Galadorn

Hehe. I was hoping this topic would come up. I grew up with horses, I rode both western and english saddles. My sister was the state equestrian champion for english saddle in this 70s. She is also the coach of last year's national champion in the U.S. I think I know what I'm talking about, and she's talking about. And btw, by riding do you mean, trot, gallop or walk? There are many ways to ride a horse, and many strides and paces you can set your horse to. If Arthur galloped his horse, I think he might have some trouble, if he walked, he might be able to make it... And I have ridden horses, walking themm with a broken ankle, and stitches in my right arm. It worked out fine. I also have ridden horses with stitches in my foot, no problems. Gut wounds may be a little more troublesome though, but walking a horse, is not very troublesome. Ummmm... your name isn't Markdoc is it? Then you must not be the guy I was talking to. And I don't like it when people call people derogatory names, thank you. I wouldn't call you an idiot. Take care.

Yeah, I'm sure Merlin had his M.D. from Johns Hopkins, and knew the precise medicial diagnosis needed to examine Arthur. You proved my point again - you don't know what historical criticism is, or even psychological perception for that matter. This was Merlin's perspective. I don't think Merlin had a 4.0 in his herbal lore Ph.D. with a 20th century medical core. Give me a break! Get inside Merlin's head, and all these people's heads. Some people thought you could die from a headache! LOLOLOLOLOLOL. Go back to college my dear doctor, quit attributing study and experience in medicine and theology/philisophy to literary criticism of the Middle Ages - which is my specialty in grad school. Take Care

You just proved me case - you're don't even know what historical criticism is. This is the MIDDLE AGES: you think they had a list of post operation suggested activities? When, you do your masters in literature, like I am, get back to me. Yeah, I'm sure Arthur and the hermit checked with the AMA before deciding whether he should ride on or not.

I gave you two options, I think Option A is a better bet. OPTION A 1. Buy a the powers, skills and cha's seperately: HKAs, Armor (Hide), Enhanced Senses, for the highest cost for each specific animal. So Enhance Senses would be +5. Figure the characteristics, using the druids characteristics as a base. 2. Assign limitations: Only in animal form -1/4, Power level only as appropriate for each specific animal form -1/4 or -1/2 - I can't decide. And any other limitations you choose. Simply use the same HKA, Armor, Enhanced Senses cost for each animal. The differentiation of the animal forms is based on special effect (wildshape) and the limitation (appropriate animal form). Just have the animal's character sheet handy for the player to look at when taking on a specific animal form. 3. You don't need shapeshift, since the special effect is changing shape, there is no appearing, the druid smells, looks, tastes and feels like the animal he wildshapes too. He is is the animal he shapes to, in all ways but his non-physical characterstics (INT, EGO, PRE). 4. You might need variable special effect +1/4, since he does change between different animal shapes. OPTION B 1. Characteristics: Use the character's characteristics, figure how much of each characteristic you would need, to reach the animal's characteristics' total. Probably best not to figure downward for lower characteristics - the druids is just a very strong mole. Remember, Druids keep the same non-physical characterstics (INT, EGO, PRE) they started with. Dont forget the limitation (-1/4, only in animal form). 2. Powers: Figure the associated powers with the associated animal: e.g. HKAs, Armor, Enhanced Senses, etc. 3. Skills: Figure the skills the animal form needs, and at what level: e.g Tracking, Climbing, Skill Levels, etc. You may even skip skill levels to emphasize, in a very Hero Gameish way, the druids lack of familiarity with the form. 4. Total: Total the cost for each animal's characteristics, powers and skills. This is the cost for the slot. Now whether you use an elemental control or multipower, you will have the total cost associated with each animal. O.K. when you get all this done, put it up on this thread, because we want to see it. Btw VPPs, as an afterthought, are too expensive for animal shapes. You can't put limitations on the power pool - too rich for my blood. Let us know what happens when you crunch the numbers, please, and which is the cheapest route. You don't have to recrunch the animal cha's etc. just figure the cost for the various options - EC, VPP, MPP. Take Care

You forgot the continuing charges, otherwise the druid would only be a particular animal form for one phase. Probably better would be a DMs option limitation (Only a limited number of forms per day, -1/4 to -1); or 1 continuing charge - 1 minute.

