Quest Digest 4/1/96 From: ">>-Josh->" <J.P.Gallagher@durham.ac.uk> Date: Thu, 04 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0000 ___ _ / _ \ | | Happy New Year! | |_| |UEST__| |IGEST 4th January 1995 \__ | / _ | | |_ | |_| | An e-mail discussion forum for the fantasy |_ / \___/ play by mail game; "Quest". Compiled by Josh Gallagher. J.P.Gallagher@durham.ac.uk o This isn't one of those automatic list thingies, so could all articles be sent clearly marked with paragraphs initalled to me. o If you want off the list, just say! No hassle, no pressure. o All material here is the exclusive property of the author and may not be used elsewhere without their permission. o For answers to specific Quest-related questions, you may want to get in touch with the Quest Helpline; queries sent to quest-help@kokodan.vivi.com will be sent to a panel of experienced Quest players, who will endeavour to answer your problems quickly. Thanks to Bruce Cota for his help. ___ / _ \ Happy New Year folks! | __/DITORIAL I trust you had enjoyable holidays, and that for some \___| lucky few you are still having them. I'm back at university now, so I should in theory be far more efficient with the Digests. Hehe. Well, New Year intentions and all that. Anyway, on with the Digest... -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 24 Dec 1995 23:34:37 GMT From: editor@elbon.demon.co.uk (Paul Noble) >JL>I want to join it, (S&M), I don't know if i will have mailed you by now, >if not drop me a line. PN> Boohahahaha, I'll be in touch, maahhahahah! >groups with this type of challenge: >SA>"Name a place and we meet you there with 100% flee factor, with or >without deathspells". Ok, if they are tired of playing their groups, >that's fine, but at least I don't want to throw away four years of=20 >playing in a stupid fight! And to all of you who make these challenges, >dont you DARE call anyone turning such a challenge down a coward! PN> Whats wrong with this (excuse me for any misspellings heinous high spirits are the reason |) Phhhhlup!)? If a group wans't to go out on a bang why not oblige them unless your scared, in G6 you shouldn't be hiding as you're on of the prime groups of the second hardest alliance (Brothhood being 1st of course). >SA> MERRY CHRISTMAS TO YOU ALL!!!=20 PN> HURRAH, AND A HUGE DRUNKEN SELEBRATION TO Y'ALL!!!!! >From: I wanna live like common ppl <roger.littlefair@unn.ac.uk> PN> hahahaha, wheres the other woute Roj???? Hows about find your-self a space..... listen for the dark side bass??!?!?!?! >(i.e. new money). If every city had its own"town bully" that excelled in > killing off new and weaker groups, then how much fun would these newcomers >get out of the game? (We all know that the road to fortune=20 lies in the >cities, don't we?) PN>Thank you but I ain't never killed a new group, not even a group below 9 chars!!! Unlike a certain Satanspawn (G14) which pretty much wipped out 2 6 party groups! PN> There is no excuse for wiping out new groups! Ignorance isn't an excuse. If you're to wipe out of decimate a group knowing who that group is is apart of the trade. >to attack an other group, as I in a kind of way enjoyed your anger upon me. >I found your group first, and I attacked you through a stealing-order. I >hope you understand that I might have exterminated your whole group at that >point, and perhaps I should have done so, but I thought this attack should >be enough. I then went dungeoneering again, and then this NA-order came, >which suited MY (certainly not yours) gaming objectivities. I'm still >hostile and like fighting, but unfortunately I don't take part in >Kharne-politics. PN> Indeed, I am more interested in Kharne Politics than thou, but to denie me such an oportunity is a travesty! To avoid combat when you were so blatently hostile is.... bloody annoying!, especislly as in the open field I'd have mashed y'all up - into 4 chars at the very least!. Do you understand? Everything I worked for was for bugger all! It was *most* annoying! It doesn't matter if you have a different attitude now, then you were willign to bash everyone (eeven very young groups!) and everyone, but now your not willing to fight anyone! >different aspects of the game, and I think the problem about the NA-order >and group vs. group-fighting is that KJC haven't programmed the game so tha= >t PN> Attempt to deny that you enjoyed almmost destroying the Hairy terrorsts?! >I saw one article written by you at "Dynamic games". I really liked it, mor= > e of that! All the best, Erling the Berserker. Erling Solheim Student at the PN> Corr, you saw an article by me?! That has got aroudn for sure, glad you enjoyed it! Happy Chribo and all that! PN> Hate to say it Erling but I may be returning to Game 14, but not as we know it ]=) , I doubt to kill you but plenty of others. PN> One more thing happy Chrimbo Jim Sparshott - from the DeathShoe and Co. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 25 Dec 95 13:13:38 GMT From: Dave Rees <chaos@thanes.demon.co.uk> > JN> I guess G14 doesn't attract many new players then... DR> There are plenty of new players in G14, unfortunately there isn't much to keep the old players interested. > JIM - (Reply to Dave Rees) - JSD are quite tasty but the > IOT's are'nt too bad themselves duckie. As for your dead > priest, I reckon it will cost you about 10000 gold to get > him alive again. Do I win a prize if I get it right? DR> Closest so far. My empties from crimbo are on there way and a special pair of my unwashed undies:) > JIM - A long time ago, I stole a skull off of some group, > and have been unable to find a use for it. Does anybody know > what I can do with it, or is just another (mirror type) > useless item? I can't recall seeing one for sale, so I dont > know how much its worth either. DR> Hand the skull to someone else just before you beat the absolute living shite out of them:) > PN> Indeed, I've just started up an evil alliance in G16.