Re: matrix gems

[Benjamin Austin <jedi@ecn.purdue.edu>]

I think that Sean's referring to the damage taken PER ROUND that one
receives while holding onto a non-aligned Matrix Gem.  A BIG owwie for
those incants taking longer than a cople of rounds.

BJ


On Mon, 28 Feb 2000, Foo wrote:

> 
> Rulings will only apply to future instances; no grandfathering.
> 
> The way it should be, it doesn't make a difference.  If you hold a gem,
> all your current incants are increased two ranks.  If you are not holding
> the gem, you don't get +2 ranks to all your current incants.
> 
>  -*********************************-
> -  Joel Gunderson                   -         
> -  fooboy@laf.cioe.com              -
> -  The only completely consistent   -
> -  people are the dead.             -
> -              -- Aldous Huxley     -
>  -*********************************-
> 
> On Mon, 28 Feb 2000, Sean L. McLane wrote:
> 
> > <my comments included below...>
> > 
> > > From fooboy@laf.cioe.com  Mon Feb 28 12:27:16 2000
> > > Subject: matrix gems
> > >
> > > Ok, I'm about to point out an enormous inconsistency in the rules (or at
> > > least the way people have been interpreting them).  
> > >
> > > Matrix gems multiply some of the skills/abilities of individual
> > > backgrounds by 1.5.  IE, a mage has 1.5 times his normal number of spell
> > > units when holding a matrix gem.  If he drops the gem, his total number of
> > > spell units goes back to the normal total.  The same holds true across the
> > > board. For warriors, your combat mod is multiplied by 1.5.  If a warrior
> > > drops his matrix gem, it goes back to its normal total.  Ditto for augers,
> > > marines, and priests.   Nomads work a little differently.
> > >
> > > Typically, a Nomad holding a Nomadic matrix gem should have all his
> > > incants increased by two ranks.  However, players have been using nomadic
> > > matrix gems (be it their own or someone elses) during the creation of an
> > > incant to add two ranks to the total ranking of the incant on a PERMANENT
> > > BASIS.  This is flat out wrong.  Once the incantor lets go of the matrix
> > > gem, the incant should go back to it's normal ranking.  This is exactly
> > > the way mage/priest/warrior/auger/chromatic matrix gems function.  Now,
> > > correct me if I'm wrong here Dan, but isn't AQ pretty much based on the
> > > fact that you have to give something to get something?  Expend exp for
> > > skills, expend exp for magic items, expend exp for spells, and expend exp
> > > for incants.  The way people have been using the nomadic matrix gems has
> > > been giving them something for nothing, and it's inconsistent with the way
> > > the rest of the system works.  
> > >
> > > Any questions?
> > >
> > 
> > Do you think that this should apply only to anyone doing incants in the future,
> > or should it also be grandfathered to include existing incants that have been
> > boosted by this method.
> > 
> > Also, when making an incant with the Matrix gem, does the gem have to be held
> > through the duration of making the incant, or just touched once at some point
> > during the making. This would be a significant question for those who are
> > nomads as a secondary background, not primary.
> > 
> > -Sean
> > 
> > > If it's ok with everyone, I would like to announce this at the next gaming
> > > session to make this official.    
> > >
> > >  -*********************************-
> > > -  Joel Gunderson                   -         
> > > -  fooboy@laf.cioe.com              -
> > > -  The only completely consistent   -
> > > -  people are the dead.             -
> > > -              -- Aldous Huxley     -
> > >  -*********************************-
> > >
> > 
> 
>