Galadorn

Make mine Hero, also. I don't think of Thieves World as a good example of low fantasy. And I don't think Lady Hawke is a tenable campaign. Even though Lady Hawke was very good, IMO. Lady Hawke is too magic deficient, I think, for my tastes. But it does give a good example of how to combine realism and fantasy. And the thief in lady hawke is 5 stars. One of the best examples of a thief that I have seen.

Re: Low fantasy, anyone? It's Brother Cadfael Mysteries, btw. And yes, I love the stark reality of the Brother Cadfael Mysteries shows, that were shown on PBS a few years ago. The props and settings, in that series, were spectacular to a Medieval Buff like me. And I'm working three scenerios for Digital Hero, set in a low fantasy setting, or more appropriately - low character point - setting. It's not completely low fantasy, though. More Tolkienish, in respect to mythology and monsters. It's more like The Hobbit, then like The Lord of the Rings: Remember Gandalf is a Fire Mage and when he couldn't even put out the fire the goblins set on his tree? It has that tone anyway. DETAILS OF CAMPAIGN: The Campaign name is Brightree. I plan on submitting a campaign supplement proposal to Hero, when I get the details, culture and feel right. Player characters are 50 character points, plus 50 points in disadvantages. Starting active points for magic are 30 pt.s. I find low fantasy helps to concentrate on the details of the setting, instead of becoming magic fixated. Special effects are very important in this kind of setting, I have found. No flashing lights and puffs of smoke for summoning. Plenty of flashing lights for fire magic, though. LOL. I am still working through the details. But I want this campaign to be a heavy dose of low fantasy, with a dash of high fantasy. If my scenario is published, I will also try to publish some character examples along with it, in a separate submission and separate article - but hopefully the same issue. I also have some new low fantasy skills, talent and perks to go along with the scenerio. O.K. don't want to bore you with more details - if you want more, I'll give you more, though. Take care.

Prosaic Magic Actually you just gave me an idea for a storyline based on prosaic magic, thanks nevenall.

Re: Qabbalah and Qlippoth? Qabalah, Quabalah, or Kabalah, is a Jewish mystical method of spiritual growth, by which a soul ascends on a path of enlightment, development and growth towards the Divine being (Yah-weh). It was developed by Jewish Mystical writers before the first century A.D., at least in rudimentary form. Kabalah has been condemned by Jewish teachers to our present day, it has also been condemned by the Catholic Church, owing to it's denial of the sovereignty of God. In Judeo-Christian mysticism, one achieves holiness and development based on the will and permittance of God; without God, there is no holiness. So the tendency of the Kabalah is to guarantee aquiring holiness, as long as you follow it's steps and methods. This is counter to obedience and abandonement to the Divine Will, including Divine determination of one's eternal destiny and growth in holiness. Madonna is now a Cabalist, as practioners of the Kabalah are called. If you read comments by most rabbis, you will see almost all condemn Cabalistic practice. So if you are a Cabalist, your belief would be condemned as anathema in the Jewish Faith, by and large, and you will be called a material heretic in the Catholic Church. Also many Protestant Denominations and the Eastern Orthodox Church have majority consensus that the Cabalistic doctrine is in error. O.k., hows that for an info-dump? LOL. P.S. For a good book on the Kabalah, a series called Christian Classics use to have a pretty thorough work called "The Quabalah," I believe. It might also be called "The Kabalah." This is a pretty detailed and scholarly exposition on the Kabalah, but from a Christian perspective. Try Amazon.com.

I agree, good point. I agree. Yes sir, good job, I think, IMHO, oh terrific master of logical potency. (BTW this last comment isn't meant for you, it's a comment meant for others. At least the way they want me to talk I think. )

That's something like me and another poster were talking about. Some kind of magic item pool, with an active point, and maybe actual cost, cap. You can only have magic items up to whatever the respective caps are. And you seem to go along with my view, that I'd rather have spells with replacable foci; easy to cast, never loose them, can't be permanently taken away. In short, theft-proof. But I agree with the majority of posters on this thread, no cost for magic items. But my twist is; if you want to make a magic item, make it a replacable foci, and the game thief fades into the woodwork, never to be seen again. One little trick I used to do is, have a detect in my magic multipower; detect magic, discriminatory, sense, x8 range. Lets see those sticky-finger, stinking thieves get away with my magic items or foci now! LOL.

