rule by creating an SP unit of 50 CP then designing a
magical weapon of 50 CP, thus creating a 100 CP unit with unstopable power.
BUT, there should be some flexability here. Brikwars tends to favor larger
numbers of weaker units than fewer, more powerful ones. I do have a race in
mind for the game that will cost a bit of CP and will utilize some SP...if I
decide I only need a small amount of SP, it seems imposing an arbitrary
limit of total CP causes issues (ballistae can easily cost more than that).
Also, we may want to decide to use the hitpoint option for any SP unit (or
any powerful unit, regardless of whether they use SP) to ensure that a horde
of unorganized regular units can still take down a more powerful one. I
think this gets around the invulnerable-unit issue.
> I'm thinking maybe... hmm... I guess you could fix it in one or more of a
> few ways:
>
> #1 - lower the SP's CP limit per troop to, say... 30 CP max spent on SP's?
I like this option.
> #2 - set a ratio limit for magic users (like, oh, I dunno, 7 non-magic
> troops per 1 magic troop?)
This isn't a bad idea, although I think saying something like no more than
25% of your army's CP can be allocated to SP.
> #2a - set a ratio limit for magic users based on their SP-- IE ratio
> increases by 2 for every 10 CP spent on SP's?
At first I didn't like this, but I'm warming up to it.
> #3 - have an SP limit per team? IE each team is limited to, I dunno, 200
> CP's spent on SP's?
This would be fair, and it also gives flexibility as to how you use it.
> #4 - similar to the ratio idea, maybe each team can have a max of 1 50
> CP-on-SP character, 3 30 CP-on-SP characters, 10 10 CP-on-SP characters or
> whatnot?
I think this is too restrictive.
> #5 - set the *total* CP limit per character to 50 CP, including any spent on
> SP's (that way you're less inclined to have *champions* running around with
> mega SP's, since you can cram more SP's into a trooper/hero than a champion)
I think this can be too restrictive. Having some large/powerful units
involved in the mayhem is a good thing and it also means that you will tend
to have fewer overall units which may be problematic, depending on your
strategy. I'd like to keep this as open-ended as possible.
> > Hmmm, I don't seem to recall the conversation you're referring to, but I
> > actually wrote the story before the weekend. I created 'Agot' by taking the
> > first letter of each word from the book I'm currently reading: A Game of
> > Thrones
>
> Heh, I was thinking: "Toga! Toga! Toga!" (backwards)
Oh, *that* conversation. Too funny.
> > And, yes, it would be
> > cool to have something as you or I have described in the center of our
> > Little Earth.
>
> Note on the sword-- if it's more or less "up for grabs", it'll go pretty
> quick, is my guess. Spend a bunch of points on hover-flight like Ram Man and
> people can go right in and snatch it. Hmm... I'm thinking 'traps'. Or some
> 3rd party guard who you don't want to take on all alone...
Well, Agot was wise. I'm sure when he sealed the castle, he placed a few
wards in and around the castle and the Sword itself :) Again, I think this
is an opportunity for everyone to create some potentially hazardous
situation which we roll against. This keeps it random and also prevents one
person/team from knowing everything that lies ahead.
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> Woa...it's to bad they don't make any in green and brown, but we can easily
> add bits and pieces of earth and vegitation once the general structure it
> there.
I'll have to see what I can dig up... I've been sorting my basic bricks now
that the Hoth base is down-- All the grey & white we could want. Tan, Green,
& Brown are great for scenery, though... maybe if we get a 'basic' idea for
a layout we can try and allot chunks of it for people to build? Hmm... I
wonder how much I could do with those colors. I'll have to check.
> > I guess I should say I'm envisioning characters being about as powerful
> > (maybe a bit more) than the superheros in the Super-game we played a while
> > back; which were mostly 27CP (base) + a max of 23 CP's spent on SP's.
>
> Actually, yes...any unit should be limited to a maximum of 50 CP that is
> utilizing SP, including the cost of the unit itself is what I was thinking
> (but didn't state that way), but a true cap specifically on SP for a given
> unit/weapon is probably a better idea.
Ah, ok :) That works much better... Just making sure we don't have champions
or whatnot floating around that cost base 60 CP + 50 CP's spent on SP's on
top of that or anything.
> What we don't want is a cheezy way
> of getting around the rule by creating an SP unit of 50 CP then designing a
> magical weapon of 50 CP, thus creating a 100 CP unit with unstopable power.
> BUT, there should be some flexability here.
Yeah-- I could of course see someone unsportsmanlike (say, Shaun) making 1
character with magic 40CP plate armor, one character with a magic 40CP
sword, and one who was a 50CP base character with crazy SP's, then just
having his armor & sword characters give their weapons to the 50CP
character. Shame on you, Shaun for even thinking that.
Anyway, should go without saying that there's no switching weapons &
equipment except where it would make sense (like if your squad of troopers
kills an opposing magic-sword-wielder and one of them drops his short sword
in exchange for the magic one)
> Brikwars tends to favor larger numbers of weaker units than fewer, more
> powerful ones.
Huh... I always kinda thought the opposite-- Vehicles and mass-power units
often seem to dominate the game, although squads can be useful at times. I'm
just reminded of:
- Neil's death knight chewing through 2 squads of our troops without blinking
- Joe's TL2 dual-chakrum-thrower-hero, who mowed down squads at a whim
- Most TL5+ games, where troopers were more-or-less useless (being why we
decided we liked more troop-intensive games)
- One of my crazy-knights being ganged up on by *4* of Neil's troops, who in
turn killed *3* of them (on *Neil's* turn nonetheless)
- Eric J's TL2 giants swooshing through innocent troopers at a whim
> I do have a race in
> mind for the game that will cost a bit of CP and will utilize some SP...if I
> decide I only need a small amount of SP, it seems imposing an arbitrary
> limit of total CP causes issues (ballistae can easily cost more than that).
Yeah, it's difficult since I'd like to allow, say, a race of X who each have
like 5 SP's, and be able to use them as though they were regular troops, but
I also want to ensure there's no cheaty-type-super-units.
> Also, we may want to decide to use the hitpoint option for any SP unit (or
> any powerful unit, regardless of whether they use SP) to ensure that a horde
> of unorganized regular units can still take down a more powerful one. I
> think this gets around the invulnerable-unit issue.
I like that idea-- perhaps any unit with an AV greater than some number gets
turned into a hit-point unit?
> > Note on the sword-- if it's more or less "up for grabs", it'll go pretty
> > quick, is my guess. Spend a bunch of points on hover-flight like Ram Man and
> > people can go right in and snatch it. Hmm... I'm thinking 'traps'. Or some
> > 3rd party guard who you don't want to take on all alone...
>
>
> Well, Agot was wise. I'm sure when he sealed the castle, he placed a few
> wards in and around the castle and the Sword itself :) Again, I think this
> is an opportunity for everyone to create some potentially hazardous
> situation which we roll against. This keeps it random and also prevents one
> person/team from knowing everything that lies ahead.
That works :)
DaveE
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> I'll have to see what I can dig up... I've been sorting my basic bricks now
> that the Hoth base is down-- All the grey & white we could want. Tan, Green,
> & Brown are great for scenery, though... maybe if we get a 'basic' idea for
> a layout we can try and allot chunks of it for people to build? Hmm... I
> wonder how much I could do with those colors. I'll have to check.
I could work on a ruff layout if I had a list of things we wanted to include
on the layout.
I have a bunch of green, brown, and extra NELUG gray bricks that I can use
for this event. Plus I can use some of the gorge sections.
<snip>
> > What we don't want is a cheezy way
> > of getting around the rule by creating an SP unit of 50 CP then designing a
> > magical weapon of 50 CP, thus creating a 100 CP unit with unstopable power.
> > BUT, there should be some flexability here.
>
> Yeah-- I could of course see someone unsportsmanlike (say, Shaun) making 1
> character with magic 40CP plate armor, one character with a magic 40CP
> sword, and one who was a 50CP base character with crazy SP's, then just
> having his armor & sword characters give their weapons to the 50CP
> character. Shame on you, Shaun for even thinking that.
So what is really wrong with this concept? If Shaun made an army of
servants and one warrior, I could keep him stuck in one place for the entire
game by using an SP power.
> Anyway, should go without saying that there's no switching weapons &
> equipment except where it would make sense (like if your squad of troopers
> kills an opposing magic-sword-wielder and one of them drops his short sword
> in exchange for the magic one)
We could also make the weapons themselves have an AV level allowing them to
be targeted and destroyed.
> > Brikwars tends to favor larger numbers of weaker units than fewer, more
> > powerful ones.
>
> Huh... I always kinda thought the opposite-- Vehicles and mass-power units
> often seem to dominate the game, although squads can be useful at times. I'm
> just reminded of:
>
> - Neil's death knight chewing through 2 squads of our troops without blinking
> - Joe's TL2 dual-chakrum-thrower-hero, who mowed down squads at a whim
> - Most TL5+ games, where troopers were more-or-less useless (being why we
> decided we liked more troop-intensive games)
> - One of my crazy-knights being ganged up on by *4* of Neil's troops, who in
> turn killed *3* of them (on *Neil's* turn nonetheless)
> - Eric J's TL2 giants swooshing through innocent troopers at a whim
Forgot one. Dave's Panzer destroying Jon's entire squad in one turn.
<snip>
> > Also, we may want to decide to use the hitpoint option for any SP unit (or
> > any powerful unit, regardless of whether they use SP) to ensure that a horde
> > of unorganized regular units can still take down a more powerful one. I
> > think this gets around the invulnerable-unit issue.
>
> I like that idea-- perhaps any unit with an AV greater than some number gets
> turned into a hit-point unit?
I would say an AV and or an SP greater than some number. That way Shaun
could have his troops give up there weapons to one warrior. That warrior
would then convert to hit points for the rest of the game.
Now with the hit points, do we want to prevent the use of healing elixer?
<snip>
Jonathan D.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Jonathan Dallas writes:
> > Yeah-- I could of course see someone unsportsmanlike (say, Shaun) making 1
> > character with magic 40CP plate armor, one character with a magic 40CP
> > sword, and one who was a 50CP base character with crazy SP's, then just
> > having his armor & sword characters give their weapons to the 50CP
> > character. Shame on you, Shaun for even thinking that.
>
> So what is really wrong with this concept? If Shaun made an army of
> servants and one warrior, I could keep him stuck in one place for the entire
> game by using an SP power.
Well, ok, a magic plate armor and sword aren't good examples, but let's just
say a mega-powerful character doesn't need to worry much about where on the
board he is. Consider Neil's necromancer. Ouch.
> > Anyway, should go without saying that there's no switching weapons &
> > equipment except where it would make sense (like if your squad of troopers
> > kills an opposing magic-sword-wielder and one of them drops his short sword
> > in exchange for the magic one)
>
> We could also make the weapons themselves have an AV level allowing them to
> be targeted and destroyed.
They actually already have AV for most things-- It depends on what material
the item is made from. Somewhere in the beginning of the trooper's arsenal,
IIRC. Although I don't think there are rules about modifying the AV of a
weapon. As for targeting, I assume it would count under the 'smaller than a
minifig head' for most things.
> > - Neil's death knight chewing through 2 squads of our troops without blinking
> > - Joe's TL2 dual-chakrum-thrower-hero, who mowed down squads at a whim
> > - Most TL5+ games, where troopers were more-or-less useless (being why we
> > decided we liked more troop-intensive games)
> > - One of my crazy-knights being ganged up on by *4* of Neil's troops, who in
> > turn killed *3* of them (on *Neil's* turn nonetheless)
> > - Eric J's TL2 giants swooshing through innocent troopers at a whim
>
> Forgot one. Dave's Panzer destroying Jon's entire squad in one turn.
Heh, I probably forgot a bunch :) Actually, another good one was Shaun's
powerful unit blowing up in a hallway and consequently causing ... how many
troops' deaths?
> > I like that idea-- perhaps any unit with an AV greater than some number gets
> > turned into a hit-point unit?
>
> I would say an AV and or an SP greater than some number. That way Shaun
> could have his troops give up there weapons to one warrior. That warrior
> would then convert to hit points for the rest of the game.
Well, the idea being that the extra equipment would theoretically have magic
to increase the unit's total AV. So his AV would jump from, say, 10 to 50,
and then he'd need to convert.
> Now with the hit points, do we want to prevent the use of healing elixer?
Hmm... good question. I think I'd probably opt for one or more of
- healing over time (say... 3HP per round?)
- majik mediks
- healing potions (same as whatever mediks use, but SP applied to a potion)
I'm not sure I'm against healing potions, since you'd need to make a potion
be pretty powerful to fully-heal a unit. Plus (assumedly), it takes a full
turn to drink the potion, so that unit is incapacitated for the turn. I
would say it's an all-or-nothing thing. So no "I'm gonna drink 1/2 of it,
and save the next 1/2 for later". That way if you want to splurge on healing
potions, that's just more you could have spent elsewhere.
In *FACT*... Hmm. Maybe you're not allowed to give healing potions to other
characters, so the points alloted to the potions just count towards the 50CP
total? That would prevent a quasi medic running around handing out potions,
too. Hmm...
DaveE
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Jonathan Dallas writes:
> > > Yeah-- I could of course see someone unsportsmanlike (say, Shaun) making 1
> > > character with magic 40CP plate armor, one character with a magic 40CP
> > > sword, and one who was a 50CP base character with crazy SP's, then just
> > > having his armor & sword characters give their weapons to the 50CP
> > > character. Shame on you, Shaun for even thinking that.
> >
> > So what is really wrong with this concept? If Shaun made an army of
> > servants and one warrior, I could keep him stuck in one place for the entire
> > game by using an SP power.
>
> Well, ok, a magic plate armor and sword aren't good examples, but let's just
> say a mega-powerful character doesn't need to worry much about where on the
> board he is. Consider Neil's necromancer. Ouch.
Is there some way of allowing the switching of items between troops without
one warrior becoming to powerful. Maybe we limit the range of SP weapons or
make long range SP powers only an ability of the minifig. Are there rules
on what a Mage can wear (armor). I could see having a powerful mage, with a
weak AV level.
I never saw Neil's Necromancer. Do we have specs on him?
<snip>
Jonathan D.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Jonathan Dallas writes:
>
> I never saw Neil's Necromancer. Do we have specs on him?
> <snip>
The basic recipe was:
Take 250 CP and cram it into one minifig, predominately in SP.
Equip the necromancer with two spells (to save on the cost of SP):
fireball
raise/animate/control dead
The basic strategy was:
Hole up in some corner somewhere.
Wait for other players' troops to start killing each other.
Raise said dead troops.
Launch massive fireballs four feet away.
Raise said burned troops.
Send dead troops to fight living troops.
Raise said newly dead troops killed by pevious dead troops.
... and so on.
[shakes fist in air]
"DANG YOU, NEIL! DANG YOU FOR ALL ETERNITY!"
-s
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Jonathan Dallas writes:
> Is there some way of allowing the switching of items between troops without
> one warrior becoming to powerful. Maybe we limit the range of SP weapons or
> make long range SP powers only an ability of the minifig. Are there rules
> on what a Mage can wear (armor). I could see having a powerful mage, with a
> weak AV level.
>
> I never saw Neil's Necromancer. Do we have specs on him?
Well, the concept behind the Necromancer was basically that the
*Necromancer* himself didn't matter. His sole purpose was to enhance his own
troops. Let's say you had an army of 20 figs, each 50 points.
19 of them are non-pacifistic slaves, each with 1 pitiful weapon and 1
super-cool-enchanted weapon (min CP cost per unit is 2, so you can balance
that out by subtracting power/etc, then add on a piddly weapon et all). 1 of
the figs is a champion. Crazy stats, just focused on making him hard to kill
(fast moving, teleport ability, super-high AV).
Um. Ok, well, I can't think of 19 different super-things to give the
champion, but let's say the slaves give him:
- Magic sword (46 CP, 14 SP)
- Magic armor (47 CP, 13 SP)
- Magic helmet (44 CP, 14 SP) [kill da wabbit!]
- Magic cape (44 CP, 14 SP)
- Magic shield (45 CP, 14 SP)
- Magic skis (46 CP, 14 SP)
- Magic container (45 CP, 14 SP)
Well, that's enough. You get the idea. Anyway, let's say the sword's magic
ability is an indexed ability to increase a unit's skill. The shield can
increase a unit's AV. etc. By the end of the 2nd turn (Assuming it takes
some time for the champion to equip all this junk), one of the slaves can be
turned into a **SUPER-SLAVE**!!! (Pretend the font size is like +a million
right there-- and bolded. Gotta be bolded.) Anyway this **SUPER-SLAVE**!!!
has a duration of 3d6 turns:
Move rate: 16" - 66" (depending on how well you rolled)
Damage: just enough to do max damage without breaking the piddly slave weapon
Skill: Stupidly high (11d6 - 1)
AV: Stupidly higher (41d6 - 1)
If you thought Ram Man had crazy hit points... Well, damn. That was nothing.
Average AV would be about 142. Over 400 hit points. Ram Man had 90. And each
subsequent turn you get yet another **SUPER-SLAVE**!!! with which to go and
wreak havoc on your opponent. And with a move rate of over 3 feet, there's
not much that's safe from them at all. Heck, since skill is a multiplicative
component of throw-range, a **SUPER-SLAVE**!!!(tm) could just throw
beefed-up rocks up to 65" (since there's no throw limit on rocks), making
his *effective* range between 26" and 131".
Now, hmm.. You don't NEED to give all these things to the champion to use
them-- the slaves could cast them on each other, but then again, they can't
go off and fight if they're busy helping beef up other slaves.
Anyway, now I'm concerned. This should really be addressed. I don't like the
idea of beefing up soldiers to the Nth degree, since duration is so cheap
(since SP regenerate 100% on each turn). Yeah. I don't like that idea at
all. Or, that is to say, I really *LIKE* the idea, but only if *I'm* the
only one who can use it :P. Perhaps... no more than X SP can be used to beef
up a particular trooper? Or maybe only 1 beef-up spell per trooper (IE you
can beef up movement, and when that wears off, you can beef up their AV, but
you can't have both at the same time). Yeah, I think I like that idea. And
you don't need to wait until duration wears out necessarily, but adding a
new beef-up spell only cancels out the pre-existing beef-up.
DaveE
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> [snip]
> Yeah-- I could of course see someone unsportsmanlike (say, Shaun) making 1
> character with magic 40CP plate armor, one character with a magic 40CP
> sword, and one who was a 50CP base character with crazy SP's, then just
> having his armor & sword characters give their weapons to the 50CP
> character. Shame on you, Shaun for even thinking that.
> [snip]
Word has it that Dave has been busy with a fine-tipped paintbrush. So far, all
of his troops have plate armor, warp engines, and poisonous fangs. And wings.
And, strangely, John Travolta chest hair.
I've got photographs to prove it!
:P
We really need to select teams soon ... I've got some ideas that need to be
shared with *somebody*. And I need to mercilessly riducule the rest of you.
-s
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> > > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> <SNIP>
... can't let you guys have all the fun now ...
Anyway, here's my thoughts:
I like the 50 CP total limit per character ... that allowed for a ton of
creativity, but prevented any trooper from being overly powerful. And it's a
nice balance .. the stronger you make a character magic-wise, the weaker you
may want to make them physically, to get points for SP. Reminds me of D&D,
where wizards were physically pansies, but powerful nonetheless.
I'd also advocate the 1000 CP limit be per person :P I have a whole army
scored up - about 120 troops all told, I think, maybe a little less - and the
total is 2500, WITHOUT counting a whole bunch of extras - catapult, ballista,
war elephant, and a few guys from a few other races. That's just a total for
*troops*.
