| |
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
|
|
| |
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
|
|
| |
"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
|
|
| |
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
|
|
| |
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:
> 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
|
|
| |
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, 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
|
|
| |
"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
|
|
| |
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
|
|
| |
"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, 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, 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, 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
|
|
| |
"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:
> [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
|
|
|