I agree.

His wounds were amended, and you think that was miraculous healing? LOL. Amended also means repaired through normal means Mark, you need to check your Oxford English Dictionary. Sounds like Authur was tended to through ordinary means, Let's see...a few key words for the former graduate student, who obviously didn't take any graduate courses in english literature. I'll point out the keywords and key phrases you seemed to have miss... "gaf hym good salues"...salues = SALVES. Which is an ointment concocted from Medieval remedies, such as medicinal herbs and pig fat. "his woundes wel amendyd"..amendyd = mended, e.g healed through normal means. Did you know that having a proper bandage and medicinal salves can heal some wounds quite rapidly? Did you also know that the line continues on... "that he myght ryde and goo," not that he may do the olympics, and win the 20 meter race, but only that me might ride and go. For goodness sake, might a wounded man who was tended too, enough so that his wounds were naturally healed enough through normal means, be well enough after three days to ride a horse? We're not running an olympic 20 meters here...

Justify it to a satisfying conclusion. I haven't found any up to this point. Think through the logic of it. Is this logic intellectually and emotionally satisfying? That's the point of fantasy literature, to satisfy the audience: emotionally, intellectually and even spiritually. As many people have voiced in this thread. Instant healing after a major battle isn't intellectually or emotionally satisfying: it just doesn't do justice to heroic sacrifice. Think of this: "Galadorn charges through the goblin troups, using his sword to thrust through one goblin, behead another, and chop the arm off another. The goblin kind's guards move to bar the way from Galadorn reaching their king. Galadorn thrusts, parries, repostes, and dances his way through the troup, taking a slash from one king's guard, a stab from another, and finally a blow to the head from the another. Blood trickles from Galadorn's ears and oozes from a welt on Galadorn's forehead. Galadorn, knight, goblin-foe, orc-beheader, dragon-slayer, falls to the ground in a heap. And along comes Father ToBen, with his healing spell, laying his hands upon the fallen knight. Galadorn hops up and brushes himself off: 'Boy was that a tough fight! Let's go it again, father.'" Now you tell me, was that a satisfying end to this story?

First, please site which source you are commenting on. I have read L'Morte D'Arthur. Which source are you commenting on? You also have to look at the cultural and spiritual context, in which the Arthur stories where authored. No literary scholar worth his salt, takes a book out of these contexts, and thinks he can interpet a literary work accurately. That I am being patronizing, is your opinion, and I will leave it at that. And I am not clearly versed? You don't follow established scholarly methods... Which is patently untrue. I suppose you know better then historians. Culture criticism mister former seminarian, cultural criticism. No, the grail, according to the concensus of historians and literary experts, represents the salvation of the British people...period. True Church, I think is a missappropriated metaphor in this context, and far too specially innappropriate. Secondly, I've read the City of God by Augustine. Thirdly, you just proved my point with you attributed the story of the grail being a story of pride. Spiritual healing is the issue, the grail is the symbol and means, and pride is the object cured. True Church doesn't fit too well into the concept of a specific remedy for pride. Fourthly, ever hear of temporal punishment? What about miraculous temporal punishments, ala Zecharia, the muted father of John the Baptist? >>>These are only three mythologies. What about....Greek, Roman, Norse, Chinese, Japanese, Summarian, Babylonian, Egyptian, etc.? In the totality of mythologies, it happens rarely. In fantasy books, it happens almost never. <<< In Norse mythology one can find many, many examples. The binding of Fenris is a one (Tyr is healed, but only partly – presumably the healer did not have the “replaces lost limbs†adder , the otter’s ransom is another. I suspect it would be easy enough to find examples in other mythologies as well – it certainly occurs in Chinese cinema, for example, so the concept is hardly foreign to them. [/b] Using a very broad definition of the term mythology aren't we? Chinese cinema is not classic chinese mythology, necessarily, is it? Chinese cinema is not the prime source of Chinese religious myths is it? Ever hear of primary sources? Think more specifically, please. Secondly, regeneration is not healing. And Norse mythology is not Hero Games. FRPGs are not quality literature. And an adder to a power, is not the NORM. When will people learn to think according to the MEAN? If you went to the Seminary, did you learn what the term NORM means in behavioral science, more specifically in sociology? What is the NORM in fantasy literature? Focusing on exceptionalities doesn't do your argument justice. Take Care.