I suppose, if pressed, I can get my total down to 1000 CP via massive layoffs.
Especially once we split into teams, so we can start formulating plans on who
supplies what types and numbers of troops ...
As for scenery: I told Joe that I recently built a huge tower - it's about 6 or
7 stories tall, each story about 10 bricks high. It's not that wide (16 studs?
18?), but each floor is accessible. I also built it without any drawbridges,
closable doors, or gates, since that would make it waaaayyy too valuable as a
fortification. As it stands, it's cool scenery and a swell place to frolic
around. I'll take some pictures of it this weekend to post.
I also built another patented Rock Outcropping, which I'm quite pleased with.
I tried to model it on that baseplate with the curved road, and the high
embankment. I basically did it the same way Joe described - grey and dark
grey, with brown and green highlights and some scattered foliage.
Lastly - do we want to try and incorporate multiple objectives? I think some
our most successful games have been when there have been multiple "objects" to
hunt down, worth various points, for example. A single objective might simply
lead to a full-frontal engagement ... which is worthwhile in and of itself, of
course ...
How about this? What if we also scattered gold around the field? Collecting
it could be used to do such interesting things as (a) buy the allegiance of
peasants, enemy troops, etc, (b) purchase various goods or equipment or siege
weapons or magical weapons upgrades at indestructible depots, (c) or other
money-related things. It could also count for value at the end of the game -
if you spent it, you might have been more successful in some objectives. If
you saved it, it counts as treasure that adds to your "score", much like the
various colored 1x1 tiles did. Just ideas :P
-s
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> > > > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > <SNIP> • <SNIP>
>
> Lastly - do we want to try and incorporate multiple objectives? I think some
> our most successful games have been when there have been multiple "objects" to
> hunt down, worth various points, for example. A single objective might simply
> lead to a full-frontal engagement ... which is worthwhile in and of itself, of
> course ...
>
> How about this? What if we also scattered gold around the field? Collecting
> it could be used to do such interesting things as (a) buy the allegiance of
> peasants, enemy troops, etc, (b) purchase various goods or equipment or siege
> weapons or magical weapons upgrades at indestructible depots, (c) or other
> money-related things. It could also count for value at the end of the game -
> if you spent it, you might have been more successful in some objectives. If
> you saved it, it counts as treasure that adds to your "score", much like the
> various colored 1x1 tiles did. Just ideas :P
Oh man, you gave me an idea...what if *no* units inherently possed any magic
and it is *always* derived from objects? We could scatter these objects
which have various powers all over the place and depending on what you
find/take, those are the abilities that you get (for the unit that posses
it)? One modification to this is that perhaps each side gets *one*
magic-being character (like Merlin) as they see fit, but all other majic
comes from the objects as I've just mentioned. Just a thought.
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
> > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> > > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > > > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> > > > > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > > <SNIP> • <SNIP>
> >
> > Lastly - do we want to try and incorporate multiple objectives? I think some
> > our most successful games have been when there have been multiple "objects" to
> > hunt down, worth various points, for example. A single objective might simply
> > lead to a full-frontal engagement ... which is worthwhile in and of itself, of
> > course ...
> >
> > How about this? What if we also scattered gold around the field? Collecting
> > it could be used to do such interesting things as (a) buy the allegiance of
> > peasants, enemy troops, etc, (b) purchase various goods or equipment or siege
> > weapons or magical weapons upgrades at indestructible depots, (c) or other
> > money-related things. It could also count for value at the end of the game -
> > if you spent it, you might have been more successful in some objectives. If
> > you saved it, it counts as treasure that adds to your "score", much like the
> > various colored 1x1 tiles did. Just ideas :P
>
> Oh man, you gave me an idea...what if *no* units inherently possed any magic
> and it is *always* derived from objects? We could scatter these objects
> which have various powers all over the place and depending on what you
> find/take, those are the abilities that you get (for the unit that posses
> it)? One modification to this is that perhaps each side gets *one*
> magic-being character (like Merlin) as they see fit, but all other majic
> comes from the objects as I've just mentioned. Just a thought.
>
> - Joe
Ack, it's a great idea, but I have a wonderful troop who needs a magical
backpack and another that needs a magical cloak.
I still love the idea, but taking away the magic items or abilities of the
troops will make then a lot less interesting to design. I will give you
that this idea adds a certain spice to the game.
This idea may even help reduce a strong mage into nothing. What if some of
the magical items didn't give power, but took it instead. Or they could
transform the minifig into a toad. Or transport him back to the start, but
without his clothing.
Jonathan
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
> > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> > > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > > > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> > > > > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > > <SNIP>
> <SNIP>
> Oh man, you gave me an idea...what if *no* units inherently possed any magic
> and it is *always* derived from objects? We could scatter these objects
> which have various powers all over the place and depending on what you
> find/take, those are the abilities that you get (for the unit that posses
> it)? One modification to this is that perhaps each side gets *one*
> magic-being character (like Merlin) as they see fit, but all other majic
> comes from the objects as I've just mentioned. Just a thought.
NOW we're talking! How's about:
Europe, mid 1300s. Castles, knights, damsels, catapults, and so on.
Without warning or explanation, there is an upswing in the potency of magic.
Typical corner fortune tellers and soothsayers suddenly display impressive acts
of mystical insight, while the more serious of the practitioners -
illusionists, alchemists, arcanists, witch doctors, etc. - suddenly find
themselves tingling with an inexplicable energy. Where before their
experiences had been mere showmanship and frustrating dead-ends, their
backgrounds now grant them access to new-found power and divination.
Keep in mind, these are times when the entire worlds' understanding and
background, even those with new-found magical powers, are grounded in the real,
the tangible, the physical. So, in truth, even the most magical of individuals
"before the rift" are still pretty weak by comparison with our wizards of
legend - hence the 50 CP cap, and a probable limit of but one or two magic
users per side.
HOWEVER, rumors have stretched from one end of Europe to the other, of the
origin of this unleashed magical energy. Not an explanation of its advent,
just a location. Various lieges, religious leaders, powerbrokers, and minor
players throughout Europe send legions of their troops, along with their most
trusted or powerful magical subjects, to the source, in the hopes of garnering
enough understanding, enough power, and enough insight that their claims for
supremacy might stand unthreatened. Kings want their troops and magicians to
become all-powerful, religious leaders hope to see their paladins bestowed with
holy smiting power, and even the random barbarian warlord sojourns to the
source in the hopes of becoming a godlike warrior.
So it is that various factions start to arrive in a land rent by the release of
magical energy. As they approach the mystical source, they stumble upon more
and more legendary creatures: goblins, orcs, living undead. And scattered
throughout the land, they find various magical objects that were created,
appeared, or were dragged by unknown creatures of the night in this land of
mystery.
Like I said, even the magic users are new to this stuff. Your regular troop is
well beyond his experiences ... but bravely soldiers on.
I like this idea: some of the magical items throughout the land are spellbooks.
Of course, very few can read them! Heroes, perhaps, certainly magic users.
Maybe some others, who have paid the 3 CP for literacy (Literacy: Costs 5-TL
CP, with a minimum of zero). So troops can collect spellbooks, but they are
useless until they are in the hands of someone who can make use of them.
It also helps explain why there might be some odd races skulking about, maybe
even teaming up with legions of troops. They either emanate from the great
Rifts in the fabric of the physical world that released magic, or they are
drawn to it for the seductive power it offers.
Furthermore, this lets each side create a story behind them. Are they a
delegation sent from Rome to wipe out all demonic lore? Are they a band of
Barbarian warriors who want to become strong enough to beat back the Knights?
Are they the forces of a greedy king, who hopes to use magic to conquer new
lands?
Maybe we could tie something like this into Joe's story?
Just a thought ...
-s
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
> > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> > > > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > > > > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> > > > > > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > > > <SNIP>
> > <SNIP>
> > Oh man, you gave me an idea...what if *no* units inherently possed any magic
> > and it is *always* derived from objects? We could scatter these objects
> > which have various powers all over the place and depending on what you
> > find/take, those are the abilities that you get (for the unit that posses
> > it)? One modification to this is that perhaps each side gets *one*
> > magic-being character (like Merlin) as they see fit, but all other majic
> > comes from the objects as I've just mentioned. Just a thought.
>
> NOW we're talking! How's about:
>
> Europe, mid 1300s. Castles, knights, damsels, catapults, and so on.
>
> Without warning or explanation, there is an upswing in the potency of magic.
> Typical corner fortune tellers and soothsayers suddenly display impressive acts
> of mystical insight, while the more serious of the practitioners -
> illusionists, alchemists, arcanists, witch doctors, etc. - suddenly find
> themselves tingling with an inexplicable energy. Where before their
> experiences had been mere showmanship and frustrating dead-ends, their
> backgrounds now grant them access to new-found power and divination.
>
> Keep in mind, these are times when the entire worlds' understanding and
> background, even those with new-found magical powers, are grounded in the real,
> the tangible, the physical. So, in truth, even the most magical of individuals
> "before the rift" are still pretty weak by comparison with our wizards of
> legend - hence the 50 CP cap, and a probable limit of but one or two magic
> users per side.
>
> HOWEVER, rumors have stretched from one end of Europe to the other, of the
> origin of this unleashed magical energy. Not an explanation of its advent,
> just a location. Various lieges, religious leaders, powerbrokers, and minor
> players throughout Europe send legions of their troops, along with their most
> trusted or powerful magical subjects, to the source, in the hopes of garnering
> enough understanding, enough power, and enough insight that their claims for
> supremacy might stand unthreatened. Kings want their troops and magicians to
> become all-powerful, religious leaders hope to see their paladins bestowed with
> holy smiting power, and even the random barbarian warlord sojourns to the
> source in the hopes of becoming a godlike warrior.
>
> So it is that various factions start to arrive in a land rent by the release of
> magical energy. As they approach the mystical source, they stumble upon more
> and more legendary creatures: goblins, orcs, living undead. And scattered
> throughout the land, they find various magical objects that were created,
> appeared, or were dragged by unknown creatures of the night in this land of
> mystery.
>
> Like I said, even the magic users are new to this stuff. Your regular troop is
> well beyond his experiences ... but bravely soldiers on.
>
> I like this idea: some of the magical items throughout the land are spellbooks.
> Of course, very few can read them! Heroes, perhaps, certainly magic users.
> Maybe some others, who have paid the 3 CP for literacy (Literacy: Costs 5-TL
> CP, with a minimum of zero). So troops can collect spellbooks, but they are
> useless until they are in the hands of someone who can make use of them.
>
> It also helps explain why there might be some odd races skulking about, maybe
> even teaming up with legions of troops. They either emanate from the great
> Rifts in the fabric of the physical world that released magic, or they are
> drawn to it for the seductive power it offers.
>
> Furthermore, this lets each side create a story behind them. Are they a
> delegation sent from Rome to wipe out all demonic lore? Are they a band of
> Barbarian warriors who want to become strong enough to beat back the Knights?
> Are they the forces of a greedy king, who hopes to use magic to conquer new
> lands?
>
> Maybe we could tie something like this into Joe's story?
You...what...but...huh?
I was thinking how cool it would be that *any* unit in posession of a
magical object reaps its benefits. The exception would be a book of spells
(which needs to be read). But if you found a red mystical gem, you would
receive the ability to cast a fire spell with, say, a total of 9 SP (for
example). You could even "stack" them potentially, so two objects of the
same type increases the power (although not doubling it). You could give
this gem to another unit and you most definitely can lose it if the unit is
slain and your opponent picks it up. A magical sword would clearly give the
unit some sort of enhanced attack, yet does not do anything for it's armor.
Units could use up to two unique magic-granting items at the same time (more?).
To make this completely fair, we could even make it so that every army (or
player) *must* create a certain CP worth of magic items which will randomly
get scattered around.
Now I have to go back and see if I can follow what you wrote...
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
> > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
> > > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > > > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> > > > > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > > > > > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> > > > > > > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > > > > > > > > ... oh, enough already
>
> I was thinking how cool it would be that *any* unit in posession of a
> magical object reaps its benefits. The exception would be a book of spells
> (which needs to be read). But if you found a red mystical gem, you would
> receive the ability to cast a fire spell with, say, a total of 9 SP (for
> example). You could even "stack" them potentially, so two objects of the
> same type increases the power (although not doubling it). You could give
> this gem to another unit and you most definitely can lose it if the unit is
> slain and your opponent picks it up. A magical sword would clearly give the
> unit some sort of enhanced attack, yet does not do anything for it's armor.
> Units could use up to two unique magic-granting items at the same time
Oops! Sorry, I didn't mean to get so wrapped up. Of course anybody could pick
up a magical sword, chalice, amulet, talisman, armor, shield, plunger, or what
have you ... but spellbooks, with things like fireballs and levitate and stuff
like that, could only be utilized by the literate. Similarly, you probably
wouldn't hand that kick-butt sword to a magic user, who doesn't have any
special combat bonuses or anything.
In general I'm not a huge fan of objects that can cast spells (or provide their
users the innate ability to). I'm much more partial to objects that see
magical bonuses - like a sword imbued with a magical sense of balance that
provide a skill bonus to use, and a magical edge that keeps a razor's sharpness
adding to the damage. Or, to use a popular example, a sword that glows blue in
the presence of orcs or goblins. I'd prefer consistent and ongoing effects,
properties that were magically imbued into the weapon (which, by the way, is
not mutually exclusive with the notion of SP ... the power can be drained
through excessive use during a single turn!), versus a tongue ring that allows
the user to launch fireballs whenever they'd like. Seems like that sort of
usage would need to be wielded by someone who had spent some time studying
magic specifically.
Anyway, just some small coinage for your perusal. Feel free to overrule!
-s
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
> Oops! Sorry, I didn't mean to get so wrapped up. Of course anybody could >pick up a magical sword, chalice, amulet, talisman, armor, shield, plunger,
> or what have you ... but spellbooks, with things like fireballs and levitate
> and stuff like that, could only be utilized by the literate. Similarly, you
> probably wouldn't hand that kick-butt sword to a magic user, who doesn't have
> any special combat bonuses or anything.
I kinda like the idea-- We could go for some extra added randomness too, by
doing something like:
- Each team brings.. oh... 10 magical objects (or whatever).
- Each of the 20 objects are put into brown treasure chests (or some other
type of container)
- 10 (or some arbitrary percentage) of the 20 objects are scattered on the
board at random.
OR, if we want to go for MORE randomness:
- Each team brings 10 objects.
- Each team brings 10 slips of paper. On each piece of paper, there's a
magical bonus. (Note some may need multiple bonuses depending on what's
applicable, like... well.. a magic shield shouldn't increase your weapon
range or do explosion damage, but might instead allow you to fly or give
you extra AV from missile attacks)
- Each object is placed at random with a piece of paper into chests.
- 1/2 of the chests are laid out to be found.
> In general I'm not a huge fan of objects that can cast spells (or provide
> their users the innate ability to). I'm much more partial to objects that see
> magical bonuses - like a sword imbued with a magical sense of balance that
> provide a skill bonus to use, and a magical edge that keeps a razor's
> sharpness adding to the damage. Or, to use a popular example, a sword that
> glows blue in the presence of orcs or goblins. I'd prefer consistent and
> ongoing effects, properties that were magically imbued into the weapon
> (which, by the way, is not mutually exclusive with the notion of SP ... the
> power can be drained through excessive use during a single turn!), versus a
> tongue ring that allows the user to launch fireballs whenever they'd like.
> Seems like that sort of usage would need to be wielded by someone who had
> spent some time studying magic specifically.
Some things like that I don't mind, others I probably would... Probably
depends on how powerful the spell is and how much control the user has over
it. I'm not against (say) magic boots that can make the wearer teleport up
to 2d6" in a general direction (direction quasi-random), but I would be
against a sword that can cast fireballs 4d6" in the user-chosen-direction at
UR 0, doing 3d10 explosion damage. (Especially since IIRC there's no aiming
involved in SP's as long as you can make the distance)
Anyway, I'd probably be ok with items not actually having SP of their own--
or maybe if you want to use the SP of an item it costs all of your movement
for that turn? Or something. I dunno. Maybe it's better if they can't have SP.
Also, I proposed a "bug fix" to the duration rules:
http://news.lugnet.com/fun/gaming/?n=1436
(quickie summary) Duration normally costs 1 SP per 1d6 rounds. Proposed
duration would cost however many SP's the total *effect* costs (range not
included), divided by 2, times the duration - 1. In other words:
You want to create an ice wall 6" from you, and give it a duration of
roughly 6 turns. Currently, you spend 2 SP's on range, 2 SP's on duration,
and 16 SP's on Create Matter (total 20 CP's).
Proposed system:
You spend 2 SP's on range, 16 SP's on Create Matter (for *this* round), and
8 times 5 SP's on duration, resulting in 58 SP's. (Why 8? it's 1/2 16. Why
5? It's desired rounds of duration (6) minus 1 for the current round, cuz
you already paid for that one at full price)
Anyway, maybe such a proposed rule is a little on the harsh side, and it
doesn't have the wonderful randomness aspect to it, but it's *way* more fair
in retrospect. Thoughts?
DaveE
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
> > Oops! Sorry, I didn't mean to get so wrapped up. Of course anybody could >pick up a magical sword, chalice, amulet, talisman, armor, shield, plunger,
> > or what have you ... but spellbooks, with things like fireballs and levitate
> > and stuff like that, could only be utilized by the literate. Similarly, you
> > probably wouldn't hand that kick-butt sword to a magic user, who doesn't have
> > any special combat bonuses or anything.
>
> I kinda like the idea-- We could go for some extra added randomness too, by
> doing something like:
>
> - Each team brings.. oh... 10 magical objects (or whatever).
> - Each of the 20 objects are put into brown treasure chests (or some other
> type of container)
> - 10 (or some arbitrary percentage) of the 20 objects are scattered on the
> board at random.
>
> OR, if we want to go for MORE randomness:
>
> - Each team brings 10 objects.
> - Each team brings 10 slips of paper. On each piece of paper, there's a
> magical bonus. (Note some may need multiple bonuses depending on what's
> applicable, like... well.. a magic shield shouldn't increase your weapon
> range or do explosion damage, but might instead allow you to fly or give
> you extra AV from missile attacks)
> - Each object is placed at random with a piece of paper into chests.
> - 1/2 of the chests are laid out to be found.
Okay, here's an idea that might work for everyone. I *do* like the idea of
granting certain magical powers (spell casting) through objects, *but* I
also think these objects are special. So my idea is that while any unit can
pick it up, no unit can remove it unless the unit is slain. So once a unit
picks it up, good, bad or indifferent, that unit is stuck with it. We could
put a caveat in where actual mage-type units can collect the items without
being stuck with them, but I'm inclined to not allow that.
This provides an element of strategy and also a fun way to hang in the game
once we annihilate yo...um...in case an army should crumble right away. The
rest of it about each team creating 'n' objects and scattering them about
would still hold - and there's a strategy in this too. Thoughts?
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
> Okay, here's an idea that might work for everyone. I *do* like the idea of
> granting certain magical powers (spell casting) through objects, *but* I
> also think these objects are special. So my idea is that while any unit can
> pick it up, no unit can remove it unless the unit is slain. So once a unit
> picks it up, good, bad or indifferent, that unit is stuck with it. We could
> put a caveat in where actual mage-type units can collect the items without
> being stuck with them, but I'm inclined to not allow that.
Are magical items resistant to fire? If they aren't then I should proably
avoid picking them up since I am prone to firey deaths.
