HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dqk412@kepler.unh.edu (David Q Kennard)
Subject: Re: Diceless or Senseless?
Organization: University of New Hampshire  -  Durham, NH
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 16:58:43 GMT

In article <4642@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp) writes:
>
>	And "never run a scenario where a player knows what's going on"?
>First, that would have been virtually impossible in my own group if we
>EVER wanted to use even a few elements from any published scenario; most
>of us HAD all of them.
>

In 15 years of playing RPGs I have never played or GMed a published scenario.
A few of my friends played heavily modified versions of some old Space
Opera modules, and I played in the settings that were left after the scenario
was run. I have bought a few for various games, as have some of my friends. 
I have stolen some elements or ideas from some; I have completely trashed a
few that seemed useful when flipped through in the store.
We just don't use them.

Now, the other point (to repeat): This thread started under the "diceless"
argument because of the belief that diceless games give too much player
knowledge; this belief is mistaken. I know far more (at least statistically)
in diced games than in diceless. Even if published scenarios aren't used,
I find that players know with far too much certainty in almost all diced
games what they can do and how things work. This may be at heart a GM
issue, but the *tendency* is that concrete probabilities, charts and other
definitive rules systems *encourage* player knowledge. 

This whole issue of "player knowledge" is irrelevant and misleading
regarding the merits or flaws of diceless roleplaying. I'm not saying
that it's not important or relevant to roleplaying. On the contrary,
it is very much an issue in a number of ways. However, the subject line
implies that this is relevant to the issue of using dice, and I disagree.

Dave Kennard
DAVE@UNH.EDU 

Dave Kennard
DAVE@UNH.EDU
From: wt0b+@andrew.cmu.edu (William Henry Timmins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Improvisation!
Date: 20 Aug 92 23:39:06 GMT
	<1992Aug19.164817.58273@cc.usu.edu>
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

>> What if I made a mistake? What if in my preparations, I had forgotten
>> to consider <bla>?
>
>I've never had a problem with overlooking something that directly impacts
>the campaign or scenario. Since the scenario (and some of the campaign) is

	Well, by your own admission, we aren't talking about us, we're talking
about generalities. If you're allowed to do it, so am I. In general,
it's easy to make mistakes, to forget to consider things. Maybe you
don't have trouble, just like I don't have trouble with improv, but that
doesn't matter.

>> If the players have a problem with something that is happening, saying
>> that 'Well, that's just how things are' isn't likely to be more
>> compelling. You are still the one who made the stuff up. 
>
>But in a prepared scenario there is the sense that the characters are
>in an environment that existed before they were there, and that they
>can't change things just by being unhappy about it. In order to be 
>rewarded, they have to do the right things at the right times. 

	Well, if you're improvising correctly, the environment will still seem
to exist before they got there, and they still have to react well. (I've
killed characters who simply made the wrong choice. I've attempted to
allow chance saves, but it's never worked. The dice always seem to
reinforce the situation... heh :) Again, this assumes things go badly.

>Which would be more rewarding to players -- finding something because
>they convinced the GM there should be something there -- or -- finding 
>something because there was something there and they figured out where
>is was? 

	Again, a badly run improv game will be like that, but in a properly run
improv game player bitching won't improve events. Besides, in my
experience, players usually get into the game and stop questioning
things. If they do question things, the game will generally go poorly in
any case.

>Good summary. Prep scenarios can be too narrow, but I'd argue that it's
>easier to make a prep campaign flexible than it would be to make an 
>improv campaign organized.

	Perhaps you're right. Again, I think making a skeleton is enough. As
long as a general flow is created, improv is enough for the rest.

-Me
[Pooh Bear incarnate.]
<B1 c+ f+ w g+ k+ s+ r- e+ p>
From: seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Music & Roleplaying
Date: 14 Aug 92 11:56:49 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
Originator: seawasp@pmax1.cis.pitt.edu


	On the subject of music for RPGs...

	I've often seen the Orff piece "Carmina Burana" mentioned. I've 
sometimes seen people claim that it was the actual music used in the
_Conan_ movies.

	Well, I just picked it up (tough to pass up a $5 CD) and while parts
of it are really good (I don't regret the purchase), I hear virtually NO
SIMILARITY to Conan. In fact, the movie it most reminds me of is Young
Sherlock Holmes -- the Rami-Tep ritual song.

