|
121 |
From: dbarrass_2000 <david.barrass@e...>
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2003 9:30am
Subject:
Re: The Golden Rule(s)
|
|
|
> And yet while this seems to be so obvious and
clear from the
> material presented in the game, it's amazing how many
players and
folks
> who run the game don't see this. Sometimes this is the
sort of
thing
> that can really drive a GM or player crazy, but I
guess when it
comes
> down to it, there aren't a lot of GMs who actually use
religion or
> think religion through in roleplaying games. And
because of the
> manner in which religion has been portrayed in rpgs in
the past,
there
> is a stereotypical attitude of how to bring it into
one's rpg and
all.
I see religion as an essential part of a Roleplaying
world and I'm
guessing you see it the same. Whatever you think of
religion it has
had increadible influence on our culture and has been
the impetus
behind some of the great (and terrible) events of this
world. I
would like it to have a similar role in my world.
> >> Beats me...but it makes for interesting
speculation, doesn't
> >>it? I suspect the priestess associated with (a form
of)
> >>witchcraft would be more what was in mind for the
pagan
> >>temples and that aspect of this, but there is no
real way to
> >>know.
> >
> >Agreed - I see it as two forms of religion
>
> While one can argue that it is two forms of religion,
I think
> that it can be seen as two aspects of the same way in
which
religions
> are dealt with.
We may just have to agree to disagree on that :--)
nothing wrong with
pluralism - after all this isn't a religion with
absolutes :--)
> Besides, most people don't associate paganism with
> religion per se.
An interesting idea. I myself described the Pagan
religions more as
bargening with the Deities, but I think most Pagans
would describe
their beliefs as a true religion, even if the basis of
interaction
was different.
> >> And where do you fit shamanism into the equation?
<g>
> >
> >See my spritis and religion document in the files
section, this
has
> >Shamans in. They, in my system, are mages interacting
with
spirits
> >in this and other dimensions.
>
> Yes, I've seen the article in question, and you've
defined the
> Shamans and their form of magic quite nicely. I have
something of a
> variant on the College of Shamanism, which is the last
College I
intend
> to bring into the game for a while (giving a total of
24 Colleges
of
> Magic).
Ohh let's have a look. I've been prompted to check out
some of your
colleges. I've only skim read Witchcraft so far and I'm
impressed.
> I'm looking forward to seeing the new draft of the
material,
btw.
> :)
still on course for later this week
David
|
|
|
122 |
From: dbarrass_2000 <david.barrass@e...>
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2003 6:02am
Subject:
Re: JohnK's Priest Skill (Long)
|
|
|
Hi John,
I've lots of questions on your priest write up, which on
the whole, I
like.
1) How do you gain Devoutness (I understand how it's
generated
in the first place and how it's lost), is it that if you
do something
devout the GM awards you with some points?
2) Devoutness seems under used, but if you don't spend
XPs on it
I guess that's not a biggie
3) I don't understand this paragraph:-
"Note that the priest cannot raise his Knowledge Rank if
the
character's Priest Rank is not equal to or exceeds the
character's
desired KR value."
4) Your calling; would it be possible to buy additional
callings
at rank 10, the same way as you can buy extra terrains
as a rank 10
ranger for example?
5) Does the priest pay Ft to cast the spells of the
colleges, or
does he lose KR (or even DV) instead as he is drawing on
the Deity's
power?
6) Section 166.14 � divine items
A "grievous" success KRx1.5, is this round up or down?
In the last bit you mention damage, what would be the
effect if you
wanted to increase success chance instead?
7) 116.13 miracles. I don't understand some of the
modifiers:-
" Miracle attempted by this person in the past year +2
Miracle attempted by this person in the past six months
-2"
Why is one a bonus and the other a penalty?
"Area is a high mana area -(Mana x 3)"
What does the (Mana x 3) mean?
"High Holy Day of the Power supplicated -5"
Why is this a penalty?
"Supplicant has demonic ties (deals with Demons often,
travels with a
Black Magician or Greater Summoner, has been granted a
boon by a
demon, etc.) -15"
Presumably for PoD priests consorting with creature of
light is a
penalty and the above not a penalty
" Supplicant is on a holy Geas -5
Supplicant is under attack -3"
I would have thought these would make it more likely
that the appeal
would be heard
8) The biggie. If you're a priest of a Fire god or the
Ocean
god (for example), wouldn't it be more appropriate to
take your
spells and rituals from the college of Fire magics or
Water magics
respectively? Why did you decide against it? What
distinguishes one
of these priests from any other?
That will do for now :--)
Thanks
David
|
|
|
123 |
From: John M. Kahane <jkahane@c...>
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2003 7:15am
Subject:
Re: Re: Spells in Religion
|
|
|
Hullo, David,
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 08:27:58 -0000, dbarrass_2000 wrote:
><snip as this thread is getting too long>
Agreed. It was getting too long. :)
>> Frankly, I don't think that there is a need to split
it into pagan
>> and PoL, to be honest. The Priest skill, if handled
right and
>>worked with by a GM and player who both have a good
grasp
>>of what they're doing, should be able to use the same
skill to
>>do this. Besides, in most pagan religions one tends to
have
>>shamans, witches, and the like, rather than priests,
so...
>
>The split into two is based on the DQ book, where
concecrated
>ground:-
>"Barrows, pagan temples (those in which magic forms
part of the
>ritual) <snip> can never be consecrated ground."
>
>I would much rather have had one skill, but I felt this
precluded it
See, this is where I differed from you, in that I didn't
see them
being mutually exclusive at all. When it comes right
down to it,
whether the religion is based on pagan beliefs or the
Powers of Light,
it's still a religion, and needs to follow a set of
generic rules.
>The Pagan religions of Greece, Rome, Egypt all had
priests and
>preistesses presiding over a complex religion. Do you
classifiy
>these as a PoL (or PoD) or pagan religion?
Powers of Light/Powers of Darkness would have covered
the Greek,
Roman, and Egyptian mythologies quite nicely. Complexity
of the
religion has nothing to do with whether it is pagan or
PoL/PoD in form
and style.
><snip again>
>> >That is a good point
>>
>> What bugs me about this is that most people just
assume that
>>the Thieves' World material is canon for the
DRAGONQUEST
>>game system, and not specific rules for the Thieves'
World environment.