> This provides an element of strategy and also a fun way to hang in the game
> once we annihilate yo...um...in case an army should crumble right away. The
> rest of it about each team creating 'n' objects and scattering them about
> would still hold - and there's a strategy in this too. Thoughts?
>
> - Joe
Do we have a willing neutral to scatter the items?
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> Okay, here's an idea that might work for everyone. I *do* like the idea of
> granting certain magical powers (spell casting) through objects, *but* I
> also think these objects are special. So my idea is that while any unit can
> pick it up, no unit can remove it unless the unit is slain. So once a unit
> picks it up, good, bad or indifferent, that unit is stuck with it. We could
> put a caveat in where actual mage-type units can collect the items without
> being stuck with them, but I'm inclined to not allow that.
>
> This provides an element of strategy and also a fun way to hang in the game
> once we annihilate yo...um...in case an army should crumble right away. The
> rest of it about each team creating 'n' objects and scattering them about
> would still hold - and there's a strategy in this too. Thoughts?
Hmm... quite interesting. Effectively, if (say) I pick up some magical plate
armor that ends up *forcing* me to run everywhere in straight lines at twice
my move rate every turn, I would have to drop any plate armor (or other
thing that might block armor from going on) that I already posessed, yes?
And at what point do we find out what an item does? Does the finding unit
necessarily equip/use the item? Or can it bring it back to another unit, and
as soon as *that* unit equips it, we find out its magical abilites, *and* it
gets stuck on the user? I kinda like the 2nd option better...
DaveE
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > Okay, here's an idea that might work for everyone. I *do* like the idea of
> > granting certain magical powers (spell casting) through objects, *but* I
> > also think these objects are special. So my idea is that while any unit can
> > pick it up, no unit can remove it unless the unit is slain. So once a unit
> > picks it up, good, bad or indifferent, that unit is stuck with it. We could
> > put a caveat in where actual mage-type units can collect the items without
> > being stuck with them, but I'm inclined to not allow that.
> >
> > This provides an element of strategy and also a fun way to hang in the game
> > once we annihilate yo...um...in case an army should crumble right away. The
> > rest of it about each team creating 'n' objects and scattering them about
> > would still hold - and there's a strategy in this too. Thoughts?
>
> Hmm... quite interesting. Effectively, if (say) I pick up some magical plate
> armor that ends up *forcing* me to run everywhere in straight lines at twice
> my move rate every turn, I would have to drop any plate armor (or other
> thing that might block armor from going on) that I already posessed, yes?
> And at what point do we find out what an item does? Does the finding unit
> necessarily equip/use the item? Or can it bring it back to another unit, and
> as soon as *that* unit equips it, we find out its magical abilites, *and* it
> gets stuck on the user? I kinda like the 2nd option better...
>
> DaveE
I was thinking whoever touches it automatically gets equiped with it, so
your only choices are to pick it up or leave it (or position another unit to
grab it). As for when you find out what it does, I kind of like the idea of
not knowing until someone picks it up...that's the problem with magic, you
never know what'll happen when you start tinkering with these things. And,
yes, items can be a liability as well as a boon, although nothing should be
able to kill a unit outright, just by picking it up. Ideally, a magic item
is both a liability and a boon, but that's up to whomever creates the items.
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > > Okay, here's an idea that might work for everyone. I *do* like the idea of
> > > granting certain magical powers (spell casting) through objects, *but* I
> > > also think these objects are special. So my idea is that while any unit can
> > > pick it up, no unit can remove it unless the unit is slain. So once a unit
> > > picks it up, good, bad or indifferent, that unit is stuck with it. We could
> > > put a caveat in where actual mage-type units can collect the items without
> > > being stuck with them, but I'm inclined to not allow that.
> > >
> > > This provides an element of strategy and also a fun way to hang in the game
> > > once we annihilate yo...um...in case an army should crumble right away. The
> > > rest of it about each team creating 'n' objects and scattering them about
> > > would still hold - and there's a strategy in this too. Thoughts?
> >
> > Hmm... quite interesting. Effectively, if (say) I pick up some magical plate
> > armor that ends up *forcing* me to run everywhere in straight lines at twice
> > my move rate every turn, I would have to drop any plate armor (or other
> > thing that might block armor from going on) that I already posessed, yes?
> > And at what point do we find out what an item does? Does the finding unit
> > necessarily equip/use the item? Or can it bring it back to another unit, and
> > as soon as *that* unit equips it, we find out its magical abilites, *and* it
> > gets stuck on the user? I kinda like the 2nd option better...
>
> I was thinking whoever touches it automatically gets equiped with it, so
> your only choices are to pick it up or leave it (or position another unit to
> grab it). As for when you find out what it does, I kind of like the idea of
> not knowing until someone picks it up...that's the problem with magic, you
> never know what'll happen when you start tinkering with these things. And,
> yes, items can be a liability as well as a boon, although nothing should be
> able to kill a unit outright, just by picking it up. Ideally, a magic item
> is both a liability and a boon, but that's up to whomever creates the items.
How about this? And I steal this, without apology, from the classic ASCII
graphics game "Rogue", which was the predecessor to "Moria": The function of
an item is unknown until it is used ... and items with penalties are considered
"cursed", and cannot be dropped or removed until a "remove curse" spell or
potion is found and used. To help the intrepids out, once a remove curse spell
or potion is identified (either by use or some sort of magic-user's skill
roll), all others of the same ilk are readily identified.
Example: Slingblade, Joe's hideously ugly Chakram tosser, find a suit of plate
mail. Wanting to emphasize her already godawful physique, she dons it. And
the first time she is struck by a rock, it become clear that the armor is
cursed and she can't remove it. However, she finds a pink potion in the next
treasure trove. She doesn't know what it is, but she drinks it out of
desparation .. maybe it's a remove curse potion! No such luck, it's an
"amplify armpit hair" potion, condemning her forever in the eyes of even her
blinded compatriots. In the meantime, another hero on her team discovers a
blue scroll, and reads the spell on it. It's a remove curse! Unfortunately,
as he has no cursed items in his posession, he is reduced to curing himself of
a nasty rash. However, now Joe's unbelievably vile hero knows that a blue
scroll is what she needs!
By contrast, a beneficial items can be handed off, dropped, thrown, or
whatever.
There is one catch in this context though - what is to prevent one from simply
having peons don the armor first, to verify whether or not they are cursed? IN
Rogue, you only had one character, so if you were getting the tar beaten out of
you you were willing to don anything in the hopes of it being enchanted. I
mean, I even tried on a chain mail thong in that game, when I was being creamed
by Trolls, hoping that it was a "Thong +8". In this game ... hmmm - well,
there is the time frame, I suppose. If one is going to have a peon don the
armor, get attacked to find out if it is useful or not, then transfer it to a
hero, who then must don it, the game might already be over.
Alternatively, if we *really* wanted to be cruel (DEFINITELY!), we could say
that a weapon or armor, or any item that is *continuously* useful (versus a
spell or potion, which is use-it-and-it's-gone), might have a different effect
on each individual. Even if peon tries it on and it's good, Uglification
Personified might put it on and find that it is cursed to her. This is more
like unto Harry Potter, or Lord of the Rings, even. In Harry Potter, a wand
might embrace one user, but backfire hideously in the hands of someone else.
Similarly, in Middle Earth, some weapons were beneficial to humans, but might
burn to the touch or eyes of orcs and goblins (ala Sting).
Stick *that* in your catapult and launch it.
-s
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
>
> How about this? And I steal this, without apology, from the classic ASCII
> graphics game "Rogue", which was the predecessor to "Moria": The function of
> an item is unknown until it is used ... and items with penalties are considered
> "cursed", and cannot be dropped or removed until a "remove curse" spell or
> potion is found and used. To help the intrepids out, once a remove curse spell
> or potion is identified (either by use or some sort of magic-user's skill
> roll), all others of the same ilk are readily identified.
>
> Example: Slingblade, Joe's hideously ugly Chakram tosser, find a suit of plate
> mail. Wanting to emphasize her already godawful physique, she dons it. And
> the first time she is struck by a rock, it become clear that the armor is
> cursed and she can't remove it. However, she finds a pink potion in the next
> treasure trove. She doesn't know what it is, but she drinks it out of
> desparation .. maybe it's a remove curse potion! No such luck, it's an
> "amplify armpit hair" potion, condemning her forever in the eyes of even her
> blinded compatriots. In the meantime, another hero on her team discovers a
> blue scroll, and reads the spell on it. It's a remove curse! Unfortunately,
> as he has no cursed items in his posession, he is reduced to curing himself of
> a nasty rash. However, now Joe's unbelievably vile hero knows that a blue
> scroll is what she needs!
>
> By contrast, a beneficial items can be handed off, dropped, thrown, or
> whatever.
>
> There is one catch in this context though - what is to prevent one from simply
> having peons don the armor first, to verify whether or not they are cursed? IN
> Rogue, you only had one character, so if you were getting the tar beaten out of
> you you were willing to don anything in the hopes of it being enchanted. I
> mean, I even tried on a chain mail thong in that game, when I was being creamed
> by Trolls, hoping that it was a "Thong +8". In this game ... hmmm - well,
> there is the time frame, I suppose. If one is going to have a peon don the
> armor, get attacked to find out if it is useful or not, then transfer it to a
> hero, who then must don it, the game might already be over.
>
> Alternatively, if we *really* wanted to be cruel (DEFINITELY!), we could say
> that a weapon or armor, or any item that is *continuously* useful (versus a
> spell or potion, which is use-it-and-it's-gone), might have a different effect
> on each individual. Even if peon tries it on and it's good, Uglification
> Personified might put it on and find that it is cursed to her. This is more
> like unto Harry Potter, or Lord of the Rings, even. In Harry Potter, a wand
> might embrace one user, but backfire hideously in the hands of someone else.
> Similarly, in Middle Earth, some weapons were beneficial to humans, but might
> burn to the touch or eyes of orcs and goblins (ala Sting).
Unless this is just randomly rolled as a particular race touches the object,
it would mean that we would need to know all of the races
beforehand...something I'm loath to do at this point. I also kind of like
the idea that the same benefit/curse happens to any race and only nuances of
that unit affect the end result. For example, a unit that finds an item that
enables flight, but can already fly doesn't do anything. The item is also
effectively nuetralized (at least until the unit is slain).
I also think that the good and the bad should stay with the unit who picked
it up...we are talking about a very shortlived game anyway, so the ability
to pass an item along is highly unlikely. Also, passing only good items off
also enables an ubber unit to evolve in fairly short order, should the game
actually go long enough...personally, I don't want this to happen; it's
about the clashing of kingdoms, not one unit running amuck.
If a peon, through luck or design, ascends to Hero status through use of
these items and a Hero descends to peon status for the same reasons, that's
good! The bards will have something to talk about. But to actively amass
such items around a particular unit seems to alter a fundamental aspect of
having a large army to begin with.
> Stick *that* in your catapult and launch it.
Moo.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 07:35:56PM +0000, Joe Comeau wrote:
> I was thinking whoever touches it automatically gets equiped with it, so
> your only choices are to pick it up or leave it (or position another unit to
> grab it). As for when you find out what it does, I kind of like the idea of
> not knowing until someone picks it up...that's the problem with magic, you
> never know what'll happen when you start tinkering with these things. And,
> yes, items can be a liability as well as a boon, although nothing should be
> able to kill a unit outright, just by picking it up. Ideally, a magic item
> is both a liability and a boon, but that's up to whomever creates the items.
I'm all for this approach. One thing to note though - if you are
already wearing a chainmail, you just wouldn't be able to touch that
glowing piece of platemail on the ground, unless you remove the armor
you're wearing beforehand. right?
Also, this leads to (amusing) self-mutilating figs, that chop off their
hand to get rid of that annoying magic ring... :)
--
Dan Boger
dan@peeron.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Dan Boger writes:
> On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 07:35:56PM +0000, Joe Comeau wrote:
> > I was thinking whoever touches it automatically gets equiped with it, so
> > your only choices are to pick it up or leave it (or position another unit to
> > grab it). As for when you find out what it does, I kind of like the idea of
> > not knowing until someone picks it up...that's the problem with magic, you
> > never know what'll happen when you start tinkering with these things. And,
> > yes, items can be a liability as well as a boon, although nothing should be
> > able to kill a unit outright, just by picking it up. Ideally, a magic item
> > is both a liability and a boon, but that's up to whomever creates the items.
>
> I'm all for this approach. One thing to note though - if you are
> already wearing a chainmail, you just wouldn't be able to touch that
> glowing piece of platemail on the ground, unless you remove the armor
> you're wearing beforehand. right?
I'm thinking that since this is magic, the magic armor would "magically"
replace your existing armor, so that it takes at the end of the movement
phase. Your old armor would just be left on the ground.
> Also, this leads to (amusing) self-mutilating figs, that chop off their
> hand to get rid of that annoying magic ring... :)
*Love* this!
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 09:06:46PM +0000, Joe Comeau wrote:
> > I'm all for this approach. One thing to note though - if you are
> > already wearing a chainmail, you just wouldn't be able to touch that
> > glowing piece of platemail on the ground, unless you remove the armor
> > you're wearing beforehand. right?
>
> I'm thinking that since this is magic, the magic armor would "magically"
> replace your existing armor, so that it takes at the end of the movement
> phase. Your old armor would just be left on the ground.
but that means that you'll be able to switch back and fourth... now, if
the old armor magically disappears, that's a different story. Do you
dare try on the new armor? It might be better than your "thong +3", but
it might not!
> > Also, this leads to (amusing) self-mutilating figs, that chop off their
> > hand to get rid of that annoying magic ring... :)
>
> *Love* this!
does that mean other figs could try chopping off your hand, for that
*good* ring you have on?
--
Dan Boger
dan@peeron.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Dan Boger writes:
> On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 09:06:46PM +0000, Joe Comeau wrote:
> > > I'm all for this approach. One thing to note though - if you are
> > > already wearing a chainmail, you just wouldn't be able to touch that
> > > glowing piece of platemail on the ground, unless you remove the armor
> > > you're wearing beforehand. right?
> >
> > I'm thinking that since this is magic, the magic armor would "magically"
> > replace your existing armor, so that it takes at the end of the movement
> > phase. Your old armor would just be left on the ground.
>
> but that means that you'll be able to switch back and fourth... now, if
> the old armor magically disappears, that's a different story. Do you
> dare try on the new armor? It might be better than your "thong +3", but
> it might not!
You forget, you can't get rid of the magic item unless you die (well, that's
what I'm proposing). Think "face-hugger" like in the movie Aliens...once
it's their, you're bound to it. Only death will set you free. Only in this
case, it might be a good thing.
> > > Also, this leads to (amusing) self-mutilating figs, that chop off their
> > > hand to get rid of that annoying magic ring... :)
> >
> > *Love* this!
>
> does that mean other figs could try chopping off your hand, for that
> *good* ring you have on?
Sure! You'll have to make the appropriate skill role, of course. I think
this is fair. I suspect in most cases it'll be easier to just kill him and
take the item.
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> You forget, you can't get rid of the magic item unless you die (well, that's
> what I'm proposing). Think "face-hugger" like in the movie Aliens...once
> it's their, you're bound to it. Only death will set you free. Only in this
> case, it might be a good thing.
Well... Let's say you're wearing a magic armor plate. Then you find
*another* magic armor plate. Does it magically replace the one you're
wearing? Does it create a matter/anti-matter paradox of both objects vying
in utter contest to be worn, completely obliterating the offending unit?
Does the 1st item take precedence, allowing the unit to carry the 2nd item
around to fellow units (without knowing its abilities, that is)
DaveE
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > You forget, you can't get rid of the magic item unless you die (well, that's
> > what I'm proposing). Think "face-hugger" like in the movie Aliens...once
> > it's their, you're bound to it. Only death will set you free. Only in this
> > case, it might be a good thing.
>
> Well... Let's say you're wearing a magic armor plate. Then you find
> *another* magic armor plate. Does it magically replace the one you're
> wearing? Does it create a matter/anti-matter paradox of both objects vying
> in utter contest to be worn, completely obliterating the offending unit?
> Does the 1st item take precedence, allowing the unit to carry the 2nd item
> around to fellow units (without knowing its abilities, that is)
>
> DaveE
I knew you were going to ask that...I would say that a unit can only possess
one of any kind of magic item (thus limiting their total ability to consume
all magic in the world) and once they have an item of that type, that's it,
so any future armor plates, using this example, cannot be used nor
touched...it's like being near two really powerful magnets with the like
polls facing one another. So this unit can only carry around regular armor,
not magical ones.
This prevents a single unit from carrying two magical swords as well
(although if he has the 2 handed ability, he should be able to carry one
magical one and one regular one). This rule only applies to "always on"
items. Magical elixers and such can be consumed at will.
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
<snip>
> > As for the castle/Ancient's Keep, I have an idea of something mountain-like
> > at the base with pieces of castle poking out the higher you get. This is
> > the main thing that I think would need multiple people to build...it's also
> > a call for BURPs and POOPs. It should definitely engourage warfare on and
> > around its surface.
>
> I've probably got enough BURPs for the whole project if need be... Wow. I
> just checked Peeron-- I should have 176 BURPs (Grey/Dk Grey rectangular &
> triangular). Dang. I didn't realize I had so many.
I created a ruff draft of what I think would be an interesting layout:
http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/april2003/april2003.txt
Just to warn you, this file may end up getting deleted by the moderator.
I've used a modular system to the design to allow us to build seperate
sections. Most of these sections are only a single thickness of brick
placed on a baseplate which is then supported by a support structure under
neither. This should greatly reduce the amount of green brick we need and
add more changes in elevation.
The hardest pieces on this layout to build will be the castle and the river
sections. The castle will need a lot of pieces to build and will probalbly
need more space than I allowed for. Since I design the river to be two
bricks lower in height than its surroundings, more bricks will be needed to
raise the ground.
I'm willing to tackle building a large mountain on at least the top two gray
48x48s and hopefully the third one while I'm away on vaction. I can also
contribute one Black Smith Shop to the village.
Any thoughts or suggestions on improving this design?
Jonathan D.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
<snip>
> I created a ruff draft of what I think would be an interesting layout:
> http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/april2003/april2003.txt
> Just to warn you, this file may end up getting deleted by the moderator.
Well it was.
Here is another link:
http://www.geocities.com/ilikeitgui/april2003/april-2003.htm
If you get an error page, just try viewing it later. Geocities won't let
that many people view the page at the same time.
<snip>
Jonathan
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
I'm thinking the mountain-castle should be in the center. Keep in mind that
we'll most likely have three armies and we will not want any unfair
advantage from board placement. Of course, you can still have the river
encircle the base of the mountain, like a mote of sorts.
- Joe
"Jonathan Dallas" <jonathan@dallas-family.com> wrote in message
news:HCw8BA.166s@lugnet.com...
> <snip>
>
> > I created a ruff draft of what I think would be an interesting layout:
> > http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/april2003/april2003.txt
> > Just to warn you, this file may end up getting deleted by the moderator.
>
> Well it was.
> Here is another link:
> http://www.geocities.com/ilikeitgui/april2003/april-2003.htm
> If you get an error page, just try viewing it later. Geocities won't let
> that many people view the page at the same time.