That's because of the curse on the land, not because of Arthur's physical infirmity, but because of Arthur's spiritual infirmity. If you understood Catholic theology better, you would understand the symbolism of the grail, and the kind of life and healing that the grail gives to Arthur, and through Arthur - the king (ala divine right) - to his kingdom. These are only three mythologies. What about....Greek, Roman, Norse, Chinese, Japanese, Summarian, Babylonian, Egyptian, etc.? In the totality of mythologies, it happens rarely. In fantasy books, it happens almost never. I was talking about literature. I agree, but in the totality of books, on the average, it doesn't happen - it's usually an all or nothing event. So executing a healing event, in literature, is not the same as a Hero Game: "I bought 3d6 of Healing so 3 body of that 6 body wound is healed." You can't justify a literary character partially healing anyone, on the average. Is that specific enough for you non-global thinkers?

I was talking about literature, not FRPGs.

I agree, and I'm working on it. Building a quality: fantasy world, magic system, storyline, setting, etc. takes a long time. I've been working on one novel series for three years, and I'm not quite there. So I'm not just complaining, I'm learning and creating as well.

I will say this, IMO healing magics are very difficult to handle in literature. In mythology, partial healing simply doesn't occur to my knowledge, unless it was cure poison or something, and the hero had to recover from the after effects of the poison. So, being that mythology is a root source for fantasy, it makes it hard to switch to partial healing, because a well-read writer or reader would fine partial healing a bit disjointed from the genre. I am working on partial healing for a story right now. It's very difficult to say, based on historical and mythological magical effects, that "and Galadorn felt his wounds close, almost completely, leaving a scab." Just doesn't seem to fit somehow, but I'm working on the conceptualization. The best example of teleportation I've seen, IMO, is in Excalibur the movie, when Merlin suddenly appears behind Arthur, or from behind a tree dozens of yards off. No puffs of smoke, or flashes of light. I can't handle teleporation that is...FLASH...ZING... the wizard is suddenly behind you! Too corny and cheesy, in my book.

Its hard for me to tailor the names, names are very important. But with my reading of fantasy novels, I will give what I think the standard names might be. Level 1: Apprentice 15 Active Points All powers in the MP will have -1 in limitations, this can but does not need to be applied to the MP. Level 2: Adept 30 Active Points Can have -1/2 in Var Lims (A -1/4 limitation) and -1/2in other limitations. Level 3: Wizard 45 Active Points -1 in VarLims (a-1/2 lim) Level 4: Magi 60 Active Points -1/2 Var Lim (-1/4 Lim) Level 5: Archmagi 75 Active Points -1/2 Var Lim (1/4 lim) May trade in MP for a VPP But, do what you want. How are the names? Good movie about an apprentice: Dragonslayer. Good book about an adept: Crispin Magicker (Out of print probably). The most common titles for magic-users that I come across in novels are: Apprentice and Wizard. Everything else seems to be a fluke to a very limited set of novels - especially the title Archmage.