>
>true, but it was writen by DQ people for DQ so it must
give some
>clues to what they were thinking. Just how much is the
question.
Actually, it was written by Eric Goldberg (who had his
hand more
into the 1st than 2nd Editon of the game) for people who
wanted to use
the concepts out of Thieves' World in the DRAGONQUEST
system. In many
ways, it was more of a DQ "adaptation" to a specific set
of fantasy
literature than it was a clarification or modification
of DQ rules to
be used in the standard, normal DRAGONQUEST game.
[stuff snipped]
>> Ah, but remember this was the 1980s, the period when
D&D
>>was being accused as contributing to the murder and
the like by
>>kids who were playing the game, and when witchcraft
was
>>considered an evil, and its real life wiccan
practicioners were all
>>in hiding and the like. The game's focus was similar
to that, and
>>hence the College of Black Magics was very much a
menace
>>within the context of the game and the game world.
Frankly, I
>>wouldn't use a Black Mage to simulate a witch or
warlock or
>>whatever, not the way the first two editions set them
up.
>> Of course, one doesn't have that worry with the 3rd
Edition. :)
>
>sadly not :--(
Something that I never really understood, to be honest.
There
was no need for them to have chopped that material out
of the 3rd
Edition.
[stuff snipped]
>...consider the College of Black Magics a terrifying
justification
>of their acts, I belive - and I fully accept your right
to dissagree -
>that this type of witchcraft was the basis of the
College. Sadly
>there is no way of knowing now :--( Quite possibly it
was both
>influences. The degree of scollarship that went into
the original
>DQ is one of the things I love about it.
As you point out, there is no way that we will ever
know, unless
one of the DQ designers becomes active here on the list
(which I doubt
is going to happen). So, yes, we will just have to agree
to disagree
on this point. But that was one of the reasons I created
the College
of Witchcraft to begin with. :)
[stuff snipped]
>> I guess you need to tell me whether the Priest skill
that I've
>> just presented addresses that question at all. :) Of
course, like I
>> said, I suspect people will either hate what I've
done for the
>>skill or like it.
>
>I have read it and it looks promicing but I have some
questions that
>I'll ask in another post :--)
Good. I'm looking forward to having *someone* comment on
it. :)
>This is one of the things I like and dispare about DQ.
The lack of
>cannonic rules makes life frustrating when you need a
quick answer
>to deal with a situation. But its also liberating, feel
there's a gap
>in the rules? Make your own, who's to stop you?
Yep, some of us have been dealing with that stuff for
20+ years
now. It's one of the things I like about DQ and one of
the things I
dislike about the game - but at the same time, running
DQ means one
doesn't have to buy umpteen game supplements at what
pass these days
for "reasonable prices".
>As long as your group is happy to play the're not going
to
>have the headache of transfering their characters to
someone
>else's game world.
Yep, another good point. :)
>You, like me and others, are making our ideas available
to DQ world
>to the benfit of all. That has to be a good thing, and
your record
>of contribution is one that I would be proud to have.
Aww, shucks, you're making me blush, David. :) Thank you
for the
kind words. :)
That said, I do wish that others would make the material
that
they've added to the vision of DRAGONQUEST available for
all to share.
Wordly Endeavour and Poor Brendan's Almanac are both
worthy products
that folks have done up for the game, and I've got
scenarios sitting
here that I would kill to pdf, but just don't have the
software to do
so. I'm hoping that my DQ webpages add something to the
DQ fan
community as well, although I'm so busy with other
projects for the
game right now (including writing a large scenario) that
I haven't had
time to do the work on the webpages that I wanted to do.
....."Oh, I don't have any problems. Well, except for
that bounty hunter from Skellar
IV who's been after me ever sicne I stole the prize
possession of the planet's president." - Charma
Ventaxis, thief-cum-archaeologist
JohnK
e-mail:
jkahane@c...
web page:
http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane
|
|
|
124 |
From: John M. Kahane <jkahane@c...>
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2003 8:02am
Subject:
Re: Re: Spells in Religion
|
|
|
Hullo, David,
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 10:35:38 -0000, dbarrass_2000 wrote:
<lots of stuff snipped>
>The part time priest I think is covered by the fact
that it is a
>skill rather than a character class.
That would certainly be my consensus on the subject. :)
>Perhaps there is an arguement for a rank 0 priest being
the state
>most worshippers acheive in the personal relationship
religions -
>I'll have to think of the implications. In my draft
rules, which I
>will post hopefully later this week, I've changed the
PoL priest
>rules to include priest, monk and <Layman>, the latter
for this
>purpose, but there's always that can be done
>To stimulate debate I'll included this rule change in
this post:
>
>[110.1] point 3 added
>Laymen do not proceed into the highest reaches of the
clergy, and so
>do not have the power of the other two, but similarly
do not have
>some of the restrictions. They generally are spiritual
guiders in
>small communities not large enough to justify a priest,
or in
>religions that do not hold with interactions with the
powers via
>priests, encouraging a more personal communication with
the Powers
>
>added to [110.17]
>A Layman does not gain any of the abilities in sections
[110.18] to
>[110.20] (nor can he collect followers), but he does
keep and can
>improve the abilities gained before rank 3
Certainly an interesting thing to consider, and gives me
some
ideas. I've sent you a private post on this matter.
.....I'd love to chat, but I must get back to the ritual
sacrifice.
JohnK
e-mail:
jkahane@c...
web page:
http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane
|
|
|
125 |
From: John M. Kahane <jkahane@c...>
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2003 8:11am
Subject:
Re: Re: The Golden Rule(s)
|
|
|
Hullo, David,
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 15:30:49 -0000, dbarrass_2000 wrote:
>> And yet while this seems to be so obvious and clear
from the
>> material presented in the game, it's amazing how many
players and
>>folks who run the game don't see this. Sometimes this
is the sort of
>>thing that can really drive a GM or player crazy, but
I guess when it
>>comes down to it, there aren't a lot of GMs who
actually use religion
>>or think religion through in roleplaying games. And
because of the
>> manner in which religion has been portrayed in rpgs
in the past,
>>there is a stereotypical attitude of how to bring it
into one's rpg and
>>all.
