Quest Digest 26/2/95 From: ">>-Josh->" <J.P.Gallagher@durham.ac.uk> Date: Mon, 27 Feb 1995 10:17:23 +0000 Here is the Quest Digest as e-mailed out yesterday.. new server wasn't working then though! Enjoy...! Oh, if you want to be on the list, or even just send an article for inclusion, please e-mail me at the above address. All comments/criticisms are welcomed! >>-Josh-> "Dreamer... Nothing but a dreamer..." -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________________________ | | | THE QUEST DIGEST | | The forum for the E-mailing Quest-players | | Compiled by Josh Gallagher: J.P.Gallagher@durham.ac.uk | | Date: 26 February 1995 | |____________________________________________________________________| o This is not an automatically generated compilation, so if all contributions could be sent to me in a seperate e-mail with paragraphs initialled, I would appreciate it a lot. o Please do not use this list for your own purposes; people do not appreciate thousands of pieces of mail arriving a day! o If you ever want taking off the list, just say, and I will be happy to do so. I don't want telling off for any nuisance mail! o All material here is the exclusive property of the author and may not be used elsewhere without their permission. JPG> Not an awful lot of material this week.. keep stuff coming in! Sorry it has been so long again.. (6 days! Oops.. meant to do it quicker than that!) Anyway, here's the stuff... -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: The Hamster <godfrey2@coventry.ac.uk> Quest Helpline service. This helpline is chaired a by a panel of experienced Quest players, who will be available to answer any queries or solve any problems to do with Quest. Send e-mail to <godfrey2@cov.ac.uk> and give "Quest help" as the subject line. Contact me if you want to join the panel. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 20 Feb 1995 15:46:29 GMT From: editor@elbon.demon.co.uk (Paul Noble) > MC> Why AD&D? I sort of agree with Stefan, and if I don't recall totally > wrong in The fantasywork, Lord of the Rings, Gandalf never wore metalarmour, PN> Don't bring the Lord of the Rings into this, it makes me sick. > CB> when he tries to enter the room/open the chest, (one of these I don't > CB> really know) a "fireball" appears and he's teleported in another room. PN> We talked to Steve about the teleporter traps and he seemed to think it was rather amusing, he did say that they should only work once though. > > CC> I have a magic ring which is a ring of invisibility. I think it > works, but part of me thinks it hasn't been programmed. Does anyone have > a list of what is/isn't programmed yet? PN> Implimented = cheap Non implimented = expensive waste of gp! > CC> On the bottom of the turnsheet there was an explanation about these > new specific/general attitudes. It said hostile to monsters would be a > general. But it's come up as specific on my turn. Was that an error on > the bottom of the turnsheet. PN>You can still have a general hostile attitude which means you can still be hostile to all parties and monsters! > CC> You all hate me, don't you? Stop giving me conflicting advice. BTW > the FAQ is being delayed due to an inordinate amount of coursework. I > hate being a Law student. PN> I issued a 1001gp recruitment order on turn 4 and accepted the char next turn. I offered up on turn 3 and I got all the normal stuff but only 250gp char. > CC> Brilliant! Then you get what you have now, older groups congruating > in the few cities which do sell magic skill and refusing to move to > another city in case it doesn't sell magic skill. PN> if half of the cities had magic research they'd have to be 10 wars going on to cover all cities. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 14:55:05 +0000 (GMT) From: Rogerio Fung <l41186@alfa.ist.utl.pt> > PN> Nope I don't agree at all, if there was every a minimum char > lost in a battle it would always be the case that some loser > would run with the minimum lose number (4) and just strength > them to 200+ knowing full well that they can't be touched. A lot > of the problem is that at the mo some groups can't be killed, RF> Well, I wonder who would be the smart guy that would run with JUST four megapowerful characters, besides, how would he get there?with four characters, you can win top max, just 4000 for TQ's. But this all seem uninportant compared wit the simple fact that no one would just have 4 characters only not to lose them, while the game allows for them to have 15! Besides all this, theorically, even if the party had only 4 powerful characters, it wouldn't be attacked, but then, if they did attack someone/thing, they could still suffer from losses...I cant picture no one doing the thing Paul described... > The best solution would be for a situation in all games that a > group could be wiped out. RF> I dont