Well if you wouldnt want me to play at your table, I would say the feeling is mutual. Tactfully? I was being assertive IMO. But then again I've done research on internet psychology and know that communication is easily misunderstood, when no voice tone is present. Secondly, poor sport? Is being a "good sport" simply going along with what the GM wants to do? In my roleplaying club of 30+ people I was voted best GM three years in a row. O.K., whatever, life goes on... If you don't like my style of communication, no problem, seems we have a personality conflict. Take Care

Good idea BJ, IMO. SOME kind of standard or guideline, but what is that standard or guideline? That's my whole point. Some people seem to rail and rant against standards. I look at them as helpful, not hurtful. But this points out another issue I don't want to address right now. I think a better idea is to use an active point limitation, but how this standard would be formulated I don't know. Yes, I agree it is a personal preference in some respect. I also think it depends on the storyline and want goals the GM has in mind. But, what I think is inappropriate, is having a 4th level paladin with a +5 holy avenger, as one D&D game I heard of had. Do you think a +5 holy avenger is appropriate? Oh well, whatever floats your boat I guess. Anyway, I'm all for setting a standard or guideline for magic item active point limits. I'm against forcing that standard on anyone, but I'm also for free speech.

I'm not continuing the argumentation thread, enough silliness. Let's move on. Potatoe and Po-TAT-toe I say. First of all, my points where rhetorical as I said before in my posts. Second of all, nothing wrong with a little debate. If you don't like free speech move to Iran. Take Care

Absolutely, I agree. I've had experiences in which some players decided they didn't like my paladin characters in AD&D. So three of them would conspire to kill me in every adventure I played in. Where were the good-aligned characters in all this? Nowhere, standing off to the side, ignoring it. The issue is R-E-S-P-E-C-T. Of course there is some risk associated with fantasy roleplaying, we all know that when we sit down at the table. But, as the Hero Games Manual says, something along these lines: "Players don't like it when their characters are captured, the GM should do this rarely, because its loosing in the characters minds." Same thing with killing characters, yes there's risk, but in fantasy fiction when main characters die, by and large, it's a heroic sacrifice - not a bum chance. When they loose their magic items in fantasy fiction, by and large, its a major event. Something to think about...

I think the problem is this: 1. Just saying that GMS should "be of good judgement" doesn't mean anything. How many of us have put an item, or allowed a power, in a campaign that just ruined a campaign for the short term. I would say, all GMs. 2. I am just saying, playtesting for a standard, would help to alleviate or reduce those mistakes. This is just research, folks, used everyday in marketing and other disciplines. 3. This is only a guideline, if you don't like the guideline, then don't use it. If I were to put my counselors hat on, I would say some people have a problem with standards and boundaries, and need some addictions treatment, but then I'm not being a counselor today. LOL

I would never pay character points for any magic item, as a Player, I just use replaceable foci. I've learned this over the many years I've played Hero. I wouldn't pay a single point for a magic item, but then, that's my own preference. I wouldn't play in a game in which those experience points, I hard earned through roleplaying, where taken away. I don't like Indian-giver GMs. Then I would spend every session to reaqcuire that magic item, spending experience points on spells, leaving the party look for it, until the GM backed down, or killed my character. Problem is, some people don't seem to have a respect for the effort people put into roleplaying a character. I spend hours designing my characters, a GM who killed my character off willy-nilly, or stole his magic items willy-nilly, would find me no longer at his table. I like potions as well, easy magic to use and the GM doesn't have to worry about it for very long. LOL.

First of all, I think a reasonable assumption is to start with standard Hero Game rules. If you don't want to follow standard Hero Game rules, my comments are not for you. Enough theory and philosophy, NPCs aren't made, in practice, following the same rules that PCs do. They start with far more character points then the PCs, typically - period, case closed. I guess we should throw persuasive language right out of the english language - thanks. Secondly, you just argued with me. I made it quite clear, and I guess that you didn't read my post throughly, that I myself hadn't decided which way to go. But then the reading ability of the American people is not what is once was. Second, if you don't like my posts, you can just ignore them. Third, you yourself engaged in arguing with me about my tactics. I thought you said arguing with others is not the way to go? Hmmmmmmmm. Fourthly, my comments where rhetorical.