>
>I see religion as an essential part of a Roleplaying
world and I'm
>guessing you see it the same. Whatever you think of
religion it has
>had increadible influence on our culture and has been
the impetus
>behind some of the great (and terrible) events of this
world. I
>would like it to have a similar role in my world.
I think that religion belongs in a roleplaying game only
if the
GM and players feel that it should be there and that it
will have some
relevance to play. I don't know whether I'd call it
essential, since
some players will use it and some players won't even
give it a second
thought - but in my campaign, the player character
merchants always pay
a visit to the temple of Denarius, the God of Trade and
Travel, and
make a sacrifice or donation to the temple before
heading out on a new
venture. :) I do feel the same as you do for the most
part about
this, and agree with you about the influence of religion
on society and
cultures.
>> >> Beats me...but it makes for interesting
speculation, doesn't
>> >>it? I suspect the priestess associated with (a form
of)
>> >>witchcraft would be more what was in mind for the
pagan
>> >>temples and that aspect of this, but there is no
real way to
>> >>know.
>> >
>> >Agreed - I see it as two forms of religion
>>
>> While one can argue that it is two forms of religion,
I think
>> that it can be seen as two aspects of the same way in
which
>>religions are dealt with.
>
>We may just have to agree to disagree on that :--)
nothing wrong
>with pluralism - after all this isn't a religion with
absolutes :--)
Exactly. Agreeing to disagree on this is the way to go.
:)
>> Besides, most people don't associate paganism with
>> religion per se.
>
>An interesting idea. I myself described the Pagan
religions
>more as bargening with the Deities, but I think most
Pagans
>would describe their beliefs as a true religion, even
if the
>basis of interaction was different.
Yes, I would have to agree with this. :)
>> Yes, I've seen the article in question, and you've
defined
>>the Shamans and their form of magic quite nicely. I
have
>>something of a variant on the College of Shamanism,
which is
>>the last College I intend to bring into the game for a
while (giving
>>a total of 24 Colleges of Magic).
>
>Ohh let's have a look. I've been prompted to check out
some of
>your colleges. I've only skim read Witchcraft so far
and I'm impressed.
The College of Witchcraft for me was a labour of love,
and there
is only one difference between the one I'm using these
days and the one
that's posted up to the web. The MA requirement for the
one on the web
is about 26, iirc. and that's not good if you want a
player character
Witch. I moved a few of the Generals into the Specials,
and have a
terrific list of spells for the College that are not
found as part of
the basic Gs or Ss of the Witchcraft College. Got about
150 spells for
the various other Colleges as well, some that I've done
up, some that
my players have done up, all using the Spell Creation
rules from AW.
>> I'm looking forward to seeing the new draft of the
material,
>>>btw. :)
>
>still on course for later this week
Good news. Looking forward to it...like I don't have
enough to
read. :)
....."So," said the 'bot, "just how user-friendly *are*
you?"
JohnK
e-mail:
jkahane@c...
web page:
http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane
|
|
|
126 |
From: John M. Kahane <jkahane@c...>
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2003 7:20am
Subject:
Re: Re: Spells in Religion
|
|
|
Hullo, Bruce,
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 18:28:13 +1000, Bruce Probst wrote:
>>Besides, in most pagan religions one tends to have
shamans,
>>witches, and the like, rather than priests, so...
>
>This is a bit of an over-simplification. "Pagan"
generally means
>"non-Christian", so this isn't really true. Lots of
"pagan" religions
>had perfectly structured priesthoods, they just weren't
(or aren't)
>*Christian* priests.
Yes, I realised that it was an over-simplification,
Bruce, but to
be honest, some folks have complicated certain aspects
of the
DRAGONQUEST rules system and some of the mechanics that
don't exist for
the game too much. You have to start simple. And if one
is going to
go and do up a Priest skill (or any other skill for that
matter) along
the lines of Troubadour, Thief, or whatever, one has to
start simple
with something that works for *all* Priests. One can add
complicated
elements to it later.
>I think the distinction should really be between
"structured" religions
>and "non-structured" ones. In a "structured" religion
being a priest
>is pretty much all you do. In a "non-structured"
religion being a priest
>is something you do in addition to whatever else you
normally do.
Agreed. Within the DQ system, I can see where the
character
would take Priest skill and other skills to represent
their normal
lives for the "unstructured" religion, but this isn't
ruled out by the
DQ mechanics and Skill system (like it is in so many
other rpgs).
>You can break it down even further ... in some
"non-structured" religion
>you have "part-time priests", in others they don't even
have that -- the
>religious worship is something that you do as an
individual, and you
>have no "flock" to care for or guide.
Good point to remember. :)
>Any religious "rules" ought to be able to cope with one
extreme as well
>as the other.
Agreed.
So, any comments on my Priest skill that I posted up
here? :)
.....I have a mind like a steel...umm, what's it
called?...you know...
JohnK
e-mail:
jkahane@c...
web page:
http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane
|
|
|
127 |
From: John M. Kahane <jkahane@c...>
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2003 9:09am
Subject:
JK Priest Skill Questions and Answers (Long)
|
|
|
Hullo, David,
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 12:02:08 -0000, dbarrass_2000 wrote:
>I've lots of questions on your priest write up, which
on the whole, I
>like.
Glad to hear it..and to be honest, I expected a few
queries about
the Priest skill as a whole. I'm just surprised no one
else has
commented on this material at all..
So let's get into them...
>1) How do you gain Devoutness (I understand how it's
generated
>in the first place and how it's lost), is it that if
you do something devout
>the GM awards you with some points?
As a general rule, that is correct. One of the basic
guidelines
that I use from hand written notes is that the normal
person who
believes very strongly in his or her deity will have a
Devoutness below
7 or 8. The equivalent of a Paladin or something like
the holy
avengers would have DVs in the 10-15 range. As you
noticed, Priests
have a DV minimum of 25.
Devoutness can be purchased at a rate commensurate with
some of
the other Characteristics, but being a Secondary
Characteristic, I
didn't like the idea of it being "bought up" with XPs.
Any behaviour
and actions that reinforce one's DV will probably give
the GM reason to
increase DV by 1 to 3 points; it works the reverse as
well.