	Have people been mixing up the music? Is there some other piece of
music out there that DOES sound like Conan? I'd dearly like to have some
such music on CD, since my tape copy is virtually dead...


                                 Sea Wasp
                                   /^\
                                   ;;;
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: cscott+@CS.CMU.EDU (Curtis Scott)
Subject: Re: Diceless or Senseless?
Organization: Carnegie Mellon University
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 16:39:35 GMT

In article <batemanc.714065783@p4.cs.man.ac.uk>, eeb1@ellis.uchicago.edu (e elizabeth bartley) muses:
|> 
|> >>Why is it better because you know when and who it is going to happen to?
|> 
|> >It isn't always.  It can be, though....  One of my characters in an
|> >Amber game (Llarana, Llewella's daughter, raised mostly in Rebma) has
|> >ten points of Good Stuff, which is what we decided the practical
|> >maximum was.  She's always been lucky, and it's fun playing with the
|> >ways that affects her personality.  (She *tries* not to rely on luck,
|> >but since she's always had luck it's really rather difficult to do so;
|> >she has to learn to do so based entirely on other people's
|> >experience.)
|> 
|> >Hm.  Well, you never know quite in what *way* you're going to be
|> >lucky....  And it's fun to have the breaks go your way regardless on
|> >how much you know.  If that doesn't make sense to you, then take my
|> >word for it: it's fun at least for some people to see their lucky
|> >characters be lucky.

Just as an observation: there are a series of fantasy novels called
the King's Tramp series in which the hero is a character who knows that
if he keeps moving, everything will work out. So whenever he doesn't
know what to do, he just travels, and his nature assures him of being in
the right place at the right time. And he DEPENDS on it.

Curtis
From: u9035281@cs.uow.edu.au (Paul John Davis)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: <---CP2020 info for you.
Date: 21 Aug 92 01:07:20 GMT
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University, Australia

This is to make up for posting that survey on computers here.


	Here is the list of information that I have mailed out to people
who have requested it. If you do not have any of them, please Email me and
I will send it to you.
	If you have any questions, just ask.

	File One:	Droids	ED209 (*)  Apexs
			NPC's   Icepick [writer of updates] Cat
			Gangs   Zylons Leather Goddesses
			Rules	New Hit Locations with new armour.
			Equipment	New misc. equipment
			Templates	NPC/PC Gang

	Update v1:	Equipment	Cyberware
	Update v2:	Equipment	Combat equipment [weapons]
	Update v3:	Equipment	Heckler & Koch new releases(file one)
	Update v4:	Equipment	Heckler & Koch new releases(file two)
	Update v5:	Gangs		Valkyries  Heroes for Hire
	Update v6:	NPC		Frank Castle aka PUNISHER (*)
	Update v7:      Equipment	CADS
	Update v8:	Atmosphere	Quotes
	Update v9:	New Rules	Shadowrun magic conversion(no spells)

* these are copywrite by another company, see files for details.

NOTE: these files are mine, so do not publish without written(Email)
permission.


	"They came.    They saw.
	 They really screwed things up." - FINN       2000AD


-- 
   	Paul Davis, [RENEGADE]	u9035281@wraith.cs.uow.edu.au
	University of Wollongong Simulation Games Secretary
	"Of course I'm Psycho - I'm a SOLO"
From: sl9b4@cc.usu.edu (Deep Six)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Speaking of ambushes II
Date: 15 Aug 92 01:07:50 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

Ambuses have been a hot topic in my campaign lately, both for the GM
and the players.

The players are trying to build a better mousetrap, so to speak, by
designing the ultimate ambush. They have tried those commonly used 
by the military, but now they want an SOP for an ambush which is 
tailor made from the skills in their party. But in trying to improve
their operation, they have become split on how to proceed. In the 
party, there is a spectrum of opinion.

On one side is the range freak. He has a custom-built sniper rifle
with a mondo range and great damage, but a pretty low rate of fire. 
He gets his jollies by picking off the enemy from a great distance,
hopefully before they can find him and get in range to return fire
(sometimes it's close). 

In the middle, there is an assortment of characters, some with shorter
ranging weapons, some with moderately long range weapons, and some who
are still experimenting with what they like best.