Gollum was an NPC, I thought we had established that NPCs don't have character point restrictions. So Gollum doesn't count. I think we're getting off track here, NPCs don't follow PC point restrictions. I'm sure Mechanon didn't start at as a 250 pt. character in Champions Second Edition... NPCs don't follow PC rules, for the most part. You give the NPC as many points as you want, period. PCs start out with a fixed amount of points, for the most part, and have to work up from there. So compared to NPCs, PCs are very constrained, that's why magic items costing anything are even an issue with PCs. You again are putting NPCs in the same category as PCs, I would say - apples and oranges. Gollum (NPC), Sauron (NPC), Sauramon (NPC), Gandalf (NPC, Mentor): These characters have no point restrictions on them, PCs do. I wonder how many GMs think, "He's an NPC, I know I need to make him more powerful to fight a PC party with 50 experience points. But you know the rules are, he starts out with 350 experience points. Sorry Mechanon, that ego defense has to go." Yes, Tom looted Frodos items from him, but then that was justified procurement. Frodo hardly had need of the items, and the items were basically useless from them on. Also, Tom needed them to rescue Frodo. Geesh I wonder if the GM would say: "Tom you have a psych. limitation: upstanding and moral person. Sorry, your 20 point psych. limit won't allow you to take Frodos items, he'll just have to die." First rule of GMing Magic Items: do the best design job you can do for magic items, making them balanced and of appropriate power levels - acccording to your perception. But even the best GMs make mistakes. Take a page for Wizards of the Coast, playtest, playtest, playtest. Even if you think that Wand of Cumulative Transformation wasn't too powerful, after having half the goblins on the continent turned into toads, it seemed a little excessive. Plus, there went the property values. Also, as I say later. Doing some playtesting to establish what reasonable levels are for magic items, will work best, I think. Ah, I think were at the core of your belief system. The pleasure of the game is there for the Game Master, only. I disagree, it's there for both the Game Master and the players. Rule #1 of fiction writing; Meet your readers expectations, if they want a happy ending, give them a happy ending. In short, give the reader a satisfying experience. Rule #1 of fantasy roleplaying: Don't be a miser, be wise. Reward players when their roleplaying deserves reward, and don't reward them when they don't earn reward. And what if a researched standard was set, in which over one thousand play sessions- it was proved what point limits weren't too excessive? You would have been less likely to make that mistake, and your players wouldn't have felt let down. I hope you replaced that magic item with a more suitable one. This paragraph makes no sense to me. We have room to disagree here, heck I haven't even decided one way or the other, Im just feeling things out. But my point is that a standard would make things more reasonable. Ok, if you don't want to follow the standard then ok. But, at least we could have a guideline.

I agree. But there has to be some type of limitation on magic items, the question is, what is it? In D&D 3rd Edition, there is a gold piece cap on magic items relevant to character level. I think this is a good idea, something along these lines seems o.k. with me. Problem is, in my book, that magic items are wild cards, one wrongly placed magic item can throw the whole campaign off. So what to do? I think the agent/follower rules could apply, using 5 active points per 1 point of character points paid. If the item is stolen the points come back like agents points do. So, to sum up, we could have: 1. Items treated as agents. 2. A magic item limit cap. 3. Independent limitation modifiers. 4. Or general wildcard havoc. I'm not sure which is best to go with either, or which combination may work.

But keep in mind, that relevant to Bilbo's adventuring days, the item was a permanent fixture to Bilbo. Secondly, the One Ring was a plot device, not intended for Sauron's use, but to push the story forward. Who treats NPC genesis as balanced and relevant to PC genesis anyway? Is Mechanon balanced for the game? Is Doctor Destroyer balanced? Fact is, the NPCs have as many points as the GM wants him to have, PCs don't work within the same parameters.