>2) Devoutness seems under used, but if you don't spend
XPs on it
>I guess that's not a biggie
Exactly. :)
>3) I don't understand this paragraph:-
>"Note that the priest cannot raise his Knowledge Rank
if the
>character's Priest Rank is not equal to or exceeds the
character's
>desired KR value."
What this means is it's a goof from an earlier version
of the rules
on Knowledge Rank. The line should actually read, "Note
that a priest
cannot raise his Knowledge Rank to more than twice his
(Priest Rank +
1) in value." Sorry about the confusion on this. I had a
post-it
note in the document about the change, but had forgotten
to make the
change and delete the post-it note.
>4) Your calling; would it be possible to buy additional
callings
>at rank 10, the same way as you can buy extra terrains
as a rank 10
>ranger for example?
Yes, I see no reason why this would not be possible. As
a
general rule, I cannot see a reason why a Priest should
not have as
many Skills as he or she wishes to take, but to be
honest, one's
function within the priesthood in terms of one's Calling
might be more
limited. Once one reaches the higher rank and wishes to
buy additional
Callings, there is no reason not to do so. Unlike
Ranger, however,
these are not sub-skills of the Priest, but actual
skills that they
have or are trained for, so they would be bought at
normal costs -
although one could modify the rule and state that the
Calling skills of
a Priest cost slightly less in XPs, say three-quarters
the cost to
progress Ranks.
>5) Does the priest pay Ft to cast the spells of the
colleges, or
>does he lose KR (or even DV) instead as he is drawing
on the Deity's
>power?
No, one doesn�t use KR or even DV for the purpose of
being the
channel of the divine/demonic source�s power. Suffice it
to say one
uses Fatigue (and then Endurance) as the deity�s power
is not meant to
be channelled this way through one�s mortal body, and as
such can do
lasting harm to the priest in question. This is one of
the additions
to the game system that I made in terms of how the
Priestly �Magic�
would work, and I�ll post this up to the forum (or do
you want it in
personal e-mail?) soon as I get onto the laptop where
the data is
stored.
>6) Section 166.14 � divine items
>A "grievous" success KRx1.5, is this round up or down?
This would be round normally, but I usually do this as
rounding
down. (Otherwise, the Priest might get too big for his
britches.) :)
However, I expect that most GMs will use this in
whatever resolution
format they prefer.
>In the last bit you mention damage, what would be the
effect if you
>wanted to increase success chance instead?
Since the modification to the item in terms of its
holiness or
unholiness is always based on KR, the same rule would
still apply.
One can�t split the KR between the damage the item does
and its Strike
Chance, however; this would require two separate
creation attempts,
although I suppose that one could split the bonus to
damage and SC
betwen the KR value that one has, and the doubling or
tripling of the
effect would be beneficial in such a case. Making an
item holy or
unholy is not the same thing as enchantment per se, even
if the
�effect� works similarly. I am curious as to what
alteration you
might make in this?
>7) 116.13 miracles. I don't understand some of the
modifiers:-
>" Miracle attempted by this person in the past year +2
>Miracle attempted by this person in the past six months
-2"
>Why is one a bonus and the other a penalty?
The idea here is that Miracles are meant to be rare,
they're not
supposed to be common. The more often the Priest calls
upon the deity
in question for a Miracle, the more less likely it is to
occur.
>"Area is a high mana area -(Mana x 3)"
>What does the (Mana x 3) mean?
Okay, the game system defines cities as being low in
mana and some
places as being high in mana. Bear in mind that Priests
were meant to
be the opposite of magic in the game, and so places with
high mana were
meant to be anathema to using priestly abilities. As a
general rule,
the mana rating of an area is defined by a factor (ie.,
1,2,etc) which
defines how much Fatigue it costs or doesn�t cost to use
a spell or
whatever. Take that number, and multiply by 3 before
subtracting it
from the chance of a Miracle occuring. Does that clarify
it any
better?
One could even argue that there are places with a high
divine aura
to them, which would have the same effect on the use of
magic that
magic has on the use of priestly abilities/magic.
.
>"High Holy Day of the Power supplicated -5"
>Why is this a penalty?
Because on the Holy Days of the given religion, the
deity or
divinity in question is meant to be being infused with
the strength of
belief of the worshippers. When the Priest attempts a
Miracle on this
holiest of days, the deity's power is weakened, and the
deity must
sacrifice its own "well-being" for that of the Priest.
(This is how I
understood the modifier from what I remember of the
designer notes for
the Religion and Priest material.)
>"Supplicant has demonic ties (deals with Demons often,
travels with a
>Black Magician or Greater Summoner, has been granted a
boon by a
>demon, etc.) -15"
>Presumably for PoD priests consorting with creature of
light is a
>penalty and the above not a penalty
Yep, correct. One Priest's PoL is another Priest's PoD,
and vice
versa. :)
>" Supplicant is on a holy Geas -5
>Supplicant is under attack -3"
>I would have thought these would make it more likely
that the appeal
>would be heard
Okay, in the first case, one needs to remember that the
Geas is an
act or quest that one is performing as a service to the
deity, not the
other way around, If you need the Miracle in order to
serve the
deity, then there's a problem with your relationship
with the deity.
In the second case, there is a chance that the deity
would grant
the Miracle, but remember, the Miracle system here isn't
like what one
finds in other fantasy rpgs or games that deal with
religion. And you
generally can't ask for a Miracle on the spur of the
moment, and combat
is definitely a short enough period of only 5
seconds...unless one
would like to Pass for say, oh five rounds perhaps... :)
>8) The biggie. If you're a priest of a Fire god or the
Ocean
>god (for example), wouldn't it be more appropriate to
take your
>spells and rituals from the college of Fire magics or
Water magics
>respectively? Why did you decide against it? What
distinguishes one
>of these priests from any other?
Okay, I knew this one was going to come from someone...
What is
important to remember is that DRAGONQUEST�s Religion
supplement was
going to keep magic separate from priestly abilities,
since they didn�t
want to have a �clerical� system as is so common in
fantasy. Being a
deity�s Priest *doesn�t* give you magic, unless the GM
wants to run the
religion system and the priest skill that way - what it
does give you
is the Miracle system (but Miracles aren�t meant to be
common in the
world, as they are similarly in our own). The
modification to allow
priests to be able to use magic from certain Colleges,
essentially
section 166.6, is one that the GM makes as the deity in
question.