understood this.. > The Aligned cities would solve so many > problems:- You want bother then you go to an evil city, you want > to be free from hurt then stay in a 'Good' city. RF>This still wouldnt prevent parties from being accidentally being totally wiped out, or battered to the point where the player would quit the game, the 4 char min rule would prevent this. > not knowing how hard a group can be and starts shouting and > mouthing off at enemies, not *ever* leaving the city so the > and actually encourage asses to shout about themselves and they > can nevere be touched, 0% flee does this prefectly. RF>If a group did have only 4 characters(still wondering who would do this willingly) and started mouthing at enemies, then, one obviously could do nothing at the offending party, BUT, one good thing that I think would work, is:just ignore them, if (and I guess yo should all know that) he doesnt get a response from his mouths, then there's no point in doing them..they only bother if you let them bother you..:) And, correct me If I am wrong, but even with 0%FF, a party can still be beaten in the spellcasting phase, no?? > To make fighters better than other classes why not divide their skill by > 10 and add it to their damage done ? RF> That would be an idea to think about... > AH> I agree with everything you said ! To me it makes sense that in an > open ended game you cant 'lose' . RF>Thanks..:) > CC> It sounds like something out of It's a Crime. I met a party the other > week called Scumbashers! Agghhhhhh!!!!!!!!!! RF>Well, we have to admit that there's always some people who name their groups with stoopid names.. just bash them! > CC> 20% is nothing. Make it 50/60% and I'm interested. RF>Well, with a value like that, every combat would be either you win and 'survive' or you lose and get out of the game...if every combat was made using 50%, then, the fleeing party would lose 50% of their members??come on, I wouldnt risk combat with those values.. > RF> Now, for Engage orders, every time you make one, your Flee Factor, > > it be increased to 15%, but if it was higher, then no problem...so, a > CC> But what about Engaging monsters? That's hardly anti-social. RF>I dont think that when you are fighting a monster you should be able to run with 0%FF, after all, it's still combat, and , realistically, no one would engage a monster to run away whatever they took a scratch. If they just stumbled on the monster, then Min flee factor refered to the attitude would still be applicable. > CC> The simplist way would be to just set your flee factor, wouldn't it? RF>Well, yes, *but* as I dont know for sure about it, you can still take losses in the magic phase, cant you? so its possible for a party over their flee factor to still suffer more damage..the rules I described would prevent that. > The above way would be hideously complex. And what if there are no powerful > good parties? RF>All worlds have good and bad parties, period.The fact that only a few of the groups in the game are really participating on alliance politics, leads to you never knowing who is powerful or not, and there might be dozens of them in the game, but they just cant be bothered to participate in it..I believe that if *evil* did get to an extreme, these parties would take a side, and , beause the evil threatens their neutrality, they would go the the good side.., all this seems much pof psychology, and Im no expert at it..just my point of view..BESIDES, even if there were no good powerful parties, the fact that you can lose up to having a min of 4 alive characters would prevent massive damage from the bad ones.. Anyway, now that we are at it..what do you do with your parties? > other. I think what you may be looking for is Deflect Magic. I've no idea > how effective it is, but when you're about to lose 6000 gps worth of > armour, it has to be worth a try. RF>Nope, what I did want was a magical armour against magic. Besides, I still havent heard on the usefulness of the Deflect Magic spells. But , on top of that, the existence of magical armour would allow fighter based parties to better defend themselves against Fireballs , Lightnings and the like.Of course , some spells wouldnt suffer any penalties against such an armour, being the case of the death spells, which, as stated before, should rely more on the toughness of the target, and eventually on the skill f the mage..As I said before, what good is 20 Armour if they get blasted away in the Magic phase?there should be higher priced armour equivalents for the high end armours..no one would bother to make magical cloth armour, would they? RF>It would just seem fair to me, that while the mages are casting spells, the other characters would be using their bows and crossbows, so, either the non mages would throw twice , one time while the mages are casting their spells and then, the other