>
> <snip>
>
> Jonathan
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Jonathan Dallas writes:
> <snip>
Regarding Scenery:
I have a couple of items to offer up. I alluded to them in another post, but
never gave any dimensions:
(1) Tall tower castle - the base of the tower will fit on a large baseplate
(2) Small hill and pond - two large baseplates in size (seen at some train
shows)
(3) Rock Outcropping - Can fill up a large baseplate area pretty well
(4) Post and Beam house - same style as the Blacksmith shop, though much
larger. About a large baseplate in size
(5) Three large trees, each on a 16x16 baseplate
I never took any pictures this weekend, because I am just that naughty. I'll
try and do so tonight (hey! it'll be light when I get home!)
-s
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Jonathan Dallas writes:
> <snip>
>
> > I created a ruff draft of what I think would be an interesting layout:
> > http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/april2003/april2003.txt
> > Just to warn you, this file may end up getting deleted by the moderator.
>
> Well it was.
> Here is another link:
> http://www.geocities.com/ilikeitgui/april2003/april-2003.htm
> If you get an error page, just try viewing it later. Geocities won't let
> that many people view the page at the same time.
Hiya Jonathan,
If you don't mind my asking, why was the original deleted during moderation?
For everyone's benefit, I also uploaded a bunch of pics of my various Scenery
MOCs (after moderation):
Green Rolling Hill: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39711
Rock Outcropping: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39152
Modular Tower Castle: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39701
Trees: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39705
The Post-and-Beam house is still forthcoming ... some more details need to be
added.
LMKWYT,
-s
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
<snip>
> Hiya Jonathan,
>
> If you don't mind my asking, why was the original deleted during moderation?
The orginal was deleted, because I was trying to sneaky. Brickshelf
automatically deletes any file that has an .htm extension. I've found on
most web sites that if you open a .txt file that has html tags in it, those
tags will be used on the page. So what I did was change my .htm extension
to a .txt extension to get the same results.
This time I did away with the html page.
www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/04-2003-brikwars.gif
www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/04-2003-brikwars2.gif
The numbers on the baseplate are still the height of the supports under the
baseplate.
Rivers are still two bricks deep, have 8 bumps of blue, 1 bump of yellow
plates along the banks, one bump of brown along the banks (can have green
plate on top), and two bumps of green brick on either side of the river.
The river is then place along an edge of the baseplate. If you want to
build the entire river, which I would suggest, then ignore any restrictions
expect for where it meets the mountain and the elevation changes.
The baseplates only need a few bricks on them (along the high edges). I
used the colors to try and give you an idea of which edge is high. I would
suggest that you put some rocks, trees, and outcropping on these baseplates
as well. You can even put Plaque Cows on them. Again like the river if you
build a large section, you can ignore any restriction except where it meets
someone elses baseplate. So Shaun to fit your Large out-cropping simply
pick a large section to build.
I will try and build the mountain. I thought about dividing it up, but
trying to design the sections to meet is very tricky. Is there anyway I can
get Dave's burps to make this easier?
The castle will be place on top of the mountain, hopefully 20 bricks off the
table, but maybe less after I build it. I had orginally designed the base
to be 32x64, but after Shaun's mention of his castle I added extra space.
I still see the village with 16x16 buildings. I know Shaun has a 48x48, but
I don't know how well the game play will be around or through that building.
I know that if we make small buildings, then we can move through alleys and
hide around more corners.
Again any thoughts for improvement. Or are you so confused by the pictures
that you are seeing milk cows floating in front of your eyes.
> For everyone's benefit, I also uploaded a bunch of pics of my various Scenery
> MOCs (after moderation):
I'll enjoy them when they become public, until then could you post deep
links instead?
> Green Rolling Hill: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39711
> Rock Outcropping: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39152
> Modular Tower Castle: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39701
> Trees: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39705
>
> The Post-and-Beam house is still forthcoming ... some more details need to be
> added.
>
> LMKWYT,
> -s
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Jonathan Dallas writes:
>
> I'll enjoy them when they become public, until then could you post deep
> links instead?
Actually, the moderators beat me to the punch. Grrrr, those pesky, efficient
moderators ...
> > Green Rolling Hill: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39711
> > Rock Outcropping: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39152
> > Modular Tower Castle: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39701
> > Trees: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39705
As an aside, I've taken to calling the upcoming battlefield "Brickle Earth".
Does that mean I'm ill?
-s
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
>
> As an aside, I've taken to calling the upcoming battlefield "Brickle Earth".
> Does that mean I'm ill?
My, yes! That vast intellect of yours and all you could come up with was
"Brickle?" It's truly a day of mourning for Geeks, Nerds and Dorks the
world round...
Didn't you come up with "Little Earth" earlier? I like that. "Studded
Earth" is also an option, but don't like that as much.
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
> For everyone's benefit, I also uploaded a bunch of pics of my various Scenery
> MOCs (after moderation):
>
> Green Rolling Hill: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39711
> Rock Outcropping: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39152
> Modular Tower Castle: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39701
> Trees: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39705
>
> The Post-and-Beam house is still forthcoming ... some more details need to be
> added.
Copied briefly to .castle because the images inspire...
Shaun, I envy the amount of green ABS you have! That rolling hill is the
sort of thing I dream of doing for my landscapes, and the design concept for
your trees is beautiful!
I have a few smaller versions of rocky terrain similar to your rock
outcropping. If I can make the event, I will bring them along.
Cheers,
-Hendo
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
"Hendo (John P. Henderson)" <hendo@valyance.com> wrote in message
news:HD1C9t.1G85@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
> > Modular Tower Castle:
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39701
I love the arch over the entrance to the tower.
A clever idea that begs to be copied ;-)
> Copied briefly to .castle because the images inspire...
And rightly so, they sure do.
Cheers, Twan.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
>
> Green Rolling Hill: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39711
Shaun,
I just saw this on Brickshelf and I was really struck by it's beauty. You've
got the curved shapes just perfect, and the movement from studs to tiles makes
a great contrast. I've got to get a bigger pile of green plates.
Bruce
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Hey guys,
I finished most of the mountain for this game. It is 96x96 and about 22
bricks high. It has a 32x64 flat spot on the top that we can put Shaun's
castle on. The mountain is also designed to sit on the table or on posts.
I was thinking about the map I made and thought that it might be too much
for us to build. If you guys think that having the baseplates at different
heights is too complex we can simply do a flat landscape with some hills and
out croppings placed on top. I would like to keep the river, but we'll
either use river plates (which I don't own any of) or add blue plates on top
of the baseplates.
Look and enjoy Mount Agot:
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39712
or
www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/mountain1.jpg
www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/mountain1a.jpg
www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/mountain2.jpg
www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/mountain3.jpg
www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/mountain4.jpg
www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/mountain5.jpg
www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/mountain6.jpg
Jonathan D.
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Jonathan Dallas writes:
> > <snip>
> >
> > > I created a ruff draft of what I think would be an interesting layout:
> > > http:///april2003/april2003.txt
> > > Just to warn you, this file may end up getting deleted by the moderator.
> >
> > Well it was.
> > Here is another link:
> > http://www.geocities.com/ilikeitgui/april2003/april-2003.htm
> > If you get an error page, just try viewing it later. Geocities won't let
> > that many people view the page at the same time.
>
>
> Hiya Jonathan,
>
> If you don't mind my asking, why was the original deleted during moderation?
>
> For everyone's benefit, I also uploaded a bunch of pics of my various Scenery
> MOCs (after moderation):
>
> Green Rolling Hill: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39711
> Rock Outcropping: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39152
> Modular Tower Castle: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39701
> Trees: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39705
>
> The Post-and-Beam house is still forthcoming ... some more details need to be
> added.
>
> LMKWYT,
> -s
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Jonathan,
Let me be the first to say that the mountain looks *awesome*!! I love the
stairways, the nooks, the crannies, and the sheer size of it. My LORD, that is
cool.
I think you have a good point about the raised scenery everywhere - I know I
won't have nearly enough pieces to raise any of my items above baseplate level,
really. I think using baseplates, with as much scenery of note on top of them,
will be fine. So far we have trees, huts, houses, rock outcroppings,
blacksmith shops ... this is going to be another amazing-scenery game!
Thanks for posting the pictures, Jonathan. Very inspirational!
-s
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Jonathan Dallas writes:
> Hey guys,
>
> I finished most of the mountain for this game. It is 96x96 and about 22
> bricks high. It has a 32x64 flat spot on the top that we can put Shaun's
> castle on. The mountain is also designed to sit on the table or on posts.
>
> I was thinking about the map I made and thought that it might be too much
> for us to build. If you guys think that having the baseplates at different
> heights is too complex we can simply do a flat landscape with some hills and
> out croppings placed on top. I would like to keep the river, but we'll
> either use river plates (which I don't own any of) or add blue plates on top
> of the baseplates.
>
> Look and enjoy Mount Agot:
> http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39712
> or
> www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/mountain1.jpg
> www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/mountain1a.jpg
> www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/mountain2.jpg
> www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/mountain3.jpg
> www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/mountain4.jpg
> www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/mountain5.jpg
> www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/mountain6.jpg
>
> Jonathan D.
>
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
> > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Jonathan Dallas writes:
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > > > I created a ruff draft of what I think would be an interesting layout:
> > > > http:///april2003/april2003.txt
> > > > Just to warn you, this file may end up getting deleted by the moderator.
> > >
> > > Well it was.
> > > Here is another link:
> > > http://www.geocities.com/ilikeitgui/april2003/april-2003.htm
> > > If you get an error page, just try viewing it later. Geocities won't let
> > > that many people view the page at the same time.
> >
> >
> > Hiya Jonathan,
> >
> > If you don't mind my asking, why was the original deleted during moderation?
> >
> > For everyone's benefit, I also uploaded a bunch of pics of my various Scenery
> > MOCs (after moderation):
> >
> > Green Rolling Hill: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39711
> > Rock Outcropping: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39152
> > Modular Tower Castle: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39701
> > Trees: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39705
> >
> > The Post-and-Beam house is still forthcoming ... some more details need to be
> > added.
> >
> > LMKWYT,
> > -s
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Thank you, I love building scuplture and if I had enough green brick I would
have covered the table.
I know most people don't have a lot of brick that is why I wanted to put the
baseplates on supports and not build the baseplates up to the desired height.
http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/supports.jpg
By using supports you can use less brick and it doesn't matter what color
they are. Now you would have still needed a few brick to cover the gaps
between the baseplates, but that would only have been 64x1 bumps worth of
green as a minimum.
I still think trying to coordinate how these raised baseplates would then
interact with each other is too complex so lets just go with a flat design
instead. Does anyone feel like building a river?
Jonathan
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
>
> Jonathan,
>
> Let me be the first to say that the mountain looks *awesome*!! I love the
> stairways, the nooks, the crannies, and the sheer size of it. My LORD, that is
> cool.
>
> I think you have a good point about the raised scenery everywhere - I know I
> won't have nearly enough pieces to raise any of my items above baseplate level,
> really. I think using baseplates, with as much scenery of note on top of them,
> will be fine. So far we have trees, huts, houses, rock outcroppings,
> blacksmith shops ... this is going to be another amazing-scenery game!
>
> Thanks for posting the pictures, Jonathan. Very inspirational!
>
> -s
>
>
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Jonathan Dallas writes:
> > Hey guys,
> >
> > I finished most of the mountain for this game. It is 96x96 and about 22
> > bricks high. It has a 32x64 flat spot on the top that we can put Shaun's
> > castle on. The mountain is also designed to sit on the table or on posts.
> >
> > I was thinking about the map I made and thought that it might be too much
> > for us to build. If you guys think that having the baseplates at different
> > heights is too complex we can simply do a flat landscape with some hills and
> > out croppings placed on top. I would like to keep the river, but we'll
> > either use river plates (which I don't own any of) or add blue plates on top
> > of the baseplates.
> >
> > Look and enjoy Mount Agot:
> > http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39712
> > or
> > www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/mountain1.jpg
> > www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/mountain1a.jpg
> > www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/mountain2.jpg
> > www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/mountain3.jpg
> > www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/mountain4.jpg
> > www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/mountain5.jpg
> > www.brickshelf.com/gallery/guigui/brikwars/042003brikwars/mountain6.jpg
> >
> > Jonathan D.
> >
> > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
> > > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Jonathan Dallas writes:
> > > > <snip>
> > > >
> > > > > I created a ruff draft of what I think would be an interesting layout:
> > > > > http:///april2003/april2003.txt
> > > > > Just to warn you, this file may end up getting deleted by the moderator.
> > > >
> > > > Well it was.
> > > > Here is another link:
> > > > http://www.geocities.com/ilikeitgui/april2003/april-2003.htm
> > > > If you get an error page, just try viewing it later. Geocities won't let
> > > > that many people view the page at the same time.
> > >
> > >
> > > Hiya Jonathan,
> > >
> > > If you don't mind my asking, why was the original deleted during moderation?
> > >
> > > For everyone's benefit, I also uploaded a bunch of pics of my various Scenery
> > > MOCs (after moderation):
> > >
> > > Green Rolling Hill: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39711
> > > Rock Outcropping: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39152
> > > Modular Tower Castle: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39701
> > > Trees: http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=39705
> > >
> > > The Post-and-Beam house is still forthcoming ... some more details need to be
> > > added.
> > >
> > > LMKWYT,
> > > -s
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Hey, if it's not a big deal, I'm fairly certain that I can actually make
this game - but... I don't think I can assemble an army (or, at the very
least, I might need some help) and you guys give me an inferiority complex
when it comes to building scenery.
So I think what I'm saying here is I'd like come to the party, but basically
mooch. If that *is* a big deal, maybe I could just watch.
I'm dying to get out of the house. :P
(From about what time-to-what time would the game be, and where?)
-Evil Wayne
______________________________________________
"There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
http://www.geocities.com/legomaniac70
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Hi Wayne,
No problem at all...I plan on arranging the teams this weekend. Just
coordinate with your partner. If it turns out that the other person can't
handle creating an army that large, I'm sure we can think of something (in
fact, we might have an odd number of players, so maybe your team will have
three people). Look forward to seeing you!
- Joe
"Wayne McCaul" <wmccaul@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote in message
news:HCs342.1wB5@lugnet.com...
> Hey, if it's not a big deal, I'm fairly certain that I can actually make
> this game - but... I don't think I can assemble an army (or, at the very
> least, I might need some help) and you guys give me an inferiority complex
> when it comes to building scenery.
>
> So I think what I'm saying here is I'd like come to the party, but • basically
> mooch. If that *is* a big deal, maybe I could just watch.
>
> I'm dying to get out of the house. :P
>
> (From about what time-to-what time would the game be, and where?)
>
> -Evil Wayne
> ______________________________________________
> "There is a very fine line between "hobby" and "mental illness."
> http://www.geocities.com/legomaniac70
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Okay,
The confirmed players are Shaun, Dave, Jonathan, Evil Wayne and myself. Dan
and Jenn will be on-lookers and may also participate (if I understand
correctly). Neil can't make it.
I would really like to have at least three armies, since it adds to the
confusion and mayhem, but with 5 players, the math is possing problems.
Assuming three teams, I randomly chose them as follows:
Team A: Shaun and Evil Wayne (this works well given Wayne's inability to
build and Shaun's all consuming desire to build an army tens of thousands
strong)
Team B: Joe and Jonathan
Team C: Dave and Dan & Jenn (of course, this now leaves Dave to build an
entire army, like Shaun)
So given the above, I was thinking that it just may be better for all
participats to build their own armies (which I prefer over going to two
armies). I know Shaun already has too many troops, so giving an army to
Wayne I doubt would be a problem...I would also be happy to come up with
some units for Wayne as well. If Dan and Jenn are on the fence about
playing, I'd be happy to give control of some of my units to them. Each
army (and therefore player in this scenario) gets 1000 CP. Large armies,
yes in deed! (Which, now that I think of it, is 180 degrees in the opposite
direction of our last game where all the players only had one unit!)
Thoughts? I also have an idea about the magic situation, but lets figure
out if we're going to have teams or not first.
- Joe
"Joe Comeau" <joe.comeau@ctp.com> wrote in message
news:HCqC47.FuL@lugnet.com...
> When the world was young, the Anasazi roamed the Earth. They were more • than
> just a nomadic people, for they were part of the world itself. Where the
> Anasazi roamed, plants flourished, game was plentiful and the races of • Earth
> thrived, as did peace among them.
>
> But a shadow began to grow in the periphery of all the races. And soon,
> Anger was given birth, followed by Hate and Malice. Colors began to mute
> and weeds appeared in the world.
>
> The Anasazi, though powerful as gods, could not adequately protect all the
> peoples of the world. Soon armies were amassed, lines drawn and battles
> begun. The world became at war with itself. No race of the Earth was • safe,
> even from itself.
>
> For centuries the war raged. Gone from the knowledge of the world were • the
> High Arts, Trust and Compassion. In their place grew Weapon Smithing,
> Dubiety and Indifference.
>
> The wisest and most adept of the Anasazi was named Agot. Agot brought all
> the Anasazi together, the first such meeting Time had ever witnessed. He
> called upon the power of all of the Anasazi and built a castle three miles
> high. Within its walls, a forge that drew upon the power of Earth's core
> was constructed. It was time for the Anasazi to wage war against the
> darkness that afflicted the races of the world. To this end, a mighty • sword
> was forged from the power of the Earth and of the Anasazi and the Sword of
> Agot was born. A single sword with which to purify the world.
>
> A Champion was chosen, cleansed by the Sword and known only as the First.
> He was then given the Sword of Agot and told to ride all the lands of • Earth,
> striking all who he came in contact with. The First scourged the Earth • and
> purified all he came across for three hundred years. When he was done, he
> returned and placed the Sword of Agot in the heart of the castle. With • the
> remaining power of the Anasazi, Agot sealed the castle to keep the races • of
> Earth safe from the temptation of power within.
>
> The great castle slowly decayed into a mountain and became known as
> Ancient's Keep. For seven thousand years, the world remained at peace and
> the Sword of Agot passed into legend, secure in the heart of the mountain.
> But the darkness was cunning and the First missed a few precious beings • that
> carried a shadow in their hearts. The shadow did not forget about the • sword
> or the castle and for seven thousand years planned and rebuilt its • strength.
> The Sword of Agot, the shadow decided, would be the vehicle with which to
> reclaim the Earth. To this end, the shadow hoarded energy until it had
> enough to cause the Earth to quake. The world trembled with such force • that
> that day was forever known as God's Shudder and the races of Earth knew • fear
> again.
>
> The quake caused a great split in the Earth and it cracked Ancient's Keep
> open, exposing its heart. No longer relegated to the stories of myth and
> legend, the presence of the Sword of Agot became known to all the races. • No
> kingdom could withstand whomever possessed such power, should it fall into
> the wrong hands. So once again, armies were amassed and now a race was • born
> to find and secure the Sword. For the only certainty was that each • kingdom
> believed the only way it could be at peace was if it possessed the Sword • of
> Agot. Once again a shadow appeared in the periphery of the races.
>
> ================================================
>
> As mentioned earlier, this is a TL2 game utilizing magic. Each being
> utilizing SP, has an initial limit of 50 CP for the powers (once in • battle,
> there's nothing to stop a unit from picking up a magic item which
> technically puts it over the 50 CP limit). Additionally, each army is
> allotted 1000 CP. The game is scheduled for Sunday, April 27. Jonathan,
> once again, has graciously offered his home as the place where the carnage
> will occur. Right now, there are four definites (Shaun, Dave, Jonathan • and
> myself) and one tentative (Neil). This game will involve teams, so if • there
> are others out there who want to play, please speak up within the next
> couple of days, so we can determine how many armies there will be and who
> the teams are...strategies must be devised and tactics thought out, not to
> mention armies have to be assembled!
>
> This is most definitely an equal opportunity game, so armies are • encouraged
> to be made up of multiple races.
