Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    Site Moderator geeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,178
    Downloads
    4
    Uploads
    7
    At 10:47 PM 4/23/2002 +1000, Peter Lubke wrote:

    >Kenneth Gauck wrote:
    >
    >>I`m not familiar with the stablize action.
    >
    >(assuming you are being sarcastic here or are you punning me on spelling?)
    >
    >You have read the BR rulebook at least once haven`t you? The part about
    >domain actions, in particular Agitate? (sarcasm)
    >"A regent with a holding can use his influence to agitate or stabilize ...."
    >
    >Would it be better if I`d said "agitate for" and "agitate against" ? Was
    >that too hard for you ?

    Actually, the book uses different terms to describe an "agitate for"
    Agitate action. Under "Loyalty" on p36 it uses the term "friendly
    manipulation" which has a kind of stark, Orwellian horror if you really
    consider it. It does use the word "stabilize" once in the Agitate action
    description, but there is no "stabilize action" and I didn`t know what you
    meant either, I`m afraid. Mr. Gauck responded before I did.

    Gary

    ************************************************** **************************
    The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
    To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
    with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

  2. #2
    Site Moderator geeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,178
    Downloads
    4
    Uploads
    7
    At 10:47 PM 4/23/2002 +1000, Peter Lubke wrote:

    >Kenneth Gauck wrote:
    >
    >>I`m not familiar with the stablize action.
    >
    >(assuming you are being sarcastic here or are you punning me on spelling?)
    >
    >You have read the BR rulebook at least once haven`t you? The part about
    >domain actions, in particular Agitate? (sarcasm)
    >"A regent with a holding can use his influence to agitate or stabilize ...."
    >
    >Would it be better if I`d said "agitate for" and "agitate against" ? Was
    >that too hard for you ?

    Actually, the book uses different terms to describe an "agitate for"
    Agitate action. Under "Loyalty" on p36 it uses the term "friendly
    manipulation" which has a kind of stark, Orwellian horror if you really
    consider it. It does use the word "stabilize" once in the Agitate action
    description, but there is no "stabilize action" and I didn`t know what you
    meant either, I`m afraid. Mr. Gauck responded before I did.

    Gary

    ************************************************** **************************
    The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
    To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
    with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    474
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Gary wrote:

    > At 10:47 PM 4/23/2002 +1000, Peter Lubke wrote:
    >
    >> Kenneth Gauck wrote:
    >>
    >>> I`m not familiar with the stablize action.
    >>
    >>
    >> (assuming you are being sarcastic here or are you punning me on
    >> spelling?)
    >>
    >> You have read the BR rulebook at least once haven`t you? The part about
    >> domain actions, in particular Agitate? (sarcasm)
    >> "A regent with a holding can use his influence to agitate or
    >> stabilize ...."
    >>
    >> Would it be better if I`d said "agitate for" and "agitate against" ? Was
    >> that too hard for you ?
    >
    >
    > Actually, the book uses different terms to describe an "agitate for"
    > Agitate action. Under "Loyalty" on p36 it uses the term "friendly
    > manipulation" which has a kind of stark, Orwellian horror if you really
    > consider it. It does use the word "stabilize" once in the Agitate action
    > description, but there is no "stabilize action" and I didn`t know what
    > you
    > meant either, I`m afraid. Mr. Gauck responded before I did.

    So you`re both claiming you didn`t know what I was saying ? (yeak okay -
    fair cop -- still noone answered the test case yet - still working on it ?)

    Anyone ever seen a game called "Freedom in the Galaxy" ? It had a
    Mega-Weapon called a planetary stabilizer. Which sounded benign until
    you found out that it stabilized a planet - that is - it abruptly
    stopped the normal rotation of the planet causing it to break up - death
    star style.

    ************************************************** **************************
    The Birthright Homepage: http://www.birthright.net
    To unsubscribe, send email to LISTSERV@ORACLE.WIZARDS.COM
    with UNSUB BIRTHRIGHT-L in the body of the message.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
BIRTHRIGHT, DUNGEONS & DRAGONS, D&D, the BIRTHRIGHT logo, and the D&D logo are trademarks owned by Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and are used by permission. ©2002-2010 Wizards of the Coast, Inc.