Priest skill was never about magic and was never
intended to be about
magic, although who knows what the final version of the
Religion
supplement would have had in it.
I would suggest the use of pagan magics would allow the
Priest to
wield Fire Magics, Water Magics, or whatever magics the
GM permits
(depending on how she views the deities and what they
allow their
followers). One could even set it up where the priest is
granted an
ability (like Resistance to Magical Fire) or a series of
abilities
(perhaps like three of the Fire Magics abilities related
to resisting
and seeing fire) or whatever by the deity as a Talent.
Whether this
would completely unbalance the game from that point of
view and priests
vs. mages is another matter entirely.
The main thing that distinguishes a priest from another
priest
is, when it comes right down to it, the deity they
worship and their
belief in the deity and their religiious practices, not
the magic or
spiritual abilities or whatever one wants to call it
that they use.
The mechanics are very much based along the lines of
priests in real
life, with a bit of the miracle element thrown in.
Whether one uses
magic with priests or not is an entirely different
subject that I think
is more in the hands of the individual GM and how they
see it. The
Priest skill that I created was based on the original
vision for this
in DQ, but of course, it has to be subjective as well.
I�m glad you liked the skill, and am glad that you
raised some of
these points. :)
.....A seed hidden in the heart of an apple is an
orchard invisible. (Welsh proverb)
JohnK
e-mail:
jkahane@c...
web page:
http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane
|
|
|
128 |
From: John M. Kahane <johnk-thinkpad@c...>
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2003 5:55am
Subject:
JK Priest Skill Addenda
|
|
|
Hullo, folks,
Here's the addenda pertaining to priests and magic
--------------------------------
[166.6] A priest may not become an Adept of any of the
Colleges of
Magic, with the exception of Black Magics, White Magics,
Shamanism,
or Witchcraft.
... These mindless ramblings have been brought to you
courtesy of much caffeine.
JohnK
from the Lap of OS/2
johnk-thinkpad@c...
http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane
|
|
|
129 |
From: Bruce Probst <bprobst@n...>
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2003 1:29am
Subject:
Re: Re: Spells in Religion
|
|
|
On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 09:20:08 -0400, "John M. Kahane"
<jkahane@c...>
wrote:
> So, any comments on my Priest skill that I posted up
here? :)
Nothing specific, other than I'm not really happy with
any of the treatments
I've seen. I am generally agreed that treating "Priest"
as a "skill" is the
right treatment for DQ, but after that I get antsy with
the specifics <g>.
Overall, I think it's too important a topic to try and
break it down into
"generic" rules. A better (albeit much more difficult)
approach would be to
develop a separate "Priest" skill for each religion, so
that each may be
uniquely tuned. There would be some things in common, of
course ... if this
sounds like a proposal for an adaptation of the
RuneQuest "Cults" system,
that wouldn't be surprising, as I've yet to see a game
do a better treatment
of diverse religions than that one.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Probst
bprobst@n... ICQ 6563830
Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 SCA #80160
"Well, look at that. 'Breach hull, all die.' Even had it
underlined."
ASL FAQ
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ
|
|
|
130 |
From: John M. Kahane <jkahane@c...>
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2003 8:42am
Subject:
Re: Re: Spells in Religion
|
|
|
Hullo, Bruce,
Boy, we seem to be having a lot of conversations about
DQ at the
moment, don't we? :)
On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 17:29:02 +1000, Bruce Probst wrote:
>> So, any comments on my Priest skill that I posted up
here? :)
>
>Nothing specific, other than I'm not really happy with
any of the
>treatments I've seen. I am generally agreed that
treating "Priest"
>as a "skill" is the right treatment for DQ, but after
that I get antsy
>with the specifics <g>.
Well, at least you're honest about your opinion on the
matter. :)
To be honest, religion is a very subjective thing, and I
suspect that
this applies even moreso in rpgs where players (and GMs
for that
matter) either want it in the game or don't want to see
it there at
all. The Priest skill, since I agree with you that it
fits in best as
a "skill" as DRAGONQUEST defines them, regardless of
which version one
uses, will either be what folks want in the game or what
they don't
want in the game at all. The old line about different
strokes and
all...
>Overall, I think it's too important a topic to try and
break it down
>into "generic" rules. A better (albeit much more
difficult)
>approach would be to develop a separate "Priest" skill
for each
>religion, so that each may be uniquely tuned.
I agree with you, in all regards, but I wouldn't want to
spend
the sheer amount of time working on something like this.
However, I've
always seen the Priest skill (perhaps because of that
long-vanished
material on religion in DQ that was never published) as
being more of a
"generic" skill that needs the religions to fit into it
long-term, with
each religion being expounded on at a different point.
Doing written
descriptions of the various deities along the lines of
the write-ups
from the DQ book on the demons (minus the game mechanics
and numbers,
of course, since they are gods!) would work, but still
takes a lot of
time. Unless one has a very small pantheon. :)
>There would be some things in common, of course ... if
this
>sounds like a proposal for an adaptation of the
RuneQuest
>"Cults" system, that wouldn't be surprising, as I've
yet to see
>a game do a better treatment of diverse religions than
that one.
Agreed. :)
And thanks for your insight on this. :)
.....Courtesy is the lubricant of social interaction.
(Robert A. Heinlein)
JohnK
e-mail:
jkahane@c...
web page:
http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane
|
|
|
131 |
From: Bruce Probst <bprobst@n...>
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2003 10:39am
Subject:
Re: Re: Spells in Religion
|
|
|
On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 10:42:20 -0400, "John M. Kahane"
<jkahane@c...>
wrote:
> Boy, we seem to be having a lot of conversations about
DQ at the
>moment, don't we? :)
Yeah, and I'm not even playing it any more these days
<g>. But it was the
first RPG I ever owned and it's always been close to my
heart <g>.
> I agree with you, in all regards, but I wouldn't want
to spend
>the sheer amount of time working on something like
this.
Neither would I, which is the main reason why I never
did anything more than
think about it <g>.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Probst
bprobst@n... ICQ 6563830
Melbourne, Australia MSTie #72759 SCA #80160
"I want to decide who lives and who dies."