On the other side is a player who doesn't have short range weapons, but
he likes to wait (literally) until he can see the whites of the bad 
guys' eyes. His philosophy is that if he can get up close and personal, 
they can't hop behind cover, sneak away and counter attack. He also 
likes working with as few minuses as possible. He wants all the bad 
guys right where he can see them, and he wants the best chance possible,
even if it means more vulnerability.

I've suggested a mix, where the PCs use both close range and distant 
range weapons to ambush, but they can't agree on which is more important.
I'm not necassarily looking for a discussion on the merits of close
range or long range combat, I'm more looking for examples from other 
campaigns of ambushes that worked well, backfired, etc., from both players
and GMs.

Okay,
+  Chadd  L.  VanZanten   SL9B4@CC.USU.EDU  +
+  ``You know,  I thought this was a good   +
+  idea but this is one weird mama-jama.''  +
+                    -- TV's Frank, MST3K   +
From: sl9b4@cc.usu.edu (Deep Six)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Improvisation!
Date: 19 Aug 92 22:15:15 GMT
Article-I.D.: cc.1992Aug19.161515.58272
Organization: Utah State University

In article <Bt6tur.34D.1@cs.cmu.edu>, cscott+@CS.CMU.EDU 
 (Curtis Scott) writes:
> In article <1992Aug17.144247.58212@cc.usu.edu>, sl9b4@cc.usu.edu (Deep Six) writes:
> |> In article <Bt3Dt6.BEL@acsu.buffalo.edu>, 
> |>  swann@acsu.buffalo.edu (Stephen Swann) writes:

> As a long-time improvisational referee, I have a point to make here. 
> You are implying that the players' participation in creating the story
> is somehow a bad thing (although I will grant that you have not said that
> explicitly). I happen to think that it's a very good thing, and in fact
> a specific advantage of the improvisational style of refereeing.

I hope you have followed the rest of the thread, cuz I'm going to say 
something that I said in the other posts. Remember the example of the 
floorboards? The players find the gem BECAUSE they search, not because
the gem was there to be found. That is not how it works in reality. So 
in that way, yes, I am saying player impact on the scenario is bad.

> Re props: I game in my office at home. It is literally filled with boxes
> and goofy stuff of all types---much like Ray Bradbury's office from
> Ray Bradbury Theater. Thus, I can always assemble props quickly.
> Scrolls, etc. with specific writing are a little tough, but if my
> players find a little lead statue of Ptah (for example), I just whip
> it down from the shelf.

If I understand this part right, you are saying props can be improvised
too. Is that right? If that is your point, yours is clearly a unique 
situation, not everyone can do this. In general, props require prep.

Okay,
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Chadd VanZanten SL9B4@CC.USU.EDU  ``You know, I thought this was a
good idea but this is one weird mama-jama.''  -- TV's Frank, MST3K
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: jnoyes@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (James E Noyes)
Subject: Dangerous Journeys Questions
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 20:41:19 GMT

I have been wondering about a couple things in this game.  One of the
mechanical aspects I was wondering about is this.  This is just an
example and if you can answer my questions, you will know how to apply
it generally...

If I was an alchemist, would the Heka that my other Heka-generating
KS Areas produce only be good on my Alchemy castings or do I also
get the castings for Divination, Dweomer and Magick and the other
Heka Areas as well...If this is the case, then alot of the castings
will be available to anyone who has the Heka skills.

Also, can ANYONE get Heka skills and cast spells.  I have a character
that is a thief and he chose Necromancy, does this mean that he can
cast Necromantic cstings and anything else that he chooses with
KS areas?  If you can help answer these questions I would really appreciate
it.  Please give page references when applicable.  I am trying to figure this 
system out.

Also, can anyone give an accurate date for the release of THE EPIC OF AERTH 
book.  there isnt a hobby store locally tht can give me any information.  They
all say the same thing "No idea"

Thank you, Jamie
From: swann@acsu.buffalo.edu (Stephen Swann)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Music & Roleplaying
Date: 15 Aug 92 18:32:40 GMT
Organization: UB

In article <4738@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp) writes:
>	I've often seen the Orff piece "Carmina Burana" mentioned. I've 
>sometimes seen people claim that it was the actual music used in the
>_Conan_ movies.