>
> Lastly, if you think the total army CP count should be modified (like to
> 1200 or 999.44), bring it up...and no, Shaun, you can't have 3000+ CP.
>
> Oh, and one more thing...I think it would be helpful (necessary?) if at
> least a couple of us worked on the scenery together, regardless of what • team
> you may ultimately be on. Any on-lookers are also welcome to build • things,
> if they so desire.
>
> - Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Just a quick follow-up...Dan is definitely going to play, so as long as Dave
can build the army, we should probably stick with the teams. Everyone okay
with that?
- Joe
"Joe Comeau" <joecomeau@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:HCy6GG.92C@lugnet.com...
> Okay,
>
> The confirmed players are Shaun, Dave, Jonathan, Evil Wayne and myself. • Dan
> and Jenn will be on-lookers and may also participate (if I understand
> correctly). Neil can't make it.
>
> I would really like to have at least three armies, since it adds to the
> confusion and mayhem, but with 5 players, the math is possing problems.
>
> Assuming three teams, I randomly chose them as follows:
> Team A: Shaun and Evil Wayne (this works well given Wayne's inability to
> build and Shaun's all consuming desire to build an army tens of thousands
> strong)
>
> Team B: Joe and Jonathan
>
> Team C: Dave and Dan & Jenn (of course, this now leaves Dave to build an
> entire army, like Shaun)
>
> So given the above, I was thinking that it just may be better for all
> participats to build their own armies (which I prefer over going to two
> armies). I know Shaun already has too many troops, so giving an army to
> Wayne I doubt would be a problem...I would also be happy to come up with
> some units for Wayne as well. If Dan and Jenn are on the fence about
> playing, I'd be happy to give control of some of my units to them. Each
> army (and therefore player in this scenario) gets 1000 CP. Large armies,
> yes in deed! (Which, now that I think of it, is 180 degrees in the • opposite
> direction of our last game where all the players only had one unit!)
>
> Thoughts? I also have an idea about the magic situation, but lets figure
> out if we're going to have teams or not first.
>
> - Joe
>
> "Joe Comeau" <joe.comeau@ctp.com> wrote in message
> news:HCqC47.FuL@lugnet.com...
> > When the world was young, the Anasazi roamed the Earth. They were more • than
> > just a nomadic people, for they were part of the world itself. Where • the
> > Anasazi roamed, plants flourished, game was plentiful and the races of • Earth
> > thrived, as did peace among them.
> >
> > But a shadow began to grow in the periphery of all the races. And soon,
> > Anger was given birth, followed by Hate and Malice. Colors began to • mute
> > and weeds appeared in the world.
> >
> > The Anasazi, though powerful as gods, could not adequately protect all • the
> > peoples of the world. Soon armies were amassed, lines drawn and battles
> > begun. The world became at war with itself. No race of the Earth was • safe,
> > even from itself.
> >
> > For centuries the war raged. Gone from the knowledge of the world were • the
> > High Arts, Trust and Compassion. In their place grew Weapon Smithing,
> > Dubiety and Indifference.
> >
> > The wisest and most adept of the Anasazi was named Agot. Agot brought • all
> > the Anasazi together, the first such meeting Time had ever witnessed. • He
> > called upon the power of all of the Anasazi and built a castle three • miles
> > high. Within its walls, a forge that drew upon the power of Earth's • core
> > was constructed. It was time for the Anasazi to wage war against the
> > darkness that afflicted the races of the world. To this end, a mighty • sword
> > was forged from the power of the Earth and of the Anasazi and the Sword • of
> > Agot was born. A single sword with which to purify the world.
> >
> > A Champion was chosen, cleansed by the Sword and known only as the • First.
> > He was then given the Sword of Agot and told to ride all the lands of • Earth,
> > striking all who he came in contact with. The First scourged the Earth • and
> > purified all he came across for three hundred years. When he was done, • he
> > returned and placed the Sword of Agot in the heart of the castle. With • the
> > remaining power of the Anasazi, Agot sealed the castle to keep the races • of
> > Earth safe from the temptation of power within.
> >
> > The great castle slowly decayed into a mountain and became known as
> > Ancient's Keep. For seven thousand years, the world remained at peace • and
> > the Sword of Agot passed into legend, secure in the heart of the • mountain.
> > But the darkness was cunning and the First missed a few precious beings • that
> > carried a shadow in their hearts. The shadow did not forget about the • sword
> > or the castle and for seven thousand years planned and rebuilt its • strength.
> > The Sword of Agot, the shadow decided, would be the vehicle with which • to
> > reclaim the Earth. To this end, the shadow hoarded energy until it had
> > enough to cause the Earth to quake. The world trembled with such force • that
> > that day was forever known as God's Shudder and the races of Earth knew • fear
> > again.
> >
> > The quake caused a great split in the Earth and it cracked Ancient's • Keep
> > open, exposing its heart. No longer relegated to the stories of myth and
> > legend, the presence of the Sword of Agot became known to all the races. • No
> > kingdom could withstand whomever possessed such power, should it fall • into
> > the wrong hands. So once again, armies were amassed and now a race was • born
> > to find and secure the Sword. For the only certainty was that each • kingdom
> > believed the only way it could be at peace was if it possessed the Sword • of
> > Agot. Once again a shadow appeared in the periphery of the races.
> >
> > ================================================
> >
> > As mentioned earlier, this is a TL2 game utilizing magic. Each being
> > utilizing SP, has an initial limit of 50 CP for the powers (once in • battle,
> > there's nothing to stop a unit from picking up a magic item which
> > technically puts it over the 50 CP limit). Additionally, each army is
> > allotted 1000 CP. The game is scheduled for Sunday, April 27. • Jonathan,
> > once again, has graciously offered his home as the place where the • carnage
> > will occur. Right now, there are four definites (Shaun, Dave, Jonathan • and
> > myself) and one tentative (Neil). This game will involve teams, so if • there
> > are others out there who want to play, please speak up within the next
> > couple of days, so we can determine how many armies there will be and • who
> > the teams are...strategies must be devised and tactics thought out, not • to
> > mention armies have to be assembled!
> >
> > This is most definitely an equal opportunity game, so armies are • encouraged
> > to be made up of multiple races.
> >
> > Lastly, if you think the total army CP count should be modified (like to
> > 1200 or 999.44), bring it up...and no, Shaun, you can't have 3000+ CP.
> >
> > Oh, and one more thing...I think it would be helpful (necessary?) if at
> > least a couple of us worked on the scenery together, regardless of what • team
> > you may ultimately be on. Any on-lookers are also welcome to build • things,
> > if they so desire.
> >
> > - Joe
>
>
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> Just a quick follow-up...Dan is definitely going to play, so as long as Dave
> can build the army, we should probably stick with the teams. Everyone okay
> with that?
Wayne and I are eagerly looking forward to gruesomely vanquishing everyone
else's troops on the field of battle.
-s
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > Just a quick follow-up...Dan is definitely going to play, so as long as Dave
> > can build the army, we should probably stick with the teams. Everyone okay
> > with that?
>
> Wayne and I are eagerly looking forward to gruesomely vanquishing everyone
> else's troops on the field of battle.
>
> -s
{Yawn} I'm sorry, did you say something?
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> Just a quick follow-up...Dan is definitely going to play, so as long as Dave
> can build the army, we should probably stick with the teams. Everyone okay
> with that?
Well, *I* am, but I imagine that all those players *not* on my team are
probably deathly afraid of my wrath, and rightfully so!
I've already got a few ideas in mind... I should be able to come up with a
massive army for Dan & myself.
DaveE
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > Just a quick follow-up...Dan is definitely going to play, so as long as Dave
> > can build the army, we should probably stick with the teams. Everyone okay
> > with that?
>
> Well, *I* am, but I imagine that all those players *not* on my team are
> probably deathly afraid of my wrath, and rightfully so!
>
> I've already got a few ideas in mind...
> DaveE
Woah! There *is* a first for everything. You keep trying, it will get
easier over time.
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Whoo-hoo...Excellent! I'm really exicted for this. I've never played with
more than 2 other people and 99.5% of all the games I have played have been
only one other person. Thanks Shaun for fronting me some troops and whatnot.
I'll be there with bells on. [Insert Lame Joke Here].
Can I ask what town I'm driving to, or is that still up in the air?
BTW, I don't know what the dealy with magic items is going to be, but we
once had a game where there were lots of containers to open. In each would
be a random item. Sometimes it would be something that added to skills
(e.g., +2 Mechanixs Sonic Screwdriver) and other times with was just random
flotsam [1], but the actual containers were empty. When you got to one and
opened it, you rolled a 1d20 and consulted a master list that we had written
up. Then you crossed off your booty from the list. If you rolled that number
again, we just went up to the next available slot.
I don't know if this would be useful/useless, but I thought I'd throw it out
there. Feel free to ignore me. :)
-Evil Wayne
[1] Which we were using to combine with other random flotsam in a McGuyver
skill. So you got a chain and some dynamite, you rolled to make it a
Exploding Crack Whip (1d6+2). Failure meant the whole thing blew up on you
in a small explosion. Even if you were combining Crackerjacks and an
Wet-Nap. Mmm.. I really should get around to documenting the previous games
somday.
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> Okay,
>
> The confirmed players are Shaun, Dave, Jonathan, Evil Wayne and myself. Dan
> and Jenn will be on-lookers and may also participate (if I understand
> correctly). Neil can't make it.
>
> I would really like to have at least three armies, since it adds to the
> confusion and mayhem, but with 5 players, the math is possing problems.
>
> Assuming three teams, I randomly chose them as follows:
> Team A: Shaun and Evil Wayne (this works well given Wayne's inability to
> build and Shaun's all consuming desire to build an army tens of thousands
> strong)
>
> Team B: Joe and Jonathan
>
> Team C: Dave and Dan & Jenn (of course, this now leaves Dave to build an
> entire army, like Shaun)
>
> So given the above, I was thinking that it just may be better for all
> participats to build their own armies (which I prefer over going to two
> armies). I know Shaun already has too many troops, so giving an army to
> Wayne I doubt would be a problem...I would also be happy to come up with
> some units for Wayne as well. If Dan and Jenn are on the fence about
> playing, I'd be happy to give control of some of my units to them. Each
> army (and therefore player in this scenario) gets 1000 CP. Large armies,
> yes in deed! (Which, now that I think of it, is 180 degrees in the opposite
> direction of our last game where all the players only had one unit!)
>
> Thoughts? I also have an idea about the magic situation, but lets figure
> out if we're going to have teams or not first.
>
> - Joe
>
> "Joe Comeau" <joe.comeau@ctp.com> wrote in message
> news:HCqC47.FuL@lugnet.com...
> > When the world was young, the Anasazi roamed the Earth. They were more • than
> > just a nomadic people, for they were part of the world itself. Where the
> > Anasazi roamed, plants flourished, game was plentiful and the races of • Earth
> > thrived, as did peace among them.
> >
> > But a shadow began to grow in the periphery of all the races. And soon,
> > Anger was given birth, followed by Hate and Malice. Colors began to mute
> > and weeds appeared in the world.
> >
> > The Anasazi, though powerful as gods, could not adequately protect all the
> > peoples of the world. Soon armies were amassed, lines drawn and battles
> > begun. The world became at war with itself. No race of the Earth was • safe,
> > even from itself.
> >
> > For centuries the war raged. Gone from the knowledge of the world were • the
> > High Arts, Trust and Compassion. In their place grew Weapon Smithing,
> > Dubiety and Indifference.
> >
> > The wisest and most adept of the Anasazi was named Agot. Agot brought all
> > the Anasazi together, the first such meeting Time had ever witnessed. He
> > called upon the power of all of the Anasazi and built a castle three miles
> > high. Within its walls, a forge that drew upon the power of Earth's core
> > was constructed. It was time for the Anasazi to wage war against the
> > darkness that afflicted the races of the world. To this end, a mighty • sword
> > was forged from the power of the Earth and of the Anasazi and the Sword of
> > Agot was born. A single sword with which to purify the world.
> >
> > A Champion was chosen, cleansed by the Sword and known only as the First.
> > He was then given the Sword of Agot and told to ride all the lands of • Earth,
> > striking all who he came in contact with. The First scourged the Earth • and
> > purified all he came across for three hundred years. When he was done, he
> > returned and placed the Sword of Agot in the heart of the castle. With • the
> > remaining power of the Anasazi, Agot sealed the castle to keep the races • of
> > Earth safe from the temptation of power within.
> >
> > The great castle slowly decayed into a mountain and became known as
> > Ancient's Keep. For seven thousand years, the world remained at peace and
> > the Sword of Agot passed into legend, secure in the heart of the mountain.
> > But the darkness was cunning and the First missed a few precious beings • that
> > carried a shadow in their hearts. The shadow did not forget about the • sword
> > or the castle and for seven thousand years planned and rebuilt its • strength.
> > The Sword of Agot, the shadow decided, would be the vehicle with which to
> > reclaim the Earth. To this end, the shadow hoarded energy until it had
> > enough to cause the Earth to quake. The world trembled with such force • that
> > that day was forever known as God's Shudder and the races of Earth knew • fear
> > again.
> >
> > The quake caused a great split in the Earth and it cracked Ancient's Keep
> > open, exposing its heart. No longer relegated to the stories of myth and
> > legend, the presence of the Sword of Agot became known to all the races. • No
> > kingdom could withstand whomever possessed such power, should it fall into
> > the wrong hands. So once again, armies were amassed and now a race was • born
> > to find and secure the Sword. For the only certainty was that each • kingdom
> > believed the only way it could be at peace was if it possessed the Sword • of
> > Agot. Once again a shadow appeared in the periphery of the races.
> >
> > ================================================
> >
> > As mentioned earlier, this is a TL2 game utilizing magic. Each being
> > utilizing SP, has an initial limit of 50 CP for the powers (once in • battle,
> > there's nothing to stop a unit from picking up a magic item which
> > technically puts it over the 50 CP limit). Additionally, each army is
> > allotted 1000 CP. The game is scheduled for Sunday, April 27. Jonathan,
> > once again, has graciously offered his home as the place where the carnage
> > will occur. Right now, there are four definites (Shaun, Dave, Jonathan • and
> > myself) and one tentative (Neil). This game will involve teams, so if • there
> > are others out there who want to play, please speak up within the next
> > couple of days, so we can determine how many armies there will be and who
> > the teams are...strategies must be devised and tactics thought out, not to
> > mention armies have to be assembled!
> >
> > This is most definitely an equal opportunity game, so armies are • encouraged
> > to be made up of multiple races.
> >
> > Lastly, if you think the total army CP count should be modified (like to
> > 1200 or 999.44), bring it up...and no, Shaun, you can't have 3000+ CP.
> >
> > Oh, and one more thing...I think it would be helpful (necessary?) if at
> > least a couple of us worked on the scenery together, regardless of what • team
> > you may ultimately be on. Any on-lookers are also welcome to build • things,
> > if they so desire.
> >
> > - Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Wayne McCaul writes:
> BTW, I don't know what the dealy with magic items is going to be, but we
> once had a game where there were lots of containers to open. In each would
> be a random item. Sometimes it would be something that added to skills
> (e.g., +2 Mechanixs Sonic Screwdriver) and other times with was just random
> flotsam [1], but the actual containers were empty. When you got to one and
> opened it, you rolled a 1d20 and consulted a master list that we had written
> up. Then you crossed off your booty from the list. If you rolled that number
> again, we just went up to the next available slot.
Ooo, I like that rule better than my stupid idea about slips of paper and
whatnot. Say, a 1d20 to determine item and another 1d20 to determine magical
effect? Let's see... items... Maybe 1/2 weapons and 1/2 wearable/equipable
things? And maybe for effects, 1-5 bad, 6-15 mediocre, 16-20 really cool?
DaveE
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Wayne McCaul writes:
> > BTW, I don't know what the dealy with magic items is going to be, but we
> > once had a game where there were lots of containers to open. In each would
> > be a random item. Sometimes it would be something that added to skills
> > (e.g., +2 Mechanixs Sonic Screwdriver) and other times with was just random
> > flotsam [1], but the actual containers were empty. When you got to one and
> > opened it, you rolled a 1d20 and consulted a master list that we had written
> > up. Then you crossed off your booty from the list. If you rolled that number
> > again, we just went up to the next available slot.
>
> Ooo, I like that rule better than my stupid idea about slips of paper and
> whatnot. Say, a 1d20 to determine item and another 1d20 to determine magical
> effect? Let's see... items... Maybe 1/2 weapons and 1/2 wearable/equipable
> things? And maybe for effects, 1-5 bad, 6-15 mediocre, 16-20 really cool?
>
> DaveE
Slips of paper ... on which are drawn siege towers? Catapults? Dragons? I'm
sorry, Dave, but much like painted torsos, just because you have a drawing of a
Black-Plague laden cow doesn't mean that your army *has* a Black-Plague laden
cow.
More to the point, in addition to armor and weapons, there should be
goblets/potions, gems, scrolls/books, and so on! Even some capes with
protective attributes (no invisibility, Dave)!
I still like the idea of some coinage, too, with some sort of goofy,
invulnerable vendor selling desirable wares. For example, a Plague Cow for
only 60 LEGO money units? Who *wouldn't* want a Plague Cow?
-s
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> I still like the idea of some coinage, too, with some sort of goofy,
> invulnerable vendor selling desirable wares. For example, a Plague Cow for
> only 60 LEGO money units? Who *wouldn't* want a Plague Cow?
I like this idea as well, and can bring my coins to supply the troops, I have
several hundred arriving shortly, to combine with my several hundred already
gathered. I've also collected some little treasury bits together, books and
chests and the shiney chrome armor and what not.
General BW question: Can hiding Ninja's be seen with infrared?
Jennifer
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Jennifer L. Boger writes:
> > I still like the idea of some coinage, too, with some sort of goofy,
> > invulnerable vendor selling desirable wares. For example, a Plague Cow for
> > only 60 LEGO money units? Who *wouldn't* want a Plague Cow?
>
> I like this idea as well, and can bring my coins to supply the troops, I have
> several hundred arriving shortly, to combine with my several hundred already
> gathered. I've also collected some little treasury bits together, books and
> chests and the shiney chrome armor and what not.
>
> General BW question: Can hiding Ninja's be seen with infrared?
>
> Jennifer
Good question. The way the rules are written, it basically says they are
completely undetectable, BUT as a certain laser-toting opponent will attest
to, invisable or not, the Ninja is still physically there and therfore can
still suffer damage intentional or otherwise. I suspect the Ninja would not
be detected by infrared due to the slowing of heartbeat and regulating his
own body temprature :) Damn Ninjas.
Also, just for the record, Ninjas are not allowed in this game. Do we want
to allow for a champion per army (team)?
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> Also, just for the record, Ninjas are not allowed in this game. Do we want
> to allow for a champion per army (team)?
On that note, what specifically about Ninjas should be disallowed? IE, half
the reason Ninjas are so cool is Stealth, which costs an un-whopping 2
points. I'd either say disallow Stealth or make it cost more... Spider
Gymnastix I'm not so worried about. IIRC there's really only been one game
where that's been overly useful/abusive, and 3 CP's sounds about fair;
especially given the 50 CP cap. Thoughts?
As for champions... hmm. I'm honestly not all that tempted to use them for
my own part, even if allowed. Stupendous feats just don't seem to be all
they're cracked up to be in our games, and the 50-CP cap sounds so
potentially limiting to Champions. But that said, I think I'm for allowing 1
Champion per team...
DaveE
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > Also, just for the record, Ninjas are not allowed in this game. Do we want
> > to allow for a champion per army (team)?