ASL FAQ
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ
|
|
|
132 |
From: dbarrass_2000 <david.barrass@e...>
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2003 2:18am
Subject:
Draft Rules Version 1.1
|
|
|
Hi everyone,
The latest draft of my rules I promiced sometime this
week is in the
files section of this news group. Its called Spirits and
Religion
V1.1.pdf
The next draft will probably include ideas from John's
priest skill,
but it may take some time :--)
To encourage those who haven't read it here's the
contents from the
doc
X. Spirits
98. Physical World Spirits
99. Boundary Sprits
100. Other Plane Spirits
101. Faerie
102. Ego Combat
103. The College of Shamanism
104. The College of Fey Magics
XI. Religion
105. Magical Religions
106. Priests of Magical Religions
107. Religious Magic
108. Graeco-Roman Pantheon
109. Religions of the Powers of Light
110. Cleric of the Powers of Light
There is a changes document with it so you can see
what's been changed
Enjoy
David
|
|
|
133 |
From: dbarrass_2000 <david.barrass@e...>
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2003 6:32am
Subject:
Re: Spells in Religion
|
|
|
> > I agree with you, in all regards, but I wouldn't
want to
spend
> >the sheer amount of time working on something like
this.
>
> Neither would I, which is the main reason why I never
did anything
more than
> think about it <g>.
See my new draft rules (in the files section), for a
worked out
pantheon. It wasn't too bad given a rule frame work, you
just have
to work out what applied and what didn't
David
|
|
|
134 |
From: John M. Kahane <jkahane@c...>
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2003 10:41am
Subject:
Re: Re: Spells in Religion
|
|
|
Hullo, Bruce,
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 02:39:58 +1000, Bruce Probst wrote:
>> Boy, we seem to be having a lot of conversations
about
>>DQ at the moment, don't we? :)
>
>Yeah, and I'm not even playing it any more these days
<g>.
I know. :(
>But it was the first RPG I ever owned and it's always
been close
>to my heart <g>.
Still is close to mine. I've run a few other systems in
the
fantasy genre from time to time over the years, but have
always come
back to the DRAGONQUEST rpg. I still consider it to be
the best
fantasy rpg out there, but others will disagree.
>> I agree with you, in all regards, but I wouldn't want
to
>>spend the sheer amount of time working on something
like
>>this.
>
>Neither would I, which is the main reason why I never
did
>anything more than think about it <g>.
Well, I've done up the material on religion that I
wanted to put
into the game, and it works for me and has been working
for me for a
long time now, so no need to really add any new material
in that
regard, other than material on the various specific
deities and the
like. Thank the Goddess (of your choice) that most
players don't
really have a desire to play priest types in DQ. :)
.....And through this deep and dreamless sleep, the
silent stars go by. (A. Camus)
JohnK
e-mail:
jkahane@c...
web page:
http://www.comnet.ca/~jkahane
|
|
|
135 |
From: dbarrass_2000 <david.barrass@e...>
Date: Wed Sep 3, 2003 8:57am
Subject:
Re: JK Priest Skill Questions and Answers (Long)
|
|
|
<snip of stuff that has been answered>
> >4) Your calling; would it be possible to buy
additional callings
> >at rank 10, the same way as you can buy extra
terrains as a rank
10
> >ranger for example?
>
> Yes, I see no reason why this would not be possible.
As a
> general rule, I cannot see a reason why a Priest
should not have as
> many Skills as he or she wishes to take, but to be
honest, one's
> function within the priesthood in terms of one's
Calling might be
more
> limited. Once one reaches the higher rank and wishes
to buy
additional
> Callings, there is no reason not to do so. Unlike
Ranger, however,
> these are not sub-skills of the Priest, but actual
skills that they
> have or are trained for, so they would be bought at
normal costs -
> although one could modify the rule and state that the
Calling
skills of
> a Priest cost slightly less in XPs, say three-quarters
the cost to
> progress Ranks.
not a bad idea, would he get cheep training from the
religious
organisation?
> >5) Does the priest pay Ft to cast the spells of the
colleges, or
> >does he lose KR (or even DV) instead as he is drawing
on the
Deity's
> >power?
>
> No, one doesn't use KR or even DV for the purpose of
being the
> channel of the divine/demonic source's power. Suffice
it to say one
> uses Fatigue (and then Endurance) as the deity's power
is not meant
to
> be channelled this way through one's mortal body, and
as such can do
> lasting harm to the priest in question. This is one of
the
additions
> to the game system that I made in terms of how the
Priestly "Magic"
> would work, and I'll post this up to the forum (or do
you want it in
> personal e-mail?) soon as I get onto the laptop where
the data is
> stored.
>
> >6) Section 166.14 � divine items
> >A "grievous" success KRx1.5, is this round up or
down?
>
> This would be round normally, but I usually do this as
rounding
> down. (Otherwise, the Priest might get too big for his
britches.) :)
> However, I expect that most GMs will use this in
whatever resolution
> format they prefer.
>
> >In the last bit you mention damage, what would be the
effect if
you
> >wanted to increase success chance instead?
>
> Since the modification to the item in terms of its
holiness or
> unholiness is always based on KR, the same rule would
still apply.
> One can't split the KR between the damage the item
does and its
Strike
> Chance, however; this would require two separate
creation attempts,
> although I suppose that one could split the bonus to
damage and SC
> betwen the KR value that one has, and the doubling or
tripling of
the
> effect would be beneficial in such a case. Making an
item holy or
> unholy is not the same thing as enchantment per se,
even if the
> "effect" works similarly. I am curious as to what
alteration you
> might make in this?
When ever I do this I allow a number of points which can
be split
between increasing chances on a D100 roll, or a D10
roll. but I don't
make it a one for one eqivalence 1 point buys 1 extra
success chance
to a D100 roll, but you need 3 to make it add one to a
D10 roll
> >7) 116.13 miracles. I don't understand some of the
modifiers:-
> >" Miracle attempted by this person in the past year
+2
> >Miracle attempted by this person in the past six
months -2"
> >Why is one a bonus and the other a penalty?
sorry I still don't understand why you get a +2 bonus if
you've asked
for a miracle in the past year and -2 if within the past
6 months.
Is one a year the accepted amount, less than one a year
and you're
not trying hard enough but 2 a year is plain careless
:--) ?
