TFT Digest Tuesday, February 13 2007 Volume 03 : Number
880
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 18:11:52 -0600
From: "Herb Nowell" <herb.nowell@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: (TFT) Re: TFT Digest V3 #878
On 2/12/07, Rob Chellis <rchellis@stny.rr.com> wrote:
instead of 32. There can't be a difference of more than 3 points
between STR and CON, or between INT and KNW.
STR determines how physically strong you are....how much damage you do,
how big a weapon you can carry.
CON is your hit points, and where you cast spells from
DEX is the same as DX
INT is your innate intelligence.....what you roll on to notice things,
and how high a level of talent or spell you can take.
KNW is the sum total of the talents/skills/spells that you know.
I like the idea, but how does it really help if you can only diff CON
and KNW by 3?
You're still looking at ST 17 Wizards instead of ST 20.
- --
Herb
"Clearly, a civilization that feels guilty for everything it is and
does will lack the energy and conviction to defend itself." - Jean
Francois Revel
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 16:54:33 -0800 (PST)
From: pvk@oz.net
Subject: (TFT) Tatoo and Unarmed Combat comments
Craig W. Barber Wrote:
"What is the rationale again for not allowing others to skin the
character after death, cut off the tattooed arm or the like, then
claim the magic is in the ink? I think that rationale needs to be
strong, or we need to live with some gruesome "Waterworld"
scenarios! Sorry if I'm not paying attention here."
I don't think the magic would be only in the ink. If it were, then there
would be little reason, I would think, to do it as a tattoo. Just do it as
a scroll, garment, shield art, sign, flag, etc.
I think it would be related to the psychic and visualization elements
of TFT magic, and that for it to take effect, it would want to be visible
by the caster and maybe also by the subject of the spell.
Craig also wrote:
"Challenge: can anyone come up with an example of a martial artist
who deliberately went into serious multi-person mC*lC)es or real
military battles *totally unarmed*?"
Only in martial arts fantasies (e.g. films, mostly Asian, though there
are also many Asian marital arts fantasy films where martial arts
masters prefer to go armed).
"Which I'd argue would mean that we should just downgrade UC by
making it easier to get, and stop expecting UC guys to give up all their
IQ and weapons!"
Yes.
* 11 IQ points of memory and the IQ prereqs are excessive, I think.
* I think at least UC I shouldn't require being unarmored.
* Maybe have a range of 1-IQ talents for each ability without high IQ
requirements, without as many linear prerequisites, so there can also
be more variety.
* I think TFT has always needed more ways to avoid getting hit that
are not ultra-hard UC talents or dropping all offense. If no other
house rule has done that, then adding talents might be a way, not
requiring lack of weapons or armor to benefit from them.
PvK
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 19:28:19 -0800 (PST)
From: Lloyd Weber <laweber3@yahoo.com>
Subject: (TFT) Melee Arena
I am getting closer to a workable computer playing aid for Melee; I call
it
Melee Arena. If anyone is interested in trying it out let me know and
I'll
email it over to you.
Lloyd
_____________________________________________________________________________
_______
TV dinner still cooling?
Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV.
http://tv.yahoo.com/
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 00:56:49 EST
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: (TFT) Re: TFT Digest V3 #879
In a message dated 2/12/07 11:46:54 PM !!!First Boot!!!,
tft-owner@brainiac.com writes:
We ended up expanding to 5
attributes - STR (Strength), CON (Constitution), DEX (Dexterity), INT
(Intelligence), and KNW (Knowledge). A starting character is 54 points
instead of 32. There can't be a difference of more than 3 points
between STR and CON, or between INT and KNW.
It's starting to sound like C+S which makes me nervous...:-)
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 08:44:01 EST
From: ErolB1@aol.com
Subject: Re: (TFT) Re: TFT Digest V3 #879
In a message dated 2/12/2007 11:59:33 PM Central Standard Time,
Sethkimmel@aol.com writes:
> We ended up expanding to 5
> attributes - STR (Strength), CON (Constitution), DEX (Dexterity), INT
> (Intelligence), and KNW (Knowledge). A starting character is 54 points
> instead of 32. There can't be a difference of more than 3 points
> between STR and CON, or between INT and KNW.
>
It's starting to sound like C+S which makes me nervous...:-)
Yeah.
My own solution to the split-attribute problem is to (a) make
disadvantages
into "negative cost" talents, having them increase characters'
talent/spell/language points rather than having them add to attribute
totals. And (b) to
include "limited" St, Dx, and IQ among the disads:
====
Limited Dx (-1 per level): This talent can represent either having the
full
quickness and agility of one's Dx score, but reduced manual dexterity; or
having the manual dexterity but reduced quickness and agility. For each
level of
this talent, the character suffers a -1 Dx penalty on the appropriate
sorts of
Dx rolls. Note that weapon use and spell-casting both require both sorts
of
Dexterity, so that either version of this talent will give a penalty to
weapon
use and spellcasting.
Limited IQ (-1 per level): This talent represents having the full memory
and
willpower of one's IQ score, but less mental quickness or perceptiveness.
For
each level of this talent, the character suffers a -1 penalty on IQ when
rolling to notice things, when making IQ rolls based on mental quickness
or wit,
and when attempting to meet the minimum IQ needed to learn a talent or
spell.
The character does not suffer this penalty when making IQ rolls based on
willpower, or when determining the number of points of talents, spells and
languages
the character can learn. For example, a hero character with IQ 12 and 3
levels
of Limited IQ could only buy talents requiring IQ 9 or less but could
still
buy 24 points worth of talents (plus the bonus points for Limited IQ and
other
negative cost talents).
Note that this talent does apply when using IQ to determine the amount
of
noise a wizard needs to make when casting a spell.