Re: Review my magic system I'm trying the same idea, but for a heroic game (50 character+50 disad.s). It's hard for me to peg down a level system, since I go more by a literary narrative type of magic system - i.e., +1 experience points for creative and imaginative use of VPP. I would not make this a hard and fast rule. But, the majority of powers should follow this standard - otherwise, sounds good to me. Generally, sounds pretty good. I don't know if you read the thread about VPPs, but I make all my mages have the following: 1. 5pt. VPP. 2. Detect Magic. 3. Magic Skill. 4. 5pt. Familiar, with familiar having 5pt. Mind Link to PC.(Follower) But then again, we seem to have very different campaigns.

There is a chance. But excellent authors are in the eye of the beholder, unless you have some empirical evidence. And who's slamming? Don't critics critique? Critique is not slamming, it's; commenting, evaluating or judging. I'm not "slamming" other authors, when I point out what I think is wrong with their work, and tell them how I think they can improve. And btw, I did compliment Tolkein far more then I critiqued him.

I think it works best in the mythic age (Ancient to Medieval Period). But I wouldn't say it only works in a historical setting. Well, Tolkien mage magic is very scarce. His magic item magic is proliferous, though. Conan is barely fantasy. Magic in his age is weak and impotent. As with Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser, generally weak, barely noticeable magic - unless the antagonists have it. Kind of Greyhawkish, eh? Everyone's more powerful then youuuuuuu, nanananannanah! Truism, truism. Au contraire, Le Guin reversed the trend in Nebula Award Winners, with her EarthSea Novel - Tehanu (1991, I believe). Very adult fantasy, and very good low fantasy environment - generally. Are fantasy readers like starving artists, waiting for their donors - the writers - to give them their bits of bread? Are fantasy readers settling for less, because we have so little of a selection of writers? I tend to think fantasy went downhill from Tolkien, with Tehanu being an exception. Mostly two-star writing, and lots of one-star - "thank God it dissappears from the bookshelves quickly" - writing. When I look at best-pratices, I ask myself these questions: 1. Who's the all-time best-seller? 2. How can I improve on the all-time best-seller author's best writing? 3. Can I do it better? 4. Can I add something new? 5. Can I add something new, that is not just new, but new and of excellent quality? 6. Can I add an element of real-life intimacy, romance, and rugged reality to the story? I ask these questions of my own writing and of the fantasy I think about reading. Otherwise, I just skip it. There's lots of "new and different" books out there, but what about new, different and great!?!

Right on, brother! Overhyped, indeed. I guess if you like immoral anti-heros, Elric might be appealing. But Elric is a good story, in my book, for several reasons: 1. It shows how a proud, arrogant, obnoxious, and vengeful person can mess everything up. 2. It tells an interesting story, with some interesting magic, monsters and mythology. 3. It's completely different from the run of the mill fantasy out there. 4. But. then again, this can all be said of the Amber Chronicles as well. 5. I give Elric ** two stars, and probably won't read it again. Right on, brother. I do think Tolkien is a bit long-winded, but for a Oxford Professor of his time, that is to be expected. Well, I think Tolkien is a bit long-winded. And Tolkein's writing craft left alot to be desired, but people still read him in droves, even so. Anyway, this is an interesting discussion. But score many for the father of modern fantasy.

Prior to the modern era, thank you case closed. Btw, we are in the modern era, not living in the twenties. Being that hes the top-selling fantasy writer of ANY genre, seems Tolkein defines fantasy, period. The writing critics haven't written about other fantasy writers, except as commentary on the genre. You forget again, that Tolkien, by far, has the most literary criticism available for any fantasy authory - independent of sub-genre. In fact, check the listing of literary criticism in books in print, and tell me how many literary criticisms are written for any other fantasy author. I'll give you a hint, the literary criticisms for Tolkein, about a dozen, outnumber all other literary criticisms for all other fantasy authors. Hmmmmmmm. And to reiterate, he's the best-selling fantasy author of all time. So, with the above information and in a real way, Tolkien does define the genre - for literary critics and readers alike. But, of course you will read what you like, I never said anyone had to hold Tolkein in greatest esteem. But, the numbers go with Tolkien - The Father of Modern Fantasy.