Most of the rest of this section you've answered, but
I'll probaly
return to pagan vs PoL in annother post
David
|
|
|
136 |
From: dbarrass_2000 <david.barrass@e...>
Date: Wed Sep 3, 2003 9:16am
Subject:
PoL vs Pagan
|
|
|
was Re: JK Priest Skill Questions and Answers (Long)
> >8) The biggie. If you're a priest of a Fire god or
the Ocean
> >god (for example), wouldn't it be more appropriate to
take your
> >spells and rituals from the college of Fire magics or
Water magics
> >respectively? Why did you decide against it? What
distinguishes
one
> >of these priests from any other?
>
> Okay, I knew this one was going to come from
someone... What
is
> important to remember is that DRAGONQUEST's Religion
supplement was
> going to keep magic separate from priestly abilities,
since they
didn't
> want to have a "clerical" system as is so common in
fantasy. Being
a
> deity's Priest *doesn't* give you magic, unless the GM
wants to run
the
> religion system and the priest skill that way - what
it does give
you
> is the Miracle system (but Miracles aren't meant to be
common in the
> world, as they are similarly in our own). The
modification to allow
> priests to be able to use magic from certain Colleges,
essentially
> section 166.6, is one that the GM makes as the deity
in question.
> Priest skill was never about magic and was never
intended to be
about
> magic, although who knows what the final version of
the Religion
> supplement would have had in it.
Then why do you get the College of White or Black magics
abillities?
wouldn't it be better to have other non-magic (or pseudo
magical)
abillities for PoL priest. The miracles I like and they
fit, be it
with work from the GM :--)
> I would suggest the use of pagan magics would allow
the
Priest to
> wield Fire Magics, Water Magics, or whatever magics
the GM permits
> (depending on how she views the deities and what they
allow their
> followers). One could even set it up where the priest
is granted an
> ability (like Resistance to Magical Fire) or a series
of abilities
> (perhaps like three of the Fire Magics abilities
related to
resisting
> and seeing fire) or whatever by the deity as a Talent.
Whether this
> would completely unbalance the game from that point of
view and
priests
> vs. mages is another matter entirely.
I think this fits, but you're getting to have different
skills for
Pagan and PoL priests - like my system ;--)
> The main thing that distinguishes a priest from
another priest
> is, when it comes right down to it, the deity they
worship and their
> belief in the deity and their religiious practices,
not the magic or
> spiritual abilities or whatever one wants to call it
that they use.
> The mechanics are very much based along the lines of
priests in real
> life, with a bit of the miracle element thrown in.
Whether one
uses
> magic with priests or not is an entirely different
subject that I
think
> is more in the hands of the individual GM and how they
see it. The
> Priest skill that I created was based on the original
vision for
this
> in DQ, but of course, it has to be subjective as well.
The priests in our society are non-pagan (for the sake
of something
to call them - PoL), I feel that if we were Ancient
Greeks, in a
fantasy environment, we would go to the temple of
Poseidon if we
wanted someone to cast spells from the College of Water
Magics - of
course this is pure speculation and has the advantage
that it cannot
be tested :-)
David
|
|
|
138 |
From: <DragonQuestCathedral@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Wed Oct 22, 2003 0:36pm
Subject:
New file uploaded to DragonQuestCathedral
|
|
|
Hello,
This email message is a notification to let you know
that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the
DragonQuestCathedral
group.
File : /Click here for a great jewish dating service
Uploaded by : nurinekuzi1769 <nurinekuzi1769@y...>
Description : Browse through jewish singles
You can access this file at the URL
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DragonQuestCathedral/files/Click%20here%20for%20a%20great%20jewish%20dating%20service
Regards,
nurinekuzi1769 <nurinekuzi1769@y...>
|
|
|
139 |
From: Richard <demon_star2002@y...>
Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 0:40pm
Subject:
New Members!!!
|
|
|
Be sure and take a good look at Barrass's nifty
religion rules in the
Files section (I think we can ignore the update, right
David?) and
let us know what you think.
I know we'd both appreciate it.
Thanks,
R.
|
|
|
140 |
From: dbarrass_2000 <david.barrass@e...>
Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 1:44am
Subject:
Re: New Members!!!
|
|
|
It's good to see some activity here, it's amazing
how things are
rattling along, then, bang it his the buffers
--- In
DragonQuestCathedral@yahoogroups.com, "Richard"
<demon_star2002@y...> wrote:
> Be sure and take a good look at Barrass's nifty
religion rules in the
> Files section (I think we can ignore the update, right
David?) and
> let us know what you think.
Update, what update?
> I know we'd both appreciate it.
Yes please do. Any feed back, positive or negative,
accepted
David
|
|
|
141 |
From: Richard <demon_star2002@y...>
Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 1:02pm
Subject:
Re: New Members!!!
|
|
|
--- In
DragonQuestCathedral@yahoogroups.com,
"dbarrass_2000" <
david.barrass@e...> wrote:
> Update, what update?
>
Changes to v1.0 or something like that. Wasn't that
something of an update?
Later,
R.
|
|
|
142 |
From: dbarrass_2000 <david.barrass@e...>
Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 1:29am
Subject:
Re: New Members!!!
|
|
|
--- In
DragonQuestCathedral@yahoogroups.com, "Richard"
<demon_star2002@y...> wrote:
> --- In
DragonQuestCathedral@yahoogroups.com,
"dbarrass_2000" <
> david.barrass@e...> wrote:
>
> > Update, what update?
> >
>
> Changes to v1.0 or something like that. Wasn't that
something of an
update?
Oh, no its just a list of the changes made to the
current version from
the previous, so people could make a note of what had
changed and
could comment on the changes easilly
David
|
|
|
143 |
From: dbarrass_2000 <david.barrass@e...>
Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 2:11am
Subject:
Feed-back
|
|
|
Does anyone have any feed-back on the religion
rules; does anybody
have things in it they hate, areas where it could be
improved? Has
anyone used them?
Come on you guys there must be something :--) Give it to
me don't
pull any punches
David
|
|
|
144 |
From: Richard <demon_star2002@y...>
Date: Thu Apr 29, 2004 1:14pm
Subject:
Sayonara, suckers!
|
|
|
Due to a pronounced lack of activity on this group,
I'm going to
delete it sometime tomorrow. Anybody who wants to
continue this
subject can do so in the other DragonQuest groups.