for every member of the group, or mages shouldnt be able to fire on the missile phase, cause they are spellcasting. It seems ridiculous that besides all the power they have, they still have one free atack! -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1995 13:48:28 +0000 (GMT) From: Hooper <A.O.Hooper@herts.ac.uk> > FM> - My party casted a double find treasure spell in the wildernis (almost > out of the wildernis. (Find treasure I casted by both mages)). I got 7! AH> Try casting detect treasure in heavy forest , as you found out it reveals money and powders . >MC> to start with mages are very weak > and don't do to much to help the party/group/team :) survive but as they > gain more spells/XPs they become the *real* slayers of the group. AH> In Quest I'm not sure this is entirly true , mages are only really vulnerable in group vs group fights - monsters just cant do enough damage . As a result a mage can get exp from monster fights and just casting spells like identify item and can get powerfull reasonably quickly if you know what you are doing . Hey , but what can I say , I was always a back-stabbing bane of the mages thief in AD&D <EG>. > PN> if the thief xp is over 300 then his awareness will go up by > three, this is the maximum, so if your thief is at 99 skill then > you'll have to waste 250gp on just awareness once he's got 300xp AH> This has only happened in the last 40 odd turns hasnt it? I'm sure my theif only used to get +1 aw although the last few did +3 aw. > PN> Nope I don't agree at all, if there was every a minimum char > lost in a battle it would always be the case that some loser > would run with the minimum lose number (4) and just strength > them to 200+ knowing full well that they can't be touched. AH> If it was implemented properly then they should not be able to harm anyone either - perhaps similar to tempary version of the no fighting option KJC are adding already while a group is under 4 members. > CC> It sounds like something out of It's a Crime. I met a party the other > week called Scumbashers! Agghhhhhh!!!!!!!!!! AH> You havent seen the joys of Lobotamised Gherkins have you? > > PN> I recruited a 1001gp thief on turn 4 > CC> You all hate me, don't you? Stop giving me conflicting advice. BTW AH> I was in the wilderness on turn 4 so Paul is probably right. > CC> Brilliant! Then you get what you have now, older groups congruating > in the few cities which do sell magic skill and refusing to move to > another city in case it doesn't sell magic skill. AH> Older groups do congregate in those cities but as they are busy killing each other they cant stay there for turn after turn . A new group can easily nip in for a few turns . It also keeps the game from going stale through each alliance sitting in their 'home city' building up their groups waiting for an attack instead they have to fight to keep an important city . > CC> I used to use 35% and I lost about 280 health over a 15 member group. > I suspect the guy I beat was using 30%. > I guess it depends on how you define kebabed? DF from 70 health to > 15? Or 70 health to 5? AH> I currently use 25% but that was just for monster bashing and minor scirmishes , it almost makes certain you never lose a character (not that you would ever lose to monsters anyway). 30-35% I would think to be about right for a real fight . My biggest problem is that my mages insist on getting hit round after round , my DF's who can take the punishment get hit just as much . I have organised a fight for this turn so I'll see how 30% goes but rest assured if it goes wrong I'll blame you <BEG>. > CC> I've had 48 sk EM and 55/56 sk DF's for 1072 or 1005 gps. Extra > money, yes, but there's no need to go overboard! AH> Out of interest could you add up their total stats and tell me what they are ? I *think* that the more you offer the better their overall stats are - of course I'm probably wrong and going to look stupid for offering so much money......<mumble mumble> > CC> 20% is nothing. Make it 50/60% and I'm interested. AH> I agree 20% is unlikely to do any real damage. > CC> But what about Engaging monsters? That's hardly anti-social. AH> It is if you are a poor gobbo ;) but as groups rarely lose to monsters the extra flee % is hardly important. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Finn Theodorsen <theodor@diku.dk> Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 01:37:57 +0100 FET>A little comment on the recent FAQ/guide concerning damage FET>After checking my combats in Game 15, I have come up with the following values. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Mace=9 Dagger=6 Shortbow=6 -35 gives +0 -29 gives +0 Light X.bow=8 37-49 gives +1 34-47 gives +1 No strength 51- gives +2 52- gives +2 Flail=9 Axe=12 Bare Hands=1 -64 gives +2 -42 gives +1 24- gives +0 67-69 gives +3 63-72 gives +3 Longsword=11 Shortsword=9 Battleaxe=14 -55 gives +1 -43 gives +1 52-59 gives +2 -54 gives +1 Greatsword=13 57- gives +2 -52 gives +1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- (Still rather uncomplete, but better than nothing - I do believe different weapons need different toughness for damagebonus. Diffe- rence in race is probably also important, but I have not tested dwarfs and large weapons.) FET>Experience is recieved on a 1 point per point of damage done. (Even if monsters have armour which reduces this, or less hits than this amount the full amount of xp is recieved). FET>It seems as if you can recieve xp for misses as well (perhaps near misses). In some of my combats characters not mentioned in the fight got 1-4 times their potential damage done as xp, and some who did hit got up to 6 times their potential damage as extra xp. The guess if have seen otherwhere about "sometimes x2" cannot hold. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 24 Feb 95 12:27:20 MEZ From: CHBRIN5@nyx.uni-konstanz.de DR> Questing dead easy : monster type * distance. It's that easy. > 20gp / sector > Rats, kobolds, goblins, gnoll, stinger plant > 40gp / sector > gnomes, orcs > 60gp / sector > giant beetle > 80gp / sector > bear, kreorse, giant frog > 100gp / sector > giant ant, giant crocodile, werewolf > 120gp / sector > unicorn, wyvern, white ape > 160gp / sector > elemental / sleech / cave bear > 180gp / sector > dragon > The harder the monster the more gold it's worth. KH> Could we collect more data like that? It would probably be the easiest way to judge a monsters strength before fighting it. From my temple quests I can add dopplegangers to the 60gp/sector class. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 24 Feb 1995 12:58:19 -0500 From: bg216@freenet.buffalo.edu (Rodrigo M. Fung) IGO> About SA idea of combat...it seems nice but that would make priests at a disadvantage as their miracles are not as powerful as mages. As their miracles are not as powerful as mages. So it would be more fair to priests to shoot missile weapons togheter with fighters, miracles togheter with mages and fight like fighters and thieves. IGO> Priests can and should always be able to cast opposite god miracles. A powerful priest logically can twist the forces of the universe :) and plea the gods to favour them. As it is programmed, the strength of that opposite miracle is weak. Try cast Call Monster while in the other side of the chart! maybe you will get a scary and dangerous rat! =) IGO> The recruting experience has nothing to do with turn age but with experience gained! IGO> To CC. To set your flee factor won't save your party! I can have a 10 per cent Flee factor and I can still lose my hole party if I run into one of that magi parties. :( IGO> Mages in leather armour?! If you are really into role-playing it's a great idea but don't impose it to the others! My concept of a mage is to carry as much armour as they can...never understood how armour can affest mana :) I think that all that is mumble jumbo. In shadowrun you can carry armour and in Mage too! Sincerely if you really believe that mages should only be in leather why don't you set the example and boast in to the world (newsletter) that you are the only and true Quest player? :) IGO> I agree with everything that a ceratin Rogerio Fung said in the last digest about the minimum party members killed in one turn. About Paul Noble if you want to improve to 99sk your 4 members, go for it! The only disadvantage is that you will take the same time as to improve 15 members but hey! You can't be attacked right? :) IGO> Yo! CC don't make fun of new parties that only have one page for status/equip/spell. One day ythey will have three pages too. :) -------------------------------------------------------------------------- JPG> That's all for today. If you have anything else to add, please feel free to comment. There are some people on the list who haven't written in yet.. not compulsary, but it would be nice! JPG> Don't forget that Chris Dickson is compiling a list of the changes we would like to see the most in Quest. This list will then be compiled into a form of voting slip, or petetion (I can't see many people not voting for something!) and then sent to KJC. They say they will listen to all suggestions, and over the past 3 months the people on this list have come up with more suggestions than I have ever read in any newsletter (could just be KJC game 11 though!), well thought out ones that would add a lot to the game. JPG> I would prefer it if this process were to be done by the 15th March, although this would mean getting a move on... I go on Easter holidays then for 5 weeks! (No net access... :-( ) So I would like to be able to see the finished petition before I leave! Any chance of this Chris? Happy Questing! >>-Josh-> "Dreamer... Nothing but a dreamer..." Up