From: mfp+@CS.CMU.EDU (Michael Polis)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Fwd: Re: Rolemaster Power Points
Date: 22 Jan 93 16:07:30 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.C19JGJ.IG6.2
Organization: Carnegie Mellon University

Apparently, this was accidentally sent to me instead of the board.

-----Forwarded Message Follows------------------------
Return-Path: <@cs.cmu.edu:cook@shaman.nexagen.com>
Received: from cs.cmu.edu by MAPS.CS.CMU.EDU id aa25837; 21 Jan 93 23:59:13 ESTReceived: from shaman.nexagen.com by CS.CMU.EDU id aa18358;
          21 Jan 93 23:59:01 EST
Received: by shaman.nexagen.com (920110.SGI/920323.SGI.AUTO.ANONFTP)
        for mfp+@CS.CMU.EDU id AA27078; Thu, 21 Jan 93 21:58:51 -0700
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 21:58:51 -0700
From: cook@shaman.nexagen.com
Message-Id: <9301220458.AA27078@shaman.nexagen.com>
To: mfp+@CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: Re: Rolemaster Power Points
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc

In rec.games.frp.misc you write:

>In article <1993Jan21.063948.22282@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, ewalents@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Erich Walentschak) writes:
>|> Im just writing to ask all the GMs out there how they distribute Power Points
>|> to their spell users.  We've tried the base PP per level with that amount added
>|> again if they train PP dev and we've tried giving a d6 PP when they train dev
>|> along with a few others, and we havent seemed to get a good balance between>|> pure and non spell users yet.  Any suggestions or methods youve found to work?
>|>
>|> Erich

My recomendation would be to use the core rules system, rather than those optional rules in the Companions. They don't work as well.

>I've always been happy with (base PP from stat)*level.  Pure's are better
>than non's because they have more spell lists.  If you want to increase
>the disparity, you could try something like (base PP from stat)*(Spell Picks).>(In case you don't remember, spell picks are: A (1-5), B (1-10), C (6-10),
>D (11-20), E (25-100))

>My experience is that pure's and hybrids pick about 1.5 spell lists/level,
>Archmages about 1 spell list/level, semi's about .7-.3 lists/level (depends
>on class), and non's get one or two lists in their career, if they even bother.
>This will make pure's more powerful than normal, and semi's less powerful.
>Non's may consider themselves pretty much screwed, and either give up magic
>or start buying spell adders.  First level pure's, which typically have 3 or 4>spell lists, are a lot more powerful, and probably considerably more playable.>(We have a house rule that makes one level overcasts free, which has a similar>effect)

>An additional bonus of this formula is that it is one less thing which depends>on the artificial concept of a level.

>Formulas which would have similar effects, but which wouldn't be quite as bad
>for non's are
>       (base PP from stat)*(Spell Picks) + level
>       (base PP from stat)*((Spell Picks)+level)/2

So, what you're saying is that the more spells someone knows, the more PP he has? This seems to suggest that PP are learned or are gained from practice.
I like to think that they are a measure of inherent power. That's why I don't use the PP development system offered in Companion II
I think (base PP from stat)*level works fine. It reflects that in a world wheremagic is common (i.e., PP multipliers are everywhere), PP flow like water.
Conversely, in a low magic world where magic items are rare, casters must conserve their power like misers. No "crude displays of power."

Very true to the various genres, I think.

Monte Cook
Rolemaster Editor

This is my first post, as I just got on the net.
I'd love to hear from Rolemaster players here or at:

        cook@shaman.nexagen.com