Magic Items as Followers I think the followers rules would work well for magic items, since as the thread originator said, points returning over time is a good idea. Better thought is how magic items are treated in fantasy literature. How are they treated in fantasy literature? I will stick to three divergent views on magic items in fantasy literature: 1. In The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit, magic items, once acquired, were permanent fixtures to a character. For example Glamdring, once acquired by Gandalf, never left his side. In fact this magic item was so powerful, that its destroyed a Balrog's flametongue, when Gandalf paried the flametongue with Glamdring. 2. In the the Elric Saga, Stormbringer was really a character itself. You could even say that Elric was Stormbringer's follower, but still Stormbringer never left Elric's side. 3. In The Sword of Shanarra, the Elfstones were a permanent item on the protangonist's item list. But the Sword of Shannarra was a transitory magic item, with a one-shot effect. I can think of no fantasy series in which magic items were not treated as a permanent part of the character inventory, except with the Sword of Shanarra, which is one item in this entire novel, and maybe Conan's magic items. So the trend, to my recollection, is that magic items are treated as permanent items, and the philosophy of these items as being temporary, is an anomaly to Fantasy Roleplaying Games. Even items with charges were replaceable, if they were used up before.

Re: Feedback on Tomb of Rakoss The Undying Darnit! I wanted to, but the file won't unzip on this computer, and my own computer is down. Anyway you can email it to me? I promise feedback, and maybe even chocolate chip cookies.

I'm working also on an adventure for DH. I already published one article. It's for an agent level game. Im playing around with realism in fantasy, using some mythic history to build a story on. I'm finding that agent level Fantasy Hero has alot of possibilities, strong realism as a backdrop for magic can have startling effects on drama, I believe. You have to drop the power level limits to 5 pt.s, though. I'm thinking about writing a whole companion book for an agent level Fantasy Hero campaign. Tell me what you think of this package for mage/cleric classes, all spellcaster characters must have these abilities: All other powers would be bought in a multipower with many limitations (incantations, gestures, foci, etc.). I find that keeping the character points low, surges out the realism. My present adventure involves fighting off a pack of wolves, well there's more then that to it, of course. And more pesky wolves keep showing up... Hmmmmmmmm Buh Byeeeee

I HATE alternative fantasy scenerios. Dinosaur characters, feline characters, distant moon environments - Booooooooring! I love the old standard Tolkeinish system, but with a twist. I think what Tolkein did right is to inculturate the reader into a whole new world. I think what Tolkein did wrong, is to be too long-winded. But his generally nordic and celtic mythology works in my book. I would love to see an Asian style fantasy campaign, but I haven't seen any I like, or that's done right. O.k. maybe its my anglo background. LOL What I have learned to love, as coined by "Parched Sea in the Harpers Series of the Forgotten Realms Books Series, is Arabian-style fantasy. I think far beyond Aladdin and His Lamp, or Ali-Baba and the Fourty Thieves, this book "The Parched Sea" open up something new for Arabian Fantasy. The book itself is probably only two stars out of four stars, but some of the concepts for fantasy are terrific. Too bad the D&D 2nd Edition magic system had to ruin the magic. In short, Arabian Fantasy is about the only alternative of medieval type fantasy I like. You can keep all other sub-genres of Fantasy including - modern, cyberpunk and whatever else they dream up next month.

I can't even make out the cover, clearly. Is there a blowup anywhere? Of course, it will be out at the end of this month or so, so this question may be moot. LOL.

Very similar to a Kopesh, or Egyptian sword.

Re: What was that? Elves weapon in LOTR movie. According to the Topic name of this thread. What was that "Elvis" weapon. I think its the Guitar of Blue Shade. They give the wielder +3 to OCV rolls, +1d6N to attacks and +1d6N vs. dark races.

Great costume.

I agree. There are probably issues of simplicity that Hero could deal with. Maybe a little covering for all those nuts and bolts? All I know is the time it would take to design a Hero character, is far longer then for many other systems. Of course, I get more out of it. But, I think the initial time up front, especially if they are new to the game system, may be disheartening. But for us people with alot of experience, it's whats makes the game rich.