Barras did too good a job on his religion rules to not
have any
discussion about it. David, if ya wanna take over the
group, just let
me know and I'll transfer the crown over to you.
|
|
|
145 |
From: Martin Gallo <martimer@m...>
Date: Thu Apr 29, 2004 2:14pm
Subject:
Re: Sayonara, suckers!
|
|
|
Sorry - I wanted to get to it, but have not had a
group to play with
and motivate me to look at DQ for a while.
>Due to a pronounced lack of activity on this group, I'm
going to
>delete it sometime tomorrow. Anybody who wants to
continue this
>subject can do so in the other DragonQuest groups.
>
>Barras did too good a job on his religion rules to not
have any
>discussion about it. David, if ya wanna take over the
group, just let
>me know and I'll transfer the crown over to you.
--
"If you haven't got your health, at least you have
something to talk about."
"They say that everything happens for a reason. I am
just tired of
that reason being to make me unhappy or embarrassed."
"You can't make a baby in a month using nine women, but
it sounds
like it would be fun to try!"
"Does it ever occur to women that maybe it is their
butts that make
their pants look big?"
|
|
|
146 |
From: dbarrass_2000 <david.barrass@e...>
Date: Fri Apr 30, 2004 1:13am
Subject:
Re: Sayonara, suckers!
|
|
|
I think this group has served its purpose; it got
people thinking and
produced a couple of "workable, logical, interesting,
fun system for
gods, religion, and priests in the DragonQuest game"
rule sets, time
to move on.
I'm working on another draft now, it's complete, but I
want to think
about it and try the changes before I post. I'll post it
in dq-rules
Thanks for setting up the group in the first place
David Barrass
--- In
DragonQuestCathedral@yahoogroups.com, "Richard"
<demon_star2002@y...> wrote:
> Due to a pronounced lack of activity on this group,
I'm going to
> delete it sometime tomorrow. Anybody who wants to
continue this
> subject can do so in the other DragonQuest groups.
>
> Barras did too good a job on his religion rules to not
have any
> discussion about it. David, if ya wanna take over the
group, just let
> me know and I'll transfer the crown over to you.
|
|
|
147 |
From: dbarrass_2000 <david.barrass@e...>
Date: Sat May 1, 2004 4:11pm
Subject:
End of Group
|
|
|
Of course if this group were to fold the info and
discussions would no
longer be available; things such as my and John's rules
(posted as a
message not a file so easilly lost). I have been back to
some posts
to check the outcomes of what we discussed
Could we archive this somewhere and make it available as
a static page
for all to see?
David
|
|
|
148 |
From: J. K. Hoffman <ryumaou@s...>
Date: Sat May 1, 2004 6:51pm
Subject:
Re: End of Group
|
|
|
dbarrass_2000 wrote:
> Of course if this group were to fold the info and
discussions would no
> longer be available; things such as my and John's
rules (posted as a
> message not a file so easilly lost). I have been back
to some posts
> to check the outcomes of what we discussed
>
> Could we archive this somewhere and make it available
as a static page
> for all to see?
>
> David
Well, if someone wants to collect it all into text
format, I'll HTMLise
it and put it up on fantasist.net along with the PDF of
official Bantam
rules.
Thanks,
Jim
--
When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is
left, I buy food
and clothes.
- Desiderius Erasmus
|
|
|
149 |
From: John Rauchert <john.rauchert@sait.ca>
Date: Sun May 2, 2004 1:45pm
Subject:
RE: End of Group
|
|
|
|
I have already captured all the
messages from the group and the group files.
I was going to offer my
website as a location for the archives, but it
is usually a good thing to have a couple of
locations as things tend to disappear off the
net.
JohnR
-----Original Message-----
From: J. K. Hoffman
To:
DragonQuestCathedral@yahoogroups.com
Sent: 01/05/04 6:51 PM
Subject: Re:
[DragonQuestCathedral] End of Group
dbarrass_2000 wrote:
> Of course if this group were to
fold the info and discussions would no
> longer be available; things
such as my and John's rules (posted as a
> message not a file so easilly
lost). I have been back to some posts
> to check the outcomes of what
we discussed
>
> Could we archive this somewhere
and make it available as a static page
> for all to see?
>
> David
Well, if someone wants to
collect it all into text format, I'll HTMLise
it and put it up on fantasist.net
along with the PDF of official Bantam
rules.
Thanks,
Jim
--
When I get a little money I buy
books; and if any is left, I buy food
and clothes.
- Desiderius Erasmus
|
|
|
|
150 |
From: J. K. Hoffman <ryumaou@s...>
Date: Mon May 3, 2004 6:18am
Subject:
Re: End of Group
|
|
|
John Rauchert wrote:
> I have already captured all the messages from the
group and the group
> files.
>
> I was going to offer my website as a location for the
archives, but it
> is usually a good thing to have a couple of locations
as things tend to
> disappear off the net.
>
> JohnR
>
Well, I'm happy to be a mirror site, too.
All you need to do is send me what you have to put up.
And be patient.
It might take a couple of days to get up and running.
Thanks,
Jim
--
When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is
left, I buy food
and clothes.
- Desiderius Erasmus
|
|
|
151 |
From: John Rauchert <john.rauchert@sait.ca>
Date: Mon May 3, 2004 7:47am
Subject:
RE: End of Group
|
|
|
|
Give me a couple of days to
format the file, then I will package them up and
send out. I have a couple of websites to roll
out in the next two days for work so I am
currently burning all my spare time.
JohnR
-----Original Message-----
From: J. K. Hoffman [ryumaou@sbc...]
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 6:18
AM
To:
DragonQuestCathedral@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re:
[DragonQuestCathedral] End of Group
John Rauchert wrote:
> I have already captured all
the messages from the group and the group
> files.
>
> I was going to offer my website
as a location for the archives, but it
> is usually a good thing to have
a couple of locations as things tend to
> disappear off the net.
>
> JohnR
>
Well, I'm happy to be a mirror
site, too.
All you need to do is send me
what you have to put up. And be patient.
It might take a couple of days
to get up and running.
Thanks,
Jim
--
When I get a little money I buy
books; and if any is left, I buy food
and clothes.
- Desiderius Erasmus
|
|
|
|