Re: Who likes the new cover? I have to agree. I don't like the super-heroish art. Why not someone like Elmore?

They are called alternative fantasy in the fantasy writing business. Try SFWA, that is the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers Association. They call these alternative fantasy. You can also try any other fantasy writing instructor, you would like to read. 1. #1 Fantasy bestseller of all time in the U.S. 2.The most critiqued fantasy author in literary criticism. 3.The best known name in the fantasy genre. And I find them interesting, and have read them all, but they are not the standard. You could include the Amber Chronicles in there if you want, as well. But these are still, unearthlike dimensions, with a mythologies foreign to human culture, generally. When marketing people (like me) set the standard, sales are the standard. With sales people vote with their dollars. Literary critics set the standard with their critical works on Tolkien, outnumbering all other fantasy criticism. I think based on the vote of literary critics, people voting with their dollars, and the only blockbuster fantasy movie in history, the standard is clear. Try research into "best practices." I think once you study this method of business and literary analysis, you'll agree Tolkien is king as well. I won't bore you with endless quotes from literary critics. Final notes: Narnia is children's literature, Oz is children's literature, I don't know if you like playing with the maturity of a child, but I don't. You forgot another goodie, and Nebula award-winner - The EarthSea Tales; but those are predominantly adolescent stories.

See? Hero says not to worry about the rules, but when it's player against player, or NPC against PC, you've got to have the rules to fall back on.

Re: VPP in FH (AGAIN) As I said in another thread, I have a 100 point low fantasy, with some swashbuckling and high fantasy included. I make my spellcasters with a multipower of 20 points or more, buy a 5 pt. VPP - just for incidental magic, and augmenting effects. I use this low fantasy VPP for things like Gandalf casting some enchantments on the treasure he and Bilbo hid; you know, not truly relevant to the story, but great for background. I've been trying to think of a way to make an undetectable, or less detectable treasure catch like Gandalf made, with just five points. If you do it with a cosmetic transform, you can make the gold appear to be stone or something. Or you can transform the gold just for the effect of detects; in other words, while it is still gold, it detects, for all detects, as stone or dirt. If you dig it up you see the gold, and this breaks the enchantment, but just for the sake of detects, it's stone. Secondly, you use a cosmetic transform on the ground you just dug up (1d6), to a normal grass, stone or whatever. Thirdly, you transform the magical gold to appear to be unmagical gold, so detect magics don't work. What do people think?

I agree that a dose of reality is great. Contrasting the reality of the real Middle Ages, with stark unreality of magic, has a wonderful effect. I think the more you dip into the reality and details of a historical period, and draw the players into it, then suddenly, there's magic! It has a startling effect. That's the effect I want on my players, shock, awe, wonder and being flabbergasted. Of course like presence attacks, it looses it's effectiveness after the first dose. That's what I like about Tolkein, no flying mages, no teleporting sorcerors, no interdimensional travelers, just hoofing it, on foot or horse, to get to your destination. I think limiting these effects can give the game a good contrast of the reality of limited transportation of the Middle Ages, with the unreality of fire bolts killing goblins dead. Kind of like one foot in reality, and one foot in fantasy.

Check the Greyhawk Gazetter, take a look at the Greyhawk coin represented. Whether they say it or not, thats a minted coin. As to carrying gold around, halfway clever merchants in the Middle Ages had mules to carry all there money for them. If you study the middle Ages, like I do, you would know that there was a type of minting going on. Check some medieval coins, they were basically "stamped" like one would stamp a wax seal on a noble's letter, and the coins had the same appearance as a wax seal, but double-sided. Also, the percentage of gold in a gold piece was not that high. Much of the gold pieces were gold enameled, rather then made of solid gold. And yes, depending on the period of the Middle Ages you want to talk about, Merchants carried around letters of credit, rather then gold in large quantities. But in the early Middle Ages, it was solid (or mixed) gold, and no letters of credit were accepted.