<etc> DR> Oh joy, 'and chaos shall spread through out the land.' > PN> Pleaseeeee! don't start the 2 cents worth! It pisses me off the most in > newsgroups! Anyway, how come the same person can put in his 2 cent/gps worth > more than once? DR> He's got more cash than you? > > PN> If you ask me I reckon it would be alright if the alliance money > dissapeared if there was either no initial cost to put up or if you need only > do it once or if you didn't have to paly a turn fee for the skill. Remember > that 30k is alot of money for a new official alliance (unless your in an > oldgame and have an old group) if you have to put another 20k for strength it's > a bit much not to see any of it returned. Plus whats this 50k for a new HQ? > Surely once established a new HQ should be cheaper than the original rather > than more?! DR> You can't lose all the cash as the alliance would never be able to but items and cover the cost of security etc. Much better to just cut the amount of money returned from someone buying the skills. Further alliance HQ's shouldn't cost any more than an original HQ. > PN> I just got the battle reports from game one back, it seems two groups > fought monks, Phyloqure and Fleyshur. Both lost the battle with 9 and 8 wounded > to none of the monks wounded. Plus weapons the order of the day for sure. By > the way did anyone know that you can get weapon skill over 100%? You can I have > seen 2 examples of such skills. DR> Indeed I've seen 101, 102 and 103 bow skills. I've also seen the 101 return to 100. > CMD> I agree with your sentiments, though not with your method of solution. > New players may well let their NA lapse (a thought: perhaps it could not be > put in terms of "issue this order to let your NA lapse" but "your NA will > lapse the first time you do an offensive order against another party") and > then get trounced by a half-decent old party, not knowing just how good old > parties are at trouncing new ones. You may say "They deserve what they get" > and to an extent they do, but punishing them by forbidding a return to NA seems > a bit extreme. DR> True, but at the present time a player has the option of whether or not he chooses to use the NA status or not. It was never intend for combat groups to have it as a 'get out clause' in cases of emergency. I still maintain that groups who need to use it over a set turn age should not be allowed to change the status at their own whim. Groups who do go NA over 75 turns old, to my mind, do so because they do not wish to enter into combat. Fair enough, I have no objection to that. I do object to those who will willingly fight small groups then go NA when hit by a bigger group. > CMD> Agreed in principle, but my Life Membership party in G14 (who I haven't > sent in a turn for since about August. Is there anything left of them, Dave?) > seem to be doing pretty well at going around penniless and starving! This is > due to a succession of poorly-written turns by me going wrong rather than > anything else... DR> Dunno, if you want to let me know where they are I can find out for you:) > CMD> Oi, I do the bad jokes around here! DR> Missed out on that one then:) > CMD> Um - players would just start flee factor 0% parties and use lots and lots > of free resurrection over the first 20 turns to attack parties they didn't > like, then drop the party. Now I agree that you could/should start one game > like that just for players who thought that this is a fair and encourageable > tactic to be used, and a really ruthless no-rules no-NA all-sneaky-tactics- > allowed-and-in-fact-encouraged game would be a superb thing to have happen > ONCE (why are we all thinking of the same player who would excel at this?) > but just for players who did know every trick in the book... DR> I distain the idea of throw away groups in Quest. Although I have no worries about the no-rules no-NA game:) > > PJC> Which powerful groups enjoy running around and killing brand new parties? > > Surely its more of a challenge fighting (and beating?!) older parties? > > CMD> I ain't naming names, but there are people like that in this world... :-( DR> There are unfortunately. It's far better beating the crap out of a 15 member group than killing 6 out of 6. Sadly, any group now not NA is a fair combat target. I take on the largest group I know in a city and then work down through who I know. This way I hope this gives enough time for any player with a small group to get out of town. And one name in particular springs to mine. > chance encounter with 4 halfbloods (yep 4 halfbloods!!) one of > my characters , an elf mage , died of wounds. With the new free > ressurection rules this should not be much of a problem. However > he died exactly ONE turn before they were detailed on the > turn sheets. DR> If the service is available try it now. It should work. DR> I've seen a combat against Monks of Fleyshur. They wouldn't even go into melee and that's with no damage spells. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 31 Dec 1995 23:48:00 GMT From: Chris@dickson.demon.co.uk (Chris M. Dickson) > AH> A sort of Quest "Gang V's Gang"? Yeah why not, it wouldnt take too > much effort. But I'd rather see the effort invested into making Quest > more _open ended_ than into more of a war game. Some things to make > quest more open ended: <lots of good ideas snipped> CMD> It would be nice to see some more long-term options, and I like those of Erling Solheim as well. > JPG> Many may remember the vote that was made earlier this year on the > improvements we wanted to see made. There were criticisms that it was > too complex an operation with too many points on it, etc. Perhaps a > better thing to do would be to come up with a top 5 improvements, say > every 2 months, and get people to write in to KJC (snail mail) with this > top 5. That way they would receive demands for the same proposals from > many different people and would be more likely to implement them. CMD> Hmm... perhaps in a few months it's time for me to run another poll, just on some considerably simpler guidelines? Any thoughts? If no-one says anything else then I'll probably run it in April-ish. CMD> Happy New Year! (He said seconds to go...) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 3 Jan 1996 15:30:07 +0100 (MET) From: Egil Geir Brautaset <egilbra@idt.unit.no> Just a minor correction to Stefan Anderssons monster list in the last Quest Digest. The monster number 897 is NOT a Leprechaun, the correct name is Leperchaun, the reason for which will become apparent when you see the information token. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- JPG> The idea about the top 5 improvements was really to cut down on the complication on the earlier poll. There is little point sending in more that about 5 points; they can't all be programmed at once, and I think 5 improvements is enough to be going on with every two months... All we would need is some easy way to do the voting. Any ideas? JPG> Anyway, I'm running into lecture time now! See you all later... Happy Questing! >>-Josh-> "But I still haven't found what I'm looking for..." - U2 Up