Limited St (-1 per level): This talent represents having the full
endurance
and toughness of one's St score, but less raw physical prowess. For each
level
of this talent, the character suffers a -1 penalty on St when determining
bonus damage from high Strength, when calculating lifting ability and
encumbrance,
or when attempting to meet the minimum St score needed to use a weapon or
to
buy the Large Size talent. Goblins have three levels of Limited St as part
of
their racial package.
Note: One point of Limited St, Dx, or IQ may either be taken or bought off
whenever the character increases the appropriate attribute by one point.
======
So that tough-but-scrawny wizard with a lot of experience might have St 16
and 5 levels of Limited St, leaving him with an adjusted St 11 for
weapons,
encumberance, and the like, St 16 for fatigue and hit points, and 5 extra
points
to buy talents and spells.
Erol K. Bayburt
Evil Genius for a Better Tomorrow
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 14:30:16 -0500
From: "John Gfoeller" <johng3110@hotmail.com>
Subject: RE: (TFT) Re: TFT Digest V3 #879
Interesting. It makes me want to research "C&S" ("Chivalry and Sorcery").
I never played it. Does anyone have any comments on it as a gaming
system?
- -- John
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Reply-To: tft@brainiac.com
To: tft@brainiac.com
Subject: (TFT) Re: TFT Digest V3 #879
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 00:56:49 EST
In a message dated 2/12/07 11:46:54 PM !!!First Boot!!!,
tft-owner@brainiac.com writes:
> We ended up expanding to 5
> attributes - STR (Strength), CON (Constitution), DEX (Dexterity), INT
> (Intelligence), and KNW (Knowledge). A starting character is 54 points
> instead of 32. There can't be a difference of more than 3 points
> between STR and CON, or between INT and KNW.
>
It's starting to sound like C+S which makes me nervous...:-)
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 13:59:03 -0600
From: "Steve Reinhardt" <stever08@fastmail.fm>
Subject: Re: (TFT) Melee Arena
I tried out an earlier version of Lloyd's program and it looks awesome
and has a good, easy to use, interface. Definitely worth checking out.
Lloyd, sorry I did not send you any feedback on this. My computer time
has been limited lately and I did not get to play with this nearly as
much as I would have liked to. I was very impressed with what I saw,
though.
Steve
- --
Steve Reinhardt
stever08@fastmail.fm
- --
http://www.fastmail.fm - Send your email first class
- ----- Original message -----
From: "Lloyd Weber" <laweber3@yahoo.com>
I am getting closer to a workable computer playing aid for Melee; I call
it
Melee Arena. If anyone is interested in trying it out let me know and
I'll
email it over to you.
Lloyd
_____________________________________________________________________________
_______
TV dinner still cooling?
Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV.
http://tv.yahoo.com/
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 14:11:17 -0800
From: Rick Smith <rsmith@lightspeed.ca>
Subject: (TFT) Comments on Chivalry & Sorcery
I've also never played it but I have read that
it had (in the earlier versions) a realistic and
well thought out combat system. I have also read
that it was slow to play that limited its
acceptance. Many people who played it, used its
extremely well researched background info & used
home made simplified combat rules (or so I've
read.)
I tried to pick up some C&S for a little while
on ebay but I didn't find any bargains & was not
willing to pay a lot for it.
Rick
On Tue, 2007-02-13 at 11:30, John Gfoeller wrote:
Interesting. It makes me want to research "C&S" ("Chivalry and
Sorcery").
I never played it. Does anyone have any comments on it as a gaming
system?
-- John
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 19:14:08 -0500
From: "David O. Miller" <davidomiller@verizon.net>
Subject: Re: (TFT) Comments on Chivalry & Sorcery
Hey everybody. I own C&S (along with most of the supplements) and
played it a little bit in college. It was the single most complicated
RPG I have ever tried to run. The combat was extremely slow and I had
one of the members of our gaming group (care to comment Tim?) help me
to look up the percentages on the several charts needed to complete a
round of combat. Meanwhile I was busy running the scenario and keeping
track of the monsters and NPC's. If I had had to do it all it would
have bogged down tremendously. By having an assistant GM we kept it
going at a fairly good pace. We played a very typical, cliche dungeon.
It was set in the ruins of a small dwarven underground city that had
the lower level taken over by a dragon. The upper levels were full of
orcs and a few other nasties. If I recall the internal logic of the
situation worked pretty well and it was fun for the players to attempt
to figure out some of the back story. It was very combat heavy but I
never pretended that the scenario was anything else but that. After
spending several gaming sessions to finish it we moved on to other,
simpler games systems like RuneQuest. I sometimes raided the
supplements for fun ideas but never returned to the rules. I found out
later that many gaming groups did exactly the same thing. Now this is
not to say that I did not like C&S. In fact I found it to be a blast to
play. It was just very complicated and felt more like a wargame than a
RPG. If I want "extremely" strategic rules I would rather sit down to
play a wargame. I like my RPG's to move at a faster pace than C&S
allowed.
- --David O. Miller
On Feb 13, 2007, at 5:11 PM, Rick Smith wrote:
I've also never played it but I have read that
it had (in the earlier versions) a realistic and
well thought out combat system. I have also read
that it was slow to play that limited its
acceptance. Many people who played it, used its
extremely well researched background info & used
home made simplified combat rules (or so I've
read.)
I tried to pick up some C&S for a little while
on ebay but I didn't find any bargains & was not
willing to pay a lot for it.
Rick
On Tue, 2007-02-13 at 11:30, John Gfoeller wrote:
Interesting. It makes me want to research "C&S" ("Chivalry and
Sorcery").
I never played it. Does anyone have any comments on it as a gaming
system?
-- John
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"
------------------------------
End of TFT Digest V3 #880
*************************
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft-digest"