>
> On that note, what specifically about Ninjas should be disallowed? IE, half
> the reason Ninjas are so cool is Stealth, which costs an un-whopping 2
> points. I'd either say disallow Stealth or make it cost more... Spider
> Gymnastix I'm not so worried about. IIRC there's really only been one game
> where that's been overly useful/abusive, and 3 CP's sounds about fair;
> especially given the 50 CP cap. Thoughts?
I don't know...Shaun didn't want them in the game. He always has nightmares
over Ninjas.
> As for champions... hmm. I'm honestly not all that tempted to use them for
> my own part, even if allowed. Stupendous feats just don't seem to be all
> they're cracked up to be in our games, and the 50-CP cap sounds so
> potentially limiting to Champions. But that said, I think I'm for allowing 1
> Champion per team...
So are we saying that no unit can cost over 50 CP total and not possess more
than 30 CP worth of SP with a total cap on SP at 250 per team? The team
limit is 1000 CP. I'm assuming that catapults and such do not have to be
bound by the 50 CP limit, true? Lastly, I'm inclined to have the magical
items that a team creates come out of their bucket of 250 total SP (and
associated CP pool). Thoughts?
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
>
> Slips of paper ... on which are drawn siege towers? Catapults? Dragons? I'm
> sorry, Dave, but much like painted torsos, just because you have a drawing of a
> Black-Plague laden cow doesn't mean that your army *has* a Black-Plague laden
> cow.
>
> More to the point, in addition to armor and weapons, there should be
> goblets/potions, gems, scrolls/books, and so on! Even some capes with
> protective attributes (no invisibility, Dave)!
>
> I still like the idea of some coinage, too, with some sort of goofy,
> invulnerable vendor selling desirable wares. For example, a Plague Cow for
> only 60 LEGO money units? Who *wouldn't* want a Plague Cow?
Oh Shaun, Plague Cows are *so* 12th century. Who has time to wait around
for the plague to take affect? I prefer the more instantaneous effects of
flaming cows myself. *That's* where the money is these days.
I also agree that there should be a variety of magical items out there...it
is the spice of life, so it is said.
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 07:46:41PM +0000, Joe Comeau wrote:
> Oh Shaun, Plague Cows are *so* 12th century. Who has time to wait around
> for the plague to take affect? I prefer the more instantaneous effects of
> flaming cows myself. *That's* where the money is these days.
not to mention that the smell of steak lures the troppers to their
untimely death! :)
> I also agree that there should be a variety of magical items out there...it
> is the spice of life, so it is said.
mmm... spice, for the steak, of course!
--
Dan Boger
dan@peeron.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> As mentioned earlier, this is a TL2 game utilizing magic. Each being
> utilizing SP, has an initial limit of 50 CP for the powers (once in battle,
> there's nothing to stop a unit from picking up a magic item which
> technically puts it over the 50 CP limit). Additionally, each army is
> allotted 1000 CP. The game is scheduled for Sunday, April 27.
Wow. This is one of the longest (and most entertaining) threads I've
noticed in the .nelug group. I honestly haven't read it all yet, so forgive
me if my questions are repeats... I will try to be brief...
1. Where do you guys play?
2. About how long is a game?
3. How hard is it for someone with BW-Rules-o-phobia to be involved?
4. Is it normal for a first-timer to be a mere spectator?
5. How does one keep track of different builder's contributions to the
display (so as to avoid someone leaving precious ABS behind)?
I ask all this, because one of these times I would like to check it out.
April 27th is a *big maybe* for me. My calendar tends to get filled about
six weeks in advance (unfortunately for these sorts of events). But, the
discussion about some things has my interest (okay, okay, mostly I just hope
to see some plague-cows). Also, if not for this event, perhaps another, but
I do have a handful of siege weapons built that might be of use (six
trebuchets, a dozen ballistae (sp?), and a few other odd little things (all
at mini-fig scale of course, and no they don't actually fire, but look cool,
IMO).
Anyhoo, I thought I'd ask and comment rather than sit out here in the
forgotten west and not say anything. :D
-Hendo
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, John P. Henderson writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > As mentioned earlier, this is a TL2 game utilizing magic. Each being
> > utilizing SP, has an initial limit of 50 CP for the powers (once in battle,
> > there's nothing to stop a unit from picking up a magic item which
> > technically puts it over the 50 CP limit). Additionally, each army is
> > allotted 1000 CP. The game is scheduled for Sunday, April 27.
>
> Wow. This is one of the longest (and most entertaining) threads I've
> noticed in the .nelug group. I honestly haven't read it all yet, so forgive
> me if my questions are repeats... I will try to be brief...
Hi Hendo! Glad you asked...
> 1. Where do you guys play?
It varies, but the last handful of games have been at Jonathan's (Arllington).
> 2. About how long is a game?
That varies too...anywhere from 5 hours to way more than 5 hours. That
includes setup time which usually takes an hour or so. It also includes
waiting around for me to show up :)
> 3. How hard is it for someone with BW-Rules-o-phobia to be involved?
Not hard at all...watching a game is usually a good place to start and then
team up with an experienced player.
> 4. Is it normal for a first-timer to be a mere spectator?
Totally.
> 5. How does one keep track of different builder's contributions to the
> display (so as to avoid someone leaving precious ABS behind)?
Hmm...it's never been a problem. Buildings and what not are easily
identifyable and all the figs usually are too. But if there is some concern
about the figs, the handy stick-a-piece-of-paper-in-the-torso trick usually
works.
> I ask all this, because one of these times I would like to check it out.
> April 27th is a *big maybe* for me. My calendar tends to get filled about
> six weeks in advance (unfortunately for these sorts of events). But, the
> discussion about some things has my interest (okay, okay, mostly I just hope
> to see some plague-cows). Also, if not for this event, perhaps another, but
> I do have a handful of siege weapons built that might be of use (six
> trebuchets, a dozen ballistae (sp?), and a few other odd little things (all
> at mini-fig scale of course, and no they don't actually fire, but look cool,
> IMO).
I'd love to see them. If you can make it, that'd be great!
> Anyhoo, I thought I'd ask and comment rather than sit out here in the
> forgotten west and not say anything. :D
>
> -Hendo
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
I figured I'd throw in some answers too, though they are mostly identical to
Joe's.
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, John P. Henderson writes:
>
> Wow. This is one of the longest (and most entertaining) threads I've
> noticed in the .nelug group. I honestly haven't read it all yet, so forgive
> me if my questions are repeats... I will try to be brief...
>
> 1. Where do you guys play?
Where *don't we play! Though, like Joe said, this time it looks like we'll be
playing at Jonathan's spacious digs in Arlington, Mass.
> 2. About how long is a game?
We usually try to get there around 10:00-11:00 in the morning ... and it's
unusual for us to leave before 6 or so. Keep in mind, if you can't commit to
the whole day we'd love to have you stop by for part of it!
> 3. How hard is it for someone with BW-Rules-o-phobia to be involved?
It isn't difficult at all. Typically, there are two or three really really
sick individuals who like to quote chapter, section, article, and verse from
the massive Brickwars tome. They are then counterbalanced by several veteran
players, who are familiar with the rules. And we often have one or two
first-timers ... what this means is that there is more than enough experience
around the table, that even someone from the 1920s can pick up some troops and
start playing. People are always more than willing to help out; keep in mind
though, Brikwars takes only about 10 minutes to master the basics (and 10
lifetimes to master the nuances). After a single turn or two, even newcomers
are pretty much acting autonomously.
Another option is for a newcomer to take control of only a few characters.
Just diving in really is the best way to start playing though.
> 4. Is it normal for a first-timer to be a mere spectator?
It's been done. Typically, they are ridiculed and called "weak" and
"cowardly". Actually, that's not true ... many games have had spectators, and
they always seem to enjoy themselves as well. After all, when all is said and
done it's still a room full of people who love talking LEGO.
> 5. How does one keep track of different builder's contributions to the
> display (so as to avoid someone leaving precious ABS behind)?
Joe covered this really well - we all remember the big things we brought, and
the troops are usually pretty easy to distinguish. For example, I think my
whole army, with only a few notable exceptions, are all dressed in the same
motif - black helmet, blue torso, black legs (blue waist, black arms ...).
Teams often try to coordinate their outfits, so as to stun their opponents with
matching colors and perfect accessories. Also, as Joe mentioned, we've been
known to stuff colored flecks of paper in torsos. I'd say the most confusing
part can be dropped weapons and body parts, but those are usually few and far
between, and can be recovered during cleanup.
> I ask all this, because one of these times I would like to check it out.
> April 27th is a *big maybe* for me. My calendar tends to get filled about
> six weeks in advance (unfortunately for these sorts of events). But, the
> discussion about some things has my interest (okay, okay, mostly I just hope
> to see some plague-cows). Also, if not for this event, perhaps another, but
> I do have a handful of siege weapons built that might be of use (six
> trebuchets, a dozen ballistae (sp?), and a few other odd little things (all
> at mini-fig scale of course, and no they don't actually fire, but look cool,
> IMO).
Cool! Any chance we can check out some pictures? In any case, hopefully you
can make it. We may sound uber-serious about this, but the goal really is to
have a great time, and come up with impressive feats of ABS mayhem.
-s
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 01:01:04PM +0000, Shaun Sullivan wrote:
> ... For example, I think my whole army, with only a few notable
> exceptions, are all dressed in the same motif - black helmet, blue
> torso, black legs (blue waist, black arms ...).
oooh - spies, here we come :)
--
Dan Boger
dan@peeron.com
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
I'm a recent importee to this part of the world and am looking to meet some
fellow brickheads. Please add me to the list of spectators (participant
wannabees but its probably too late for that) who would like to drop by but
requires knowledge of where to go.
Brikwars has not yet made it to Ottawa. I need some exposure so I can take
it back there :-)
Doug
ParLUGment member #7
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, John P. Henderson writes:
snip
> > 4. Is it normal for a first-timer to be a mere spectator?
>
> It's been done. Typically, they are ridiculed and called "weak" and
> "cowardly". Actually, that's not true ... many games have had spectators, and
> they always seem to enjoy themselves as well. After all, when all is said and
> done it's still a room full of people who love talking LEGO.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
So, just cuz I found myself wondering today... Game rules quickie summary (I
think):
Things we're decided on:
========================
- Tek Level 2 (Medieval)
- April 27th, 2003, Jonathan's place
- Shaun & Wayne vs. Joe & Jonathan vs. Dave & Dan & Jenn
- 1000 CP limit per *team*, not per player
- 50 CP limit per living unit (no limit on seige weapons)
- Shaun will lose
- No ninjas allowed
Things we're sorta sure on:
==========================
- There's some sort of mountain/castle
- Quasi-random magic items scattered across the board somehow
- Jonathan's units will all be dead before the 3rd round starts
- Magic items permanently link themseleves to a unit until unit dies (except
wizard-type units)
- Magic items limited to 1 of each "type" per unit
- Some sorts of magic books/scrolls which do "something cool" only for
wizardly units
- Allow 1 champion per team
- "Something" is protecting an uber-cool sword somewhere on the board
Questions I still have:
=======================
- What's the SP limit per team (if any)?
- Is the ninja ability "Stealth" disallowed? (ditto Spider-Gymnastix)
- Duration-rules mods? [1]
- Inanimate-object-animation rules mods? [2]
DaveE
[1] - I liked Mike's idea wherein you roll multiple d6's on each turn per
"remaining duration", and any that come up with a '1' lose effect that turn.
[2] - Proposed: Pay 1 SP per blok-mass of the object you're animating, if
you plan on doing those sorts of sneaky things, to prevent people from, say,
animating the big castle containing the uber-sword and marching it towards
your troops, or jumping on top of enemy troops, forcing them to endure
ABS-crushing death.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> So, just cuz I found myself wondering today... Game rules quickie summary (I
> think):
>
> Things we're decided on:
> ========================
> - Tek Level 2 (Medieval)
> - April 27th, 2003, Jonathan's place
> - Shaun & Wayne crushing Joe & Jonathan and Dave & Dan & Jenn
> - 1000 CP limit per *team*, not per player
Hmmmmm. I'd been thinking 1000 CP per player ... do we definitely want to
avoid this? On average, this would still come to at most 100 troops, assuming
you had all regular troopers. Throw in heroes, horses, catapults, ballistae,
siege towers, and each person would have much less than that. Is taht
acceptable, or do people definitely find that too high?
> - 50 CP limit per living unit (no limit on seige weapons)
> - Shaun will lose his mercy and clemency, and instead trounce the enemy with
> the evil Wayne by his side.
> - No ninjas allowed
>
> Things we're sorta sure on:
> ==========================
> - There's some sort of mountain/castle
> - Quasi-random magic items scattered across the board somehow
> - Jonathan's units will all be dead before the 3rd round starts
> - Magic items permanently link themseleves to a unit until unit dies (except
> wizard-type units)
> - Magic items limited to 1 of each "type" per unit
> - Some sorts of magic books/scrolls which do "something cool" only for
> wizardly units
> - Allow 1 champion per team
I guess I would subscribe to no champions per team - I'm sick of that lame-face
nitwit duck-walking chakram-tossing overcompensating butt-ugly she-wench.
Anything to keep her out of the game ...
Outvote me at will!
> - "Something" is protecting an uber-cool sword somewhere on the board
>
> Questions I still have:
> =======================
> - What's the SP limit per team (if any)?
> - Is the ninja ability "Stealth" disallowed? (ditto Spider-Gymnastix)
I'd say definitely ... maybe the only exception I can envision would be as an
illusionary spell, but perhaps with some limitations? Such as no duration is
allowed (so it would have to be cast each turn)? And if the unit then attacks,
the illusion is destoyed for the rest of the turn? Hey, that could be pretty
cool, actually ... it's expensive and costly to use, and goes away when one is
most vulnerable? I dunno, maybe that works. As a natural, ongoing effect ...
toss 'er out the the window :P
> - Duration-rules mods? [1]
> - Inanimate-object-animation rules mods? [2]
Both sound good to me ...
-s
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
"Shaun Sullivan" <shaun_sullivan@irco.com> wrote in message
news:HD4sEB.1rpn@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> > So, just cuz I found myself wondering today... Game rules quickie summary • (I
> > think):
> >
> > Things we're decided on:
> > ========================
> > - Tek Level 2 (Medieval)
> > - April 27th, 2003, Jonathan's place
> > - Shaun & Wayne crushing Joe & Jonathan and Dave & Dan & Jenn
> > - 1000 CP limit per *team*, not per player
>
> Hmmmmm. I'd been thinking 1000 CP per player ... do we definitely want to
> avoid this? On average, this would still come to at most 100 troops, • assuming
> you had all regular troopers. Throw in heroes, horses, catapults, • ballistae,
> siege towers, and each person would have much less than that. Is taht
> acceptable, or do people definitely find that too high?
Jonathan and I can handle this with the caveat that Team C (Dave, Dan and
Jenn) only get 2000 CP total and, therefore, 500 CP max allotted to SP.
> > - 50 CP limit per living unit (no limit on seige weapons)
> > - Shaun will lose his mercy and clemency, and instead trounce the enemy • with
> > the evil Wayne by his side.
> > - No ninjas allowed
> >
> > Things we're sorta sure on:
> > ==========================
> > - There's some sort of mountain/castle
> > - Quasi-random magic items scattered across the board somehow
> > - Jonathan's units will all be dead before the 3rd round starts
> > - Magic items permanently link themseleves to a unit until unit dies • (except
> > wizard-type units)
> > - Magic items limited to 1 of each "type" per unit
> > - Some sorts of magic books/scrolls which do "something cool" only for
> > wizardly units
> > - Allow 1 champion per team
>
> I guess I would subscribe to no champions per team - I'm sick of that • lame-face
> nitwit duck-walking chakram-tossing overcompensating butt-ugly she-wench.
> Anything to keep her out of the game ...
>
> Outvote me at will!
Oh Shaun, the lengths that you go to in the hopes of keeping one little fig
off the board. Totally fine with not having any champions, but one wonders
if that will really stop Sena, Warrior Chic from appearing...
> > - "Something" is protecting an uber-cool sword somewhere on the board
> >
> > Questions I still have:
> > =======================
> > - What's the SP limit per team (if any)?
> > - Is the ninja ability "Stealth" disallowed? (ditto Spider-Gymnastix)
>
> I'd say definitely ... maybe the only exception I can envision would be as • an
> illusionary spell, but perhaps with some limitations? Such as no duration • is
> allowed (so it would have to be cast each turn)? And if the unit then • attacks,
> the illusion is destoyed for the rest of the turn? Hey, that could be • pretty
> cool, actually ... it's expensive and costly to use, and goes away when • one is
> most vulnerable? I dunno, maybe that works. As a natural, ongoing effect • ...
> toss 'er out the the window :P
It sounds like we're in agreement, in general...allowable as long as it is a
magical effect of some sort.
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Quoting Joe Comeau <joecomeau@earthlink.net>:
> Jonathan and I can handle this with the caveat that Team C (Dave, Dan and
> Jenn) only get 2000 CP total and, therefore, 500 CP max allotted to SP.
Drat! Guess i better put these away then. ;)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
>
> "Shaun Sullivan" <shaun_sullivan@irco.com> wrote in message
> >
> > Hmmmmm. I'd been thinking 1000 CP per player ... do we definitely want to
> > avoid this? On average, this would still come to at most 100 troops,
> > assuming you had all regular troopers. Throw in heroes, horses, catapults,
> > ballistae, siege towers, and each person would have much less than that. Is
> > that acceptable, or do people definitely find that too high?
>
> Jonathan and I can handle this with the caveat that Team C (Dave, Dan and
> Jenn) only get 2000 CP total and, therefore, 500 CP max allotted to SP.
Just to be a royal pain, I'd forgo this caveat altogether. 1000 CP per player.
If other people decide they can play (Hendo ... where are you?), then they can
add another 1000 CP as well. The unlucky team is the one that doesn't have as
many players as the other side.
Having played the underdog on several occasions, I can vouch for it still being
just as fun. Sometimes evenly matched team tend to go head-to-head ... someone
who's playing at an initial disadvantage has to get all creative. Plus it
counts for soooo much more when one whallops one's opponents.
Just my two cents. Besides, I can't envision Jen as a force to be reckoned
with anyway. I envision her troops running to the nearest pond to stare at the
pretty tropical fish ;) As if being handicapped with Dave weren't enough ...
poor, poor Dan.
-s
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> Just my two cents. Besides, I can't envision Jen as a force to be reckoned
> with anyway. I envision her troops running to the nearest pond to stare at
> the
> pretty tropical fish ;) As if being handicapped with Dave weren't enough
> ...
> poor, poor Dan.
stareing at fish... summoning swamp beasts, it's really all the same once you've
lost isn't it? :)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
> Just to be a royal pain, I'd forgo this caveat altogether. 1000 CP per player.
> If other people decide they can play (Hendo ... where are you?), then they can
> add another 1000 CP as well. The unlucky team is the one that doesn't have as
> many players as the other side.
>
> Having played the underdog on several occasions, I can vouch for it still being
> just as fun. Sometimes evenly matched team tend to go head-to-head ... someone
> who's playing at an initial disadvantage has to get all creative. Plus it
> counts for soooo much more when one whallops one's opponents.
>
> Just my two cents. Besides, I can't envision Jen as a force to be reckoned
> with anyway. I envision her troops running to the nearest pond to stare at the
> pretty tropical fish ;) As if being handicapped with Dave weren't enough ...
> poor, poor Dan.