I don't know what music was used in _Conan_ (been a long time since I
saw the original), but I think I would have remembered if it was
_Carmina Burana_.

Anyway, _Carmina Burana_ *was* definitely used in the film _Excaliber_.
Maybe somebody just got confused.

-- 
Steve Swann                 |    Speak to me in many voices; make
swann@acsu.buffalo.edu      |      them all sound like one...  -BOC
From: holmes@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Krishgan)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Shadowrun Astral Adepts
Date: 20 Aug 92 16:33:41 GMT
Organization: the Night Crafters Associated Press

Concerning Lester Wards' (Wordmans) comments on Astral Adepts-

->>[Ok Lester, here we go again....   ;-0  ]<<
    -Reflex

  1.  The Astral Adept that I suggested is FAR different from a Shamanic
    Adept in two (2) primary ways.

    a.  Shamanic Adepts can use their spells (although limited in
        classification) in the physical world.
    b.  A Shamanic Adept can conjure a spirit, whereas the Astral Adept
	that I suggested cannot.

  2.  The total reaction bonus for the Astral Adept is 12 in the case that
    you listed (Grade 2 mage with Reaction of 4).  Oh yeah, btw, the Astral
    Reaction is -NOT- the reaction of the caster, as the Reaction attribute
    is the average of quickness and intelligence, which is JUST intelligence
    in the Astral.

  3.  Your "AA that is wicked fast in the Astral" is not.

  4.  Astral Combat in the Astral is Sorcery skill, Armed Combat (with a
    -bonded- Weapon Foci), Conjuring (Spirits only), Enchanting (against
    Foci only) are the only options.  I suppose you could Unarmed Combat,
    but the damage would be even worse than Sorcery skill (maybe).  Something
    like (Charisma)M1 Stun vs. (Skill)L1 Damage.  Unarmed normally works
    only for Mundanes, and that is against Manifesting spirits/mages/things
    only.

  5.  But, we are differing again...    ;-P  ]<<
     -Reflex
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Axly)
Subject: Re: SRun: Mag 3 Cyber Eyes in Combat
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 23:05:16 GMT

ward1@husc8.harvard.edu (Lester Ward) writes:

>josecuer@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Aaron Smith) writes:

>>work as scopes.  If you *really* think that the mag eyes unbalance the game then don't just rule that they don't work that way, there is no logic in that.

>I think there is a .lot. of "logic in that".  Scopes help because they are
>mounted on the gun and work like sights.  With op mag you have no connection
>to the barrel of the gun at all.  If you're smartlinked, the dot's already
>on the target, your not gonna get it any better.

If you can see the target better, like as if it were in front of you, it's
easier to hit. I'd say a full sized image of the person vice the reduced 
size you see at a large distance just might be helpful.

Axly
 
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: chem7l@jane.uh.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: BTECH Novels
Date: 19 Aug 92 21:53:00 GMT
Organization: University of Houston
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

I've noticed that FASA has started numbering their latest BattleTech novels as
one series, but I know there were several BattleTech novels published before the
new series began.  If anyone knows the names of any or all of these earlier
novels, and where to get them, please mail me.

Thanks in advance,

Jim Corbit
Chem7l@Jetson.uh.edu
From: dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Axly)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: BTECH Novels
Date: 20 Aug 92 16:30:14 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

chem7l@jane.uh.edu writes:

>I've noticed that FASA has started numbering their latest BattleTech novels as
>one series, but I know there were several BattleTech novels published before the
>new series began.  If anyone knows the names of any or all of these earlier
>novels, and where to get them, please mail me.

They just republished "Decision at Thunder Rift" btw.

Decision at Thunder Rift
Mercenary's Star
The Price of Glory (or something like that)

Wolves on the Border

The Heir of the dragon (or somethign like that)

Those are the one I remember.