Wow. I've been watching the deliberations, and I
only wish I could play. Nuts.
Would someone please name a horse, a tree, or a
ballista (or a ball of flaming pitch, if you're
so inclined) in my honor? That way I can be there
in spirit.
best
LFB
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Lindsay Frederick Braun writes:
>
> Would someone please name a horse, a tree, or a
> ballista (or a ball of flaming pitch, if you're
> so inclined) in my honor? That way I can be there
> in spirit.
If it's any consolation, I've just about finished building a Medieval
Battleship, which I was going to name the "LFB Pinafore".
Hmm, maybe not.
I will definitely figure out something appropriate though ... appropriate for
whom, though, that's a different question.
;)
-s
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Shaun Sullivan writes:
> If other people decide they can play (Hendo ... where are you?)...
Huh? Who? Oh, sorry, I was distracted by a monkey with a bicycle made of
ice cream...
Uh... Technically, I am in Greenfield (when I am home). The big question
for this topic is whether I can get from Greenfield to Arlington on the
27th. Currently, there is a strong rumor that I may have to work that day.
If I do work, perhaps I will get lucky and get out early enough to show up
late and be a spectator. (If someone emails me directions, that would be
great.) If I don't work, I should be able to arrive earlier and be more
involved.
I will keep you informed, but at this point I will play it safe and say I
will not likely be able to play. :(
-Hendo
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
So, Shaun will lose? Then, by association, Evil Wayne will lose. Evil Wayne
cannot lose. Evil Wayne, who, apparently likes to talk in annoying 3rd
person, will not simply stand aside and allow the forces of good-and-just to
turn his team's troops into the bloody pulps of the battlefield...
Unless there's a hefty bribe in it, that is.
Evil Wayne takes cash, checks, charge, beads, spices, flecks of lint,
declarations of undying love, and various shiny objects that catch Evil
Wayne's eye [1].
The bigger the bribe, the more soul-crushing the betrayal.
Mu-ha-ha-ha!
-Evil Wayne
[1] Please make checks payable to The Penultimate Evil Wayne, Inc. This is a
limited time offer, so act now. Batteries not included, some assembly
required. Tax and destination charges may apply, see your authorized dealer
for details. Offer void where prohibited. And prohibited where void.
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> So, just cuz I found myself wondering today... Game rules quickie summary (I
> think):
>
> Things we're decided on:
> ========================
> - Tek Level 2 (Medieval)
> - April 27th, 2003, Jonathan's place
> - Shaun & Wayne vs. Joe & Jonathan vs. Dave & Dan & Jenn
> - 1000 CP limit per *team*, not per player
> - 50 CP limit per living unit (no limit on seige weapons)
> - Shaun will lose
> - No ninjas allowed
>
> Things we're sorta sure on:
> ==========================
> - There's some sort of mountain/castle
> - Quasi-random magic items scattered across the board somehow
> - Jonathan's units will all be dead before the 3rd round starts
> - Magic items permanently link themseleves to a unit until unit dies (except
> wizard-type units)
> - Magic items limited to 1 of each "type" per unit
> - Some sorts of magic books/scrolls which do "something cool" only for
> wizardly units
> - Allow 1 champion per team
> - "Something" is protecting an uber-cool sword somewhere on the board
>
> Questions I still have:
> =======================
> - What's the SP limit per team (if any)?
> - Is the ninja ability "Stealth" disallowed? (ditto Spider-Gymnastix)
> - Duration-rules mods? [1]
> - Inanimate-object-animation rules mods? [2]
>
> DaveE
>
> [1] - I liked Mike's idea wherein you roll multiple d6's on each turn per
> "remaining duration", and any that come up with a '1' lose effect that turn.
>
> [2] - Proposed: Pay 1 SP per blok-mass of the object you're animating, if
> you plan on doing those sorts of sneaky things, to prevent people from, say,
> animating the big castle containing the uber-sword and marching it towards
> your troops, or jumping on top of enemy troops, forcing them to endure
> ABS-crushing death.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> So, just cuz I found myself wondering today... Game rules quickie summary (I
> think):
>
> Things we're decided on:
> ========================
> - Tek Level 2 (Medieval)
> - April 27th, 2003, Jonathan's place
> - Shaun & Wayne vs. Joe & Jonathan vs. Dave & Dan & Jenn
> - 1000 CP limit per *team*, not per player
> - 50 CP limit per living unit (no limit on seige weapons)
> - Shaun will lose
> - No ninjas allowed
Yep.
> Things we're sorta sure on:
> ==========================
> - There's some sort of mountain/castle
> - Quasi-random magic items scattered across the board somehow
> - Jonathan's units will all be dead before the 3rd round starts
> - Magic items permanently link themseleves to a unit until unit dies (except
> wizard-type units)
> - Magic items limited to 1 of each "type" per unit
> - Some sorts of magic books/scrolls which do "something cool" only for
> wizardly units
> - Allow 1 champion per team
> - "Something" is protecting an uber-cool sword somewhere on the board
Also sounds good...I'm actually going to be creating that "something" with
regards to the sword. I'll be sure to make it fair so that fore-knowledge
is not and advantage (Jonathan doesn't even know what I have in mind for
this at this point), but may just reveal the whole thing, once I've worked
out a couple of things.
> Questions I still have:
> =======================
> - What's the SP limit per team (if any)?
> - Is the ninja ability "Stealth" disallowed? (ditto Spider-Gymnastix)
> - Duration-rules mods? [1]
> - Inanimate-object-animation rules mods? [2]
The SP limit is should not consume more than %25 of your total CP, so 250 CP
worth. Again, I think the magic items that you create to get scatterd
should draw from this pool, minimum of 5 items per team, with a maximum of
10 per team...thoughts?
Spider Gymnastix should be allowed. I guess Stealth should ony be allowed
through magic, but perhaps Shaun can elighten us with his thoughts on the
matter.
> DaveE
>
> [1] - I liked Mike's idea wherein you roll multiple d6's on each turn per
> "remaining duration", and any that come up with a '1' lose effect that turn.
This didn't make sense to me at first, but what your saying is that you
simply lose a turn of duration for every '1' that appears, thus shortening
the effect. I'm okay with that.
> [2] - Proposed: Pay 1 SP per blok-mass of the object you're animating, if
> you plan on doing those sorts of sneaky things, to prevent people from, say,
> animating the big castle containing the uber-sword and marching it towards
> your troops, or jumping on top of enemy troops, forcing them to endure
> ABS-crushing death.
This seems reasonable, but shouldn't it be total blok-mass - 1, since BW
always seems to assume a blok-mass of 1 (so you only have to pay additional
SP when you are anamating something larger).
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> The SP limit is should not consume more than %25 of your total CP, so 250 CP
> worth. Again, I think the magic items that you create to get scatterd
> should draw from this pool, minimum of 5 items per team, with a maximum of
> 10 per team...thoughts?
Hmm. I kinda think if the SP's come out of your team's rations, people will
be less likely to go scattering cool objects across the board. Plus, people
would know in advance what *their* items did and would be less/more likely
to pick them up depending on function (if they can see in advance what they
are).
Actually, to tell the truth, I might be inclined (if that were the case) to
produce 10 really *awful* items, then try and avoid picking up magic items
all together, except maybe the sword in the middle. Basically, I'd assume
that each other team would've produced somewhere around a 50/50 distribution
of good/bad items, and that my additional third of the items would push the
balance to 33/66 good/bad (depending on how many items other people put
out), meaning I should avoid magic items in general, and that way other
teams are more likely to get junk that's detrimental. Hmm. Ok, actually, I
wouldn't, cuz I'd feel too guilty doing that. But anyway, I'm sorta leery of
the SP's coming out of your magic pool.
I think I'm more inclined to give some added inscentive to magic items-- IE
'somehow' we're guaranteed that there's a *slightly* higher chance that a
magic item will be good than bad. If that's the case, it encourages more
magic-item-getting (just a good excuse to take a chance), which adds
definite fun to the game. Especially when you pick up the magic helmet that
makes you attack your own troops, or a sword that makes the first enemy unit
you touch with it divide in half and replicate instantly!
> Spider Gymnastix should be allowed. I guess Stealth should ony be allowed
> through magic, but perhaps Shaun can elighten us with his thoughts on the
> matter.
Sounds good to me.
> > [1] - I liked Mike's idea wherein you roll multiple d6's on each turn per
> > "remaining duration", and any that come up with a '1' lose effect that turn.
>
> This didn't make sense to me at first, but what your saying is that you
> simply lose a turn of duration for every '1' that appears, thus shortening
> the effect. I'm okay with that.
Yep. So effectively you can get a magic spell that lasts forever (if you
never roll a 1), or a magic spell that lasts only 1 turn, even when spending
10 SP's on duration. It appears to shorten 'average' duration slightly, such
that it increases logarithmically instead of linearly, while also
guaranteeing nothing whatsoever due to outlandish probability.
> > [2] - Proposed: Pay 1 SP per blok-mass of the object you're animating, if
> > you plan on doing those sorts of sneaky things, to prevent people from, say,
> > animating the big castle containing the uber-sword and marching it towards
> > your troops, or jumping on top of enemy troops, forcing them to endure
> > ABS-crushing death.
>
> This seems reasonable, but shouldn't it be total blok-mass - 1, since BW
> always seems to assume a blok-mass of 1 (so you only have to pay additional
> SP when you are anamating something larger).
Either sounds ok to me-- I proposed that originally, and IIRC Mike said he
was thinking about just making it cost 1 SP per blok mass. We can just go
with the "pay 1 SP per mass beyond 1" for now, though...
DaveE
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Quoting David Eaton <deaton@intdata.com>:
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > The SP limit is should not consume more than %25 of your total CP, so 250 • CP
> > worth. Again, I think the magic items that you create to get scatterd
> > should draw from this pool, minimum of 5 items per team, with a maximum of
> > 10 per team...thoughts?
>
> But anyway, I'm sorta leery
> of
> the SP's coming out of your magic pool.
I agree. It's not my troops fault he picked up something that cursed him
forever and made some sp effectively ususable until his untimely death. He
could have just as easily have picked up a goat. I don't think that magic items
should count towards the 250 sp pool.
Jennifer
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
"Jennifer L. Boger" <jenn@peeron.com> wrote in message
news:1049991336.3e9598a900ff7@home.peeron.com...
> Quoting David Eaton <deaton@intdata.com>:
>
> > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > > The SP limit is should not consume more than %25 of your total CP, so • 250
> > CP
> > > worth. Again, I think the magic items that you create to get scatterd
> > > should draw from this pool, minimum of 5 items per team, with a maximum • of
> > > 10 per team...thoughts?
> >
> > But anyway, I'm sorta leery
> > of
> > the SP's coming out of your magic pool.
>
> I agree. It's not my troops fault he picked up something that cursed him
> forever and made some sp effectively ususable until his untimely death. • He
> could have just as easily have picked up a goat. I don't think that magic • items
> should count towards the 250 sp pool.
>
> Jennifer
Okay, so they're independent of your team's SP...BUT we must have a limit on
these things, since we don't want people getting too carried away. So
because of this, let's set an actual number of items per team at 10.
Further, let's also say that each team has free reign as to what objects
they decide to enchant. However, once an item is picked up, if two or more
teams have an enchantment on the same item (like a sword) and/or a team has
multiple types of enchantments on the same item, then a roll is made on the
Ker-Magic-Item-Don't-Let-Me-Down table to see which enchantment it actually
is. Sound fair? Also, we should probably set a Fair CP Value to any item
not to exceed...what? 20 CP?
My thought here is that certain items may do some simple things like give
the wearer an additional 4" of movement and might only cost about 6 CP
between the item itself and the magic ability. However, for items that
grant SP powers, we don't want them to be too powerful.
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> Okay, so they're independent of your team's SP...BUT we must have a limit on
> these things, since we don't want people getting too carried away. So
> because of this, let's set an actual number of items per team at 10.
Works for me-- I had been thinking we could just have a CP pool for magic
items, but this works just as effecitvely. Each team makes 5 to 10 magic
items, none of which can exceed 20 CP? Sounds ok to me... Maybe we can play
around with magic items and see if that 20 CP's needs adjusting up or down
or whatnot, but sounds ok to me for now.
> Further, let's also say that each team has free reign as to what objects
> they decide to enchant. However, once an item is picked up, if two or more
> teams have an enchantment on the same item (like a sword) and/or a team has
> multiple types of enchantments on the same item, then a roll is made on the
> Ker-Magic-Item-Don't-Let-Me-Down table to see which enchantment it actually
> is. Sound fair?
Not quite sure I follow you-- I think you're saying:
- I bring a dk.gray sword with a spell to increase power rating by 1
- Wayne brings a dk.gray sword with a spell to increase stupidity by 2
- Joe's chamberpot-man picks up a dk.gray sword, and we have no way of knowing
which sword it is; mine or Wayne's.
- We roll to figure out whose item it is.
That right? That sounds ok to me... (I assume items will be put into chests
or whatnot so we can't see what we're getting until we open or touch said
chests)
> My thought here is that certain items may do some simple things like give
> the wearer an additional 4" of movement and might only cost about 6 CP
> between the item itself and the magic ability. However, for items that
> grant SP powers, we don't want them to be too powerful.
SP powers should't be too bad that way; since you've got to spend 3 CP's per
SP, plus an indexed ability (assuming it's a thing that casts something), so
that's a max of... 5 SP's per item? Hm. Depending on indexed ability, that
IS a bit strong for J.Random item. AND, if we score it according to, say,
creature rules (like 1 CP per 1" hover flight), then it's *still* kinda
powerful (sword with 18" hover flight? Too powerful). Hmmmm. Maybe reduce
the max to 10 or 15 CP's per magic item? Base items (especially items like
books/jewelry/boots/etc) don't seem to cost much, leaving apparently lots of
space for increased pointage.
Although, here's a perfect opportunity for me to pitch my CP pool for magic
items idea. If we said you've got to have 10 items, and can't use more than
100 CP's total for them (max 20 CP per item), then you can't go splurging
and making lots of 20 CP items... Perhaps something like:
CP pool for magic items = 10 * Number of items (max 10)
Hence, you keep the balance pretty even...
DaveE
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
"David Eaton" <deaton@intdata.com> wrote in message
news:HD54G3.t0F@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > Okay, so they're independent of your team's SP...BUT we must have a limit • on
> > these things, since we don't want people getting too carried away. So
> > because of this, let's set an actual number of items per team at 10.
>
> Works for me-- I had been thinking we could just have a CP pool for magic
> items, but this works just as effecitvely. Each team makes 5 to 10 magic
> items, none of which can exceed 20 CP? Sounds ok to me... Maybe we can • play
> around with magic items and see if that 20 CP's needs adjusting up or down
> or whatnot, but sounds ok to me for now.
>
> > Further, let's also say that each team has free reign as to what objects
> > they decide to enchant. However, once an item is picked up, if two or • more
> > teams have an enchantment on the same item (like a sword) and/or a team • has
> > multiple types of enchantments on the same item, then a roll is made on • the
> > Ker-Magic-Item-Don't-Let-Me-Down table to see which enchantment it • actually
> > is. Sound fair?
>
> Not quite sure I follow you-- I think you're saying:
>
> - I bring a dk.gray sword with a spell to increase power rating by 1
> - Wayne brings a dk.gray sword with a spell to increase stupidity by 2
> - Joe's chamberpot-man picks up a dk.gray sword, and we have no way of • knowing
> which sword it is; mine or Wayne's.
> - We roll to figure out whose item it is.
>
> That right? That sounds ok to me... (I assume items will be put into • chests
> or whatnot so we can't see what we're getting until we open or touch said
> chests)
Yes, but it also applies if your team created two different kinds of
enchanted dk.gray swords, the Sword of Van-Damage and the Sword of the
Flaming Hemorrhoids. And to be fair, I guess that means that once one is
used, it gets taken off the list, although I could easily go with the idea
that *any* time a dk.gary sword is found (using this example), you always
have a chance of getting any of the options. So if there are 3 dk.gray
swords out there, there's three different enchantments that are possible,
but the reality is they could all be Swords of the Flaming Hemorrhoids. I'd
be happy either way.
> > My thought here is that certain items may do some simple things like give
> > the wearer an additional 4" of movement and might only cost about 6 CP
> > between the item itself and the magic ability. However, for items that
> > grant SP powers, we don't want them to be too powerful.
>
> SP powers should't be too bad that way; since you've got to spend 3 CP's • per
> SP, plus an indexed ability (assuming it's a thing that casts something), • so
> that's a max of... 5 SP's per item? Hm. Depending on indexed ability, that
> IS a bit strong for J.Random item. AND, if we score it according to, say,
> creature rules (like 1 CP per 1" hover flight), then it's *still* kinda
> powerful (sword with 18" hover flight? Too powerful). Hmmmm. Maybe reduce
> the max to 10 or 15 CP's per magic item? Base items (especially items like
> books/jewelry/boots/etc) don't seem to cost much, leaving apparently lots • of
> space for increased pointage.
>
> Although, here's a perfect opportunity for me to pitch my CP pool for • magic
> items idea. If we said you've got to have 10 items, and can't use more • than
> 100 CP's total for them (max 20 CP per item), then you can't go splurging
> and making lots of 20 CP items... Perhaps something like:
>
> CP pool for magic items = 10 * Number of items (max 10)
A pool seems fine to me...let's go with your formula above with a max of 20
CP for any one item for now. I'll try and come up with a few things and see
if 20 CP is too high...I suspect it is, even with only 80 CP for 9 other
items.
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> Yes, but it also applies if your team created two different kinds of
> enchanted dk.gray swords, the Sword of Van-Damage and the Sword of the
> Flaming Hemorrhoids. And to be fair, I guess that means that once one is
> used, it gets taken off the list, although I could easily go with the idea
> that *any* time a dk.gary sword is found (using this example), you always
> have a chance of getting any of the options. So if there are 3 dk.gray
> swords out there, there's three different enchantments that are possible,
> but the reality is they could all be Swords of the Flaming Hemorrhoids. I'd
> be happy either way.
I like the idea that all effect are still possible. Adds sort of a
Schrodinger's-cat effect to the trooper who picks up an item. The only thing
is, doesn't that mess up the point spread? You can't construct items if
you're assigning random effects to them, can you?
Might it be better to come up with an Effects Chart with Small, Medium, and
Large Effects, so you open the chest, it's got a dk.grey sword and you roll
on the Med for it's effect, good, bad or ugly?
Or am I just not seeing this right?
-W
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
"Wayne McCaul" <wmccaul@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote in message
news:HD584w.16sn@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > Yes, but it also applies if your team created two different kinds of
> > enchanted dk.gray swords, the Sword of Van-Damage and the Sword of the
> > Flaming Hemorrhoids. And to be fair, I guess that means that once one is
> > used, it gets taken off the list, although I could easily go with the • idea
> > that *any* time a dk.gary sword is found (using this example), you always
> > have a chance of getting any of the options. So if there are 3 dk.gray
> > swords out there, there's three different enchantments that are possible,
> > but the reality is they could all be Swords of the Flaming Hemorrhoids. • I'd
> > be happy either way.
>
> I like the idea that all effect are still possible. Adds sort of a
> Schrodinger's-cat effect to the trooper who picks up an item. The only • thing
> is, doesn't that mess up the point spread? You can't construct items if
> you're assigning random effects to them, can you?
>
> Might it be better to come up with an Effects Chart with Small, Medium, • and
> Large Effects, so you open the chest, it's got a dk.grey sword and you • roll
> on the Med for it's effect, good, bad or ugly?
>
> Or am I just not seeing this right?
>
> -W
I think you're not seeing it right. Basically, each team comes up with 10
magical items. The actual items can be just about anything, swords,
goblets, coins, anything. Each team can decide what kind of effect it will
produce, such as increased speed by 4", halving your armor value or perhaps
some sort of energy ball spell that can affect an area. The teams do this
independently of one another and bring to the game their list of
items/enchantments. Come game day, we see what items people have chosen to
enchant. Any items that are the same, will have the Team Name listed as a
placeholder on the Ker-Magic-Don't-Let-Me-Down table for that item and
assigned a number(s) based on how many there are and what the appropriate
die to use is (if there are 3 enchanments associated with a chrome sword, a
1d6 will be used and each enchantment will get two numbers, if there are 10
enchantments, then each gets a single number and a 1d10 will be used). All
items are then placed in some sort of container and will be randomly
scattered throughout the land. When a player decides to pick up an item,
the appropriate roll will be made to determine which Team/enchantment it is.
At this point, the enchantment is revealed to everyone and that unit, good
,bad, or indifferent is now stuck with it.
Does that clear things up?
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Alright you people have way to much free time at work so I'll post something
quick before I get to far behind.
Summary:
-Each team has ten magic items (number them one through ten)
-30 suitcases (small container) are placed on the field randomly
-Each suitcase has a number 1-3 (which team's enchancement)
-The player who picked up the suitcase rolls a 1d10 to determine which
enchantment of the team's is in the case.
Is this what we are saying?
On another note. I just realized that if we keep the teams the way they are
then we can have 1000cp per player. We currently have three starting points
on the field. Two are at the top corners while the third is in the middle
bottom. Which ever team gets stuck starting at the middle bottom is going
to have a disadvantage since they can be attacked from either side.
So to compensate for this we can have Dave's team start and the bottom
middle and give him the extra 1000cp to defend himself with.
Sound good?
Jonathan
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
>
> "Wayne McCaul" <wmccaul@NOSPAMattbi.com> wrote in message
> news:HD584w.16sn@lugnet.com...
> > In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > > Yes, but it also applies if your team created two different kinds of
> > > enchanted dk.gray swords, the Sword of Van-Damage and the Sword of the
> > > Flaming Hemorrhoids. And to be fair, I guess that means that once one is
> > > used, it gets taken off the list, although I could easily go with the • idea
> > > that *any* time a dk.gary sword is found (using this example), you always
> > > have a chance of getting any of the options. So if there are 3 dk.gray
> > > swords out there, there's three different enchantments that are possible,
> > > but the reality is they could all be Swords of the Flaming Hemorrhoids. • I'd
> > > be happy either way.
> >
> > I like the idea that all effect are still possible. Adds sort of a
> > Schrodinger's-cat effect to the trooper who picks up an item. The only • thing
> > is, doesn't that mess up the point spread? You can't construct items if
> > you're assigning random effects to them, can you?
> >
> > Might it be better to come up with an Effects Chart with Small, Medium, • and
> > Large Effects, so you open the chest, it's got a dk.grey sword and you • roll
> > on the Med for it's effect, good, bad or ugly?
> >
> > Or am I just not seeing this right?
> >
> > -W
>
> I think you're not seeing it right. Basically, each team comes up with 10
> magical items. The actual items can be just about anything, swords,
> goblets, coins, anything. Each team can decide what kind of effect it will
> produce, such as increased speed by 4", halving your armor value or perhaps
> some sort of energy ball spell that can affect an area. The teams do this
> independently of one another and bring to the game their list of
> items/enchantments. Come game day, we see what items people have chosen to
> enchant. Any items that are the same, will have the Team Name listed as a
> placeholder on the Ker-Magic-Don't-Let-Me-Down table for that item and
> assigned a number(s) based on how many there are and what the appropriate
> die to use is (if there are 3 enchanments associated with a chrome sword, a
> 1d6 will be used and each enchantment will get two numbers, if there are 10
> enchantments, then each gets a single number and a 1d10 will be used). All
> items are then placed in some sort of container and will be randomly
> scattered throughout the land. When a player decides to pick up an item,
> the appropriate roll will be made to determine which Team/enchantment it is.
> At this point, the enchantment is revealed to everyone and that unit, good
> ,bad, or indifferent is now stuck with it.
>
> Does that clear things up?
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> I think you're not seeing it right. Basically, each team comes up with 10
> magical items. The actual items can be just about anything, swords,
> goblets, coins, anything. Each team can decide what kind of effect it will
> produce, such as increased speed by 4", halving your armor value or perhaps
> some sort of energy ball spell that can affect an area. The teams do this
> independently of one another and bring to the game their list of
> items/enchantments. Come game day, we see what items people have chosen to
> enchant. Any items that are the same, will have the Team Name listed as a
> placeholder on the Ker-Magic-Don't-Let-Me-Down table for that item and
> assigned a number(s) based on how many there are and what the appropriate
> die to use is (if there are 3 enchanments associated with a chrome sword, a
> 1d6 will be used and each enchantment will get two numbers, if there are 10
> enchantments, then each gets a single number and a 1d10 will be used). All
> items are then placed in some sort of container and will be randomly
> scattered throughout the land. When a player decides to pick up an item,
> the appropriate roll will be made to determine which Team/enchantment it is.
> At this point, the enchantment is revealed to everyone and that unit, good
> ,bad, or indifferent is now stuck with it.
>
> Does that clear things up?
Yup, that works. Thanks. Although I do like Mike's idea of each item having
a possible negative as well.
-W
Thanks
-W
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Jennifer L. Boger writes:
> I agree. It's not my troops fault he picked up something that cursed him
> forever and made some sp effectively ususable until his untimely death. He
> could have just as easily have picked up a goat.
Well, I'm a total newbie when it comes to comprehending the technical
details like CP here. And maybe this idea has already been brought up.
Correct me if I am wrong, but the problem is that we want magic items that
get tied to the unit that picks them up. Some of us have suggested once
picked up they cannot be dropped, while others dislike this. Is that right?
What if there was one kind of magic item that could be used to dispel this
effect of bond between an item and a trooper? Something like a Scroll of
Dispel:
http://peeron.com/inv/parts/3068px2
Or, a similar idea, what if there were just a few magical zones on the map
that removed the curse of an item bond simply by moving into them? Of
course this could be good as well as bad. A unit carrying a Sword of
Weakness might rush to get to one of these zones to rid himself of the
cursed weapon. But, at the same time, a unit carrying a Halbard of Power
might be forced to lose his precious item by having to flank through one of
these zones.
Again, just spitting out ideas...
-Hendo, a guy that doesn't really know much
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> Actually, to tell the truth, I might be inclined (if that were the case) to
> produce 10 really *awful* items, then try and avoid picking up magic items
> all together, except maybe the sword in the middle. Basically, I'd assume
> that each other team would've produced somewhere around a 50/50 distribution
> of good/bad items, and that my additional third of the items would push the
> balance to 33/66 good/bad (depending on how many items other people put
> out), meaning I should avoid magic items in general, and that way other
> teams are more likely to get junk that's detrimental.
Why not set it up with two potential effects for every item, one negative
and one positive? When you pick up the item, a roll of 1-2 on 1d6 means the
item is the bad version, otherwise it's the good one. That means no one
will have an advantage when going after the items they designed themselves,
and the odds are favorable enough to offset the potential danger.
I'd also suggest that you try and make any magical items fancy-looking
enough that you don't have to worry about duplicates. Gray swords just
don't say 'magic' to me, unless we're talking about The Legendary Gray Sword
of Unremarkableness +0.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Mike Rayhawk writes:
> Why not set it up with two potential effects for every item, one negative
> and one positive? When you pick up the item, a roll of 1-2 on 1d6 means the
> item is the bad version, otherwise it's the good one. That means no one
> will have an advantage when going after the items they designed themselves,
> and the odds are favorable enough to offset the potential danger.
Yeah, I'd kinda like to go this way more or less-- IE it's possible that 3
people bring gems (say) that all do negative things. Hence, people know
"uh-oh, gems suck!" Originally I had a whacked out, but intensely random
concept whereby:
You roll a 1d20 after receiving an object, then examine the "appropriate"
list for effect, depending on the item type. That way, you wouldn't get
staves that increased weapon range, pirate hats that added fire damage to
your attacks, etc. But that requires a list for, say, CC weapons, Ranged
weapons, Wearable items, and generic items. Plus there's nothing to say that
a pirate hat SHOULDN'T add fire damage to your attacks or whatnot, that was
just my left-brained impulses kicking in.
> I'd also suggest that you try and make any magical items fancy-looking
> enough that you don't have to worry about duplicates. Gray swords just
> don't say 'magic' to me, unless we're talking about The Legendary Gray Sword
> of Unremarkableness +0.
Good point-- we don't want to confuse a *dropped* grey sword with a
*magical* grey sword :) Plus it might make it easier for figuring out whose
is whose later on, not to mention adding the creative spice to the game
that's so fun :)
DaveE
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> Good point-- we don't want to confuse a *dropped* grey sword with a
> *magical* grey sword :)
On the other hand, if the most magical tower in existence has just been
cracked open by a massive earthquake, it just may be possible that enough
magical energy has been released that any time a soldier dies, his dropped
items automatically gain random magical attributes...
- Mike.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
"Mike Rayhawk" <rayhawk@artcenter.edu> wrote in message
news:HD6Bw4.os3@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> > Good point-- we don't want to confuse a *dropped* grey sword with a
> > *magical* grey sword :)
>
> On the other hand, if the most magical tower in existence has just been
> cracked open by a massive earthquake, it just may be possible that enough
> magical energy has been released that any time a soldier dies, his dropped
> items automatically gain random magical attributes...
>
> - Mike.
Yeah, then you could create a bunch of peons that you then sacrifice so you
can arm your better troops with magical items. Talk about chaos on the
battlefield!
I was always thinking that if a common type of item was used (afterall,
there are only so many sword types and breastplates), we'd just put a tiny
piece of tape on it to denote that it is magical. But I like the idea of
finding creative ways to make them not so common...I'm certainly going to
try.
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> [so very much stuff clipped]
All right.
At the end of the day, we're going to need to lay out some step-by-step
instructions as to what each team has to provide with respect to the random
magic items. I think we've all got a handle on how the teams' starting magical
distribution goes:
(1) no more than 50 CP per troop, including magical items
(2) no more than 250 CP of magic per player? Or did I just make that up?
But then there are, in addition, the random magical items. Each team (or is it
player?) provides:
(1) No less than 10 magical items?
(2) No more than 20 magical items?
(3) Total CP of magical items is 10*Qty
(4) Each Item has both a positive and a negative effect associated with it, of
identical cost
(5) No single item can cost more than 20 CP ?
At gametime:
(1) Chests and boxes are scattered randomly around the battlefield
(2) When one is opened there is either an item inside, or a random chart is
consulted to determine what item is inside
(3) A 1d6 is rolled if the trooper takes the item. A roll of 1-2 and the item
is detrimental, 3-6 and the item is beneficial
(4) Items remain the sole possession of their discoverers, due to a
fascinating symbiotic bonding process
Does that roll up all of these previous e-mails? There are so many nuances
flying about, I'm getting uber-confused.
Please feel free to amend the above rules if I've made an error or a lapse in
judgement, and repost as a suggested set. A couple of iterations, and we'll be
at something we can actually work with. For crying out tears, we only have
two weeks left before it all becomes moot and Evil Wayne and I stomp on all
challengers.
-s
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
"Shaun Sullivan" <shaun_sullivan@irco.com> wrote in message
news:HD6MFz.1MK8@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> > [so very much stuff clipped]
>
> All right.
>
> At the end of the day, we're going to need to lay out some step-by-step
> instructions as to what each team has to provide with respect to the • random
> magic items. I think we've all got a handle on how the teams' starting • magical
> distribution goes:
>
> (1) no more than 50 CP per troop, including magical items
> (2) no more than 250 CP of magic per player? Or did I just make that up?
Correct and correct. (What's your problem? There's only about a 100
messages in this thread.)
> But then there are, in addition, the random magical items. Each team (or • is it
> player?) provides:
Each Team.
> (1) No less than 10 magical items?
> (2) No more than 20 magical items?
> (3) Total CP of magical items is 10*Qty
We were saying up to 10 with a minimum of 5, the formula being 10*Qty.
Personally, I hope each team creates 10. With 30 items out there, there
will be enough to make it interesting without having too many items
scattered on the board.
> (4) Each Item has both a positive and a negative effect associated with • it, of
> identical cost
Correct
> (5) No single item can cost more than 20 CP ?
This is the current limit, pending feedback from some trials to ensure it's
not too high of a figure.
> At gametime:
>
> (1) Chests and boxes are scattered randomly around the battlefield
> (2) When one is opened there is either an item inside, or a random chart • is
> consulted to determine what item is inside
Correct, but just to clarify, if there is more than one enchantment (for
example 2 teams have enchanted the same object) then the 'random chart' is
consulted based on a roll to see what item is inside.
> (3) A 1d6 is rolled if the trooper takes the item. A roll of 1-2 and the • item
> is detrimental, 3-6 and the item is beneficial
> (4) Items remain the sole possession of their discoverers, due to a
> fascinating symbiotic bonding process
Correct and correct *and* a unit cannot possess more than one enchanted item
of the same type (such as a sword, helm, etc.). Any book of spells can only
be read by a magic user (that is to say some sort of wizard-like unit) and
multiple books can be collected.
> Does that roll up all of these previous e-mails? There are so many • nuances
> flying about, I'm getting uber-confused.
[insert obvious insult here]
> Please feel free to amend the above rules if I've made an error or a lapse • in
> judgement, and repost as a suggested set. A couple of iterations, and • we'll be
> at something we can actually work with. For crying out tears, we only • have
> two weeks left before it all becomes moot and Evil Wayne and I get • stompped
> on by all the challengers.
Finally, something we can all agree on!
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
"Mike Rayhawk" <rayhawk@artcenter.edu> wrote in message
news:HD5I9L.237I@lugnet.com...
> In lugnet.org.us.nelug, David Eaton writes:
> > Actually, to tell the truth, I might be inclined (if that were the case) • to
> > produce 10 really *awful* items, then try and avoid picking up magic • items
> > all together, except maybe the sword in the middle. Basically, I'd assume
> > that each other team would've produced somewhere around a 50/50 • distribution
> > of good/bad items, and that my additional third of the items would push • the
> > balance to 33/66 good/bad (depending on how many items other people put
> > out), meaning I should avoid magic items in general, and that way other
> > teams are more likely to get junk that's detrimental.
>
> Why not set it up with two potential effects for every item, one negative
> and one positive? When you pick up the item, a roll of 1-2 on 1d6 means • the
> item is the bad version, otherwise it's the good one. That means no one
> will have an advantage when going after the items they designed • themselves,
> and the odds are favorable enough to offset the potential danger.
I do like this idea. Although this does not get around the multiple
enchantments of the same item issue (two different magic chrome swords). In
this case, I guess we could handle it by first rolling to see which version
the item is and then do the good/bad magic roll based on that.
> I'd also suggest that you try and make any magical items fancy-looking
> enough that you don't have to worry about duplicates. Gray swords just
> don't say 'magic' to me, unless we're talking about The Legendary Gray • Sword
> of Unremarkableness +0.
Yeah, we'll need to keep them straight from other magic versions as well as
their common counterparts.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> When the world was young, the Anasazi roamed the Earth. They were more than
*Snippity*
> - Joe
Oh dear Lord! (of the LEGO Rings)... I want to play soooo bad... but I can't
make it since I will be out of Boston that weekend. :( :( :(
This looks like the best TL2 game ever... but I must admit I got tired of
reading this thread after post #137.
Enjoy the game and may the best team win (anyone but Shawn) ;)
J.-
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Regarding the magic items that are going to be scattered about the land, I
have one request...can we reserve the gold sword (from the Temple of Mount
Everest, set 7417) for the Sword of Agot? It's not the end of the world if
you already have designs for it.
- Joe
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Hey, shouldn't we name our kingdoms? Keep in mind that you don't have to
reveal your races, just give the land they're coming from a name. And just
to clarify, each *team* is a kingdom.
- Joe
"Joe Comeau" <joe.comeau@ctp.com> wrote in message
news:HCqC47.FuL@lugnet.com...
> When the world was young, the Anasazi roamed the Earth. They were more • than
> just a nomadic people, for they were part of the world itself. Where the
> Anasazi roamed, plants flourished, game was plentiful and the races of • Earth
> thrived, as did peace among them.
<snip>
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Jonathan and I are from the Kingdom of Draak, a land strong in character and
beauty.
- Joe
"Joe Comeau" <joecomeau@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:HDCu3s.21Au@lugnet.com...
> Hey, shouldn't we name our kingdoms? Keep in mind that you don't have to
> reveal your races, just give the land they're coming from a name. And • just
> to clarify, each *team* is a kingdom.
>
> - Joe
>
> "Joe Comeau" <joe.comeau@ctp.com> wrote in message
> news:HCqC47.FuL@lugnet.com...
> > When the world was young, the Anasazi roamed the Earth. They were more • than
> > just a nomadic people, for they were part of the world itself. Where • the
> > Anasazi roamed, plants flourished, game was plentiful and the races of • Earth
> > thrived, as did peace among them.
> <snip>
>
>
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In the North, life is harder. The Northern Lands of Ram'aka are no exception,
and those who spend their lives there are in a constant struggle against harsh
nature on the one hand, and harsher neighbors on the other. Living near the
very edge of civiliation, kingdoms in Ram'aka are subjected to barbarian raids,
animal attacks, and harsh weather.
The Orris Principality is perhaps the brightest spot in the cold north country.
Located near the ocean, the Kingdom of Orris has the advantage of limited trade
with foreign merchants, providing access to strange and wonderful wares that
are more commonly seen in the resplendent and decadent southern realms. In
addition to fantastic items and articles, their seaport also provides access to
learning and academics from far-off lands. Orris itself is well-known as the
scholarly epicenter of the Northern Lands of Ram'aka.
With the opening of the magical rifts, visitors to the Kingdom of Orris grew
fewer and less frequent - but those that did brave the global upheaval to visit
Orris were different, stranger, and more diverse. Even as attacks from the
Further Lands increased, learning about the newly-unleashed arts fluorished.
Soon the future became clear; all of Ram'aka must embrace the knowledge and use
of magic. The mythological Sword of Agot has risen from its dark slumber, and
only with it in hand can the Northern Lands of Ram'aka smite the Southern
encroachments, defend themselves from the Further Lands, and assume the
preeminence their histories have foretold.
And so the armies of Orris march south. Nothing can stand in its way.
Certainly not any Draak Queens.
In lugnet.org.us.nelug, Joe Comeau writes:
> Jonathan and I are from the Kingdom of Draak, a land strong in character and
> beauty.
>
> - Joe
>
> "Joe Comeau" <joecomeau@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:HDCu3s.21Au@lugnet.com...
> > Hey, shouldn't we name our kingdoms? Keep in mind that you don't have to
> > reveal your races, just give the land they're coming from a name. And • just
> > to clarify, each *team* is a kingdom.
> >
> > - Joe
> >
> > "Joe Comeau" <joe.comeau@ctp.com> wrote in message
> > news:HCqC47.FuL@lugnet.com...
> > > When the world was young, the Anasazi roamed the Earth. They were more • than
> > > just a nomadic people, for they were part of the world itself. Where • the
> > > Anasazi roamed, plants flourished, game was plentiful and the races of • Earth
> > > thrived, as did peace among them.
> > <snip>
> >
> >
| | | | | | |