Axly
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: rjgb@apmaths.uwo.ca (Richard Brooks)
Subject: Test of Posting Ability
Organization: Applied Mathematics, U.W.O
Distribution: all
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 18:47:55 GMT
Summary: test
Keywords: test

This is a test and you should'nt waste your time reading it.
From: bell@cassatt.cs.unc.edu (Andrew Bell)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Improvisation!
Date: 18 Aug 92 20:47:48 GMT
Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

In article <Bt6tur.34D.1@cs.cmu.edu> cscott+@CS.CMU.EDU (Curtis Scott) writes:
>In article <1992Aug17.144247.58212@cc.usu.edu>, sl9b4@cc.usu.edu (Deep Six) writes:
>|> No, it's more than just time, it's the impact the players are having on
>|> the game.

>As a long-time improvisational referee, I have a point to make here. 
>You are implying that the players' participation in creating the story
>is somehow a bad thing (although I will grant that you have not said that
>explicitly). I happen to think that it's a very good thing, and in fact
>a specific advantage of the improvisational style of refereeing.

It's good in some ways, bad in others.  If I as a player feel that it
doesn't matter what I do, then I tend to get less involved (and be less
interested) in the game.  It's true when the party is too big, and it's
true when the GM "helps me along" by modifying his improvisation.

>My players were wandering in a classical "dungeon" environment,
>and wandered into a small maze. It took an hour of play time for them to
>find their way through, with me giving them which way they could go, and
>them constantly making wrong turns. It was depressing.

I don't think anyone is arguing that you shouldn't ever fudge -- the
occasional helping hand of lady luck or "after an hour of wandering
around the maze, you finally find an exit" is unlikely to upset anyone.

>...I had the mindset that as GM I could
>not affect things except by placing them in advance. So the players had a
>bad time.

It sounds like the mindset is the problem, not preparation per se.

Anyway, let me throw my 2 cents in.  As a player,  I'd like to have most
of the overriding plot(s) worked out to some reasonable level of detail,
so the challenge of effectively sorting through the plot is there.  On
the other hand,  I certainly don't mind improvisation of the smaller
details,  and can't expect a GM to think of everything, so a certain
amount of improv is a necessity, and I'm perfectly happy with a GM who
improvises subplots and encounters.

Gotta run or I'd say more.

   -Andrew Bell
bell@cs.unc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: pmwg1641@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Peter M. White)
Subject: Re: Shadowrun Astral Adepts-
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 17:54:57 GMT

ward1@husc8.harvard.edu (Lester Ward) writes:

>ratinox@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Richard Pieri/Stainless Steel Rat) writes:
>>Combat as your Astral Combat Skill, the Astral Defense Pool only works
>>against other Unarmed Combat; it gives you diddly-squat against spirits or
>>spells. [I interpret it this way from the example on page 66 of the
>>Grimoire: if you use Conjuring as your Combat Skill, you only get your
>>Defense Pool against spirits.]

>I completely disagree with this interpretation.  The reason you can use
>Conjuring as a .combat. skill to attack spirits is that you know a lot about
>spirits.  If you knew a lot about .combat. (and most magicians don't) then
>you'd just use that knowledge to attack anything.  In other words, I believe
>it means Conjuring will work against Spirits (because Conjuring is knowledge)
>of spirits), Sorcery will work against spells and other astral things (because
>sorcery is the ability to manipulate astral space), but combat skill will
>work against anything (because combat is the knowlegde of doing damage).

>>--RAt

>Wordman

My interpretation is that you can *always* use Unarmed/Armed Combat
*or* Sorcery skill in Astral Space.  Typically it is a moot point.
A mage or shaman is unlikely to have a higher effective combat skill
than their Sorcery unless they have an awesome weapon focus.  The
issue of Conjuring skill covers the unusual case where one is fighting
a Spirit and has a high Conjuring (and low everything else).  Very
unlikely to happen to a PC, but might happen to an exotic NPC.  However,
a PA will undoubtedly use their favorite combat skill rather than
embarass themselves by attacking with Sorcery.

The SR astral combat seems pretty loopy to me.  My gaming circle
dispensed with the Astral Pool or allowing attacks with Sorcery
altogether.  We only use a combat skill.  The Magic Pool can be
used as a supplementary defense pool, but we handle combat slightly
differently.  Although I could see that it would make sense to
allow attacks against spells with Sorcery and attacks against
spirits with Conjuring.


--Peter


______________________________________________________________________________
						|
     "Guards!  Let me draw their fire!"		|	p-white@uiuc.edu
		   --Scapegoat,_Marshal Law_	|
______________________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc