HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: FUDGE FAQ
Date: 10 Jan 93 00:32:07 GMT
Reply-To: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, N.H.

FUDGE Frequently Asked Questions:
 
Q1. What is FUDGE?
==================
A1. FUDGE is a free role-playing game.  It is just a gaming "engine" -
each GM must provide the "body" of the RPG in order to make it work.  A
certain amount of customization work is necessary in order to use
FUDGE, and many things are left unstated: the GM will have to fudge a
lot.

However, it provides a simple, word-based mechanism for creating
characters and resolving actions that is very easy to use in almost any
given situation.

FUDGE stands for:
Freeform: simple, laid-back, not rules-heavy.  Customizable to taste.
Universal: usable with any genre.
Donated: it costs nothing, and may be reproduced and passed out to
         players legally.
Gaming: role-playing gaming, that is.
Engine: it's just the basic mechanism for character creation and
        development, as well as action resolution.  No world details
        are provided.

Q2. Who is the target audience?
===============================
A2. FUDGE is for experienced GMs, though it can be used with novice
players.  It's not for those who want extreme detail.  You must enjoy
making decisions on the fly in order to run FUDGE.

Q3. What genres is it for?
==========================
A3. Any.  Only playtesting will reveal if it really works for any
genre, of course.

Q4. Where can I get it?
=======================
A4. As of this date, it is not yet available by ftp because it's not
yet done.  Almost.  Still playtesting.  When it's done, it'll be
available at an FTP site, but I don't yet know when or where.  Until
then, the current, updated version is posted on rec.games.design as
needed.  I'll be posting the latest version sometime around 1/15/93.

Q5. Can I contribute?
=====================
A5. At this point, yes, you can.  I am acting as "editor" (or "filter"
if you prefer) for suggestions and feedback.  This is very subjective,
however, so don't be offended if your suggestions don't make it into
the main text.  My main criteria for including rules are simplicity and
necessity.

Fortunately, anyone can still contribute to the Addenda that is
attached to FUDGE.  This will be true, even after it is finished and
located at an ftp site.  Simply add a section to the Addenda along the
lines of: "Alternate section B3, written by Jane Doe, 2/93."  This
allows for FUDGE's constant growth, even if I lose net access someday.
The Addenda already has a few sections written by other folk.

-- 
  - Steffan O'Sullivan		         sos@oz.plymouth.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: jim@visix.com (Jim Edwards-Hewitt)
Subject: Re: New Game
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:57:32 GMT
Distribution: rec.games.design
Reply-To: jim@visix.com
	<1435@blue.cis.pitt.edu> <naam.726345426@terra.cecer.army.mil>
Organization: Visix Software Inc., Reston, VA


You can get patents on board games; I know of some people who did.  I
assume that most board-game patents are like theirs, "A patent on the
method of moving playing pieces... blah, blah, blah" or something to that
effect.  I'd heard that getting a patent was expensive (for lawyers and
patent searches), but I don't think they had huge resources (they just sell
the game mail-order, and they still have day jobs) so maybe it's not as bad
as I've heard.

	-- Jim

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Edwards-Hewitt               jim@visix.com | Life is a game where 
President, Interactive Literature Foundation   | you play yourself.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: olsen_jo@cc.uvcc.edu
Subject: Re: Artificial Intelligence for Games
Organization: Utah Valley Community College
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 21:50:07 GMT

In article <Dec30.183952.57153@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU>, hallch@CS.ColoState.EDU (christopher hall) writes:
> Hello all,
> 
>      I was wondering if anyone could point me in the direction of any
> material related to the use of artificial intelligence in computer games.
> Specifically I am searching for material that would be useful in
> controlling computer players in a role-playing game.  I am assuming that I
> will have to program the different possible actions for the computer but I
> would like to know a good and efficient way to go about making the
> computer decide which option would be the 'best'.

You can get some rather nice behaviors out of a rule based system.  First,
you define all the actions your beasties need to perform.  Second, define
a list of things they can know, such as "is there a person in front of me"
and "I am really, really hungry".  The knowlege base should be true/false
items so they are easier to compute.

Then create a list of actions.  The beastie will perform the first one where
his current state matches the required state.  The trick to make this 
useful, is that your state consists of a mask showing which of the t/f items
are important, and another variable showing the required state for a specific
action.  That way, you can do things like the following with the rules:

if(hungry AND near food AND NOT near enemy) then eat the nearest food.

This technique also works well in things like AI players for military
simulations, or anything where you have multiple non-communicating opponents.
If you're really sneaky, you can also add communicating opponents. :^)

John Olsen
olsen_jo@uvadm.uvcc.edu
From: vcwp@doc.ic.ac.uk (Vincent Chun Wai Poon)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Adventure Games Generator.
Date: 5 Jan 1993 17:16:15 -0000
Organization: Department of Computing, Imperial College, University of London, UK.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: motmot.doc.ic.ac.uk
Summary: Help on writing/designing adventure games.


I hope I have posted this to the relevanet group. Anyway I am going to do a
project on writing an adventure game generator.

To start off with, I have the problem of deciding what features I should put in
If I include too much then I don't know if I could implement it. On the other 
hand if I only have a few then the end product will look too simple.

So I am asking if u guys have any suggestions on designing such a system or if
there are ant tools/books/existing programs/ that help with this.

One requirement I want is to do a graphical generator, rather than a text-
adventure generator as I have seen a few.

So if people who have done something like that or any ideas or comments on what
features should include in an adventure ganerator, please email
	vcwp@doc.ic.ac.uk

Thanks in advance.
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: alyon@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (arthur alexander lyon)
Subject: Re: net.rpg:  world design
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 22:56:32 GMT

In article <1992Dec24.001604.6727@trl.oz.au> s.mathers@trl.oz.au writes:
>I am getting bored with talk of mechanics.  I think mechanics are of
>secondary importance when designing a RPG, and I think you would
>get a better and more consistent set of mechanics if you worried
>about them only after you have a reasonable idea of where the game
>will take place and what the world is like. (world=universe)
>
>Besides, a generic RPG game called GURPS is already been done, and is on
>the market and doing just fine thanks.
>
>I don't want to kill off the mechanics discussion, because some good
>ideas have come from it.  I just want to open another discussion on
>world design, which I think will be more interesting and yield even
>more interesting ideas.  Having said that...
>
I'm game. Mechanics are challenging and worthy pursuits, but I feel
world-design is at least as important. I have also found it true that
if world-design comes first, the themes and style therein will dictate
many mechanics. A game set in Howard's Hyborian Age should, to keep to
the spirit of the source material, rely on many different rules than
would one set in Tolkein's Middle Earth. Designing a generic or broad
system, as I have done, is problematic when it comes to this. This why
most games material is oriented around set, developed 'worlds'. All the
mechanics and visuals and tone blend for a cohesive thrill.
More on this, but suffice to say I cast my vote in favor of some
world-design and world-design mechanics (hurm) discussion.

>Here is a general outline of a world I have been tinkering with for a
>long while.  It is a fantasy world with the usual low mundane technology
>(ie: swords & crossbows etc...), but the roll high-technology has in
>our world is replaced by what is called magic.  I like the idea of magic
>being based in a lot of ways on natural talent.  ie: there are a lot 
>of OK magicians out there, and a lot of people have tinkered with
>magic, but there are only a few magicians who have achieved excellence.
>Think of it in the same vein as playing an instrument.  Say guitar.
>Lots of us have mucked about with a guitar at some stage or another,
>and a lot have given up because it was too hard, or we just didnt have
>the knack.  Then there are the few such as Jimi Hendrix...the 'wizards'
>
>
>Anyway, the centre of this world is a huge city.  I am influenced
>heavilly in this respect by Byzantium.  A large fabulous city, famous
>for its culture, high arts etc.. surrounded by not so fabulous, and
>posibly hostile territories and rival empires.
>
>I wont go any further, or nobody will read a huge post, so thats just
>a few fragments of some ideas.  


Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: glw@io.it.uswc.uswest.com (Glenn Williams)
Subject: Re: New Game
Organization: U S WEST Communications
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 19:51:57 GMT

>Well, I talked to a friend who is a patent lawyer about a patent I was trying
>to get and he said I'd be looking at $4k or so, mainly for searches and other
>lawyer fees. I am patenting a telephone device so I'm not sure of searches
>for board games etc but I think it'd be around the same general price range.

You can do the whole process yourself. There are lots of books available that will help. A lawyer is perhaps safer, but by no means required.
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: mathers@sibelius.trl.OZ.AU (Steven Mathers)
Subject: Re: net.rpg:  world design
Reply-To: s.mathers@trl.oz.au
Organization: Telecom Research Labs, Melbourne, Australia
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 22:31:47 GMT

In article <43160@sdcc12.ucsd.edu>, bkoike@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Bryce Koike) writes:
|> In article <C0GFq8.C97@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> alyon@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (arthur alexander lyon) writes:
|> 	I disagree.  A bad set of rules will make a game quite
|> unplayable.  (de-emphasis of such rules helps, but then why bother?)
|> I consider the rules almost as important as the background (if any).
|> If they don't work, if they're seriously flawed, if they choke up
|> every time I ask for a skill roll, then I'm going to seriously think

I find it hard to see any redeamable features about AD&D mechanics,
but it's awfully popular.  Sort of reminds me of IBM PC's in a way.
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: New Game
From: pjhst10+@pitt.edu (Peter   J Hill)
Date: 5 Jan 93 22:38:32 GMT
Distribution: rec.games.design
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

I have an idea for a new game.  Does anyone know if I should copyright it, or
do I have to get a patent, or what?  Thanks for your reply

pjhst10@vms.cis.pitt.edu
From: nates@ll.mit.edu ( Nate Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: Re: Mornington Crescent?
Date: 5 Jan 93 21:49:22 GMT
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory

In article <kleber.726262858@husc.harvard.edu> kleber@husc11.harvard.edu (Gwydden) writes:
>blom@husc15.harvard.edu writes:
>> > What is Mornington Crescent?
>>
>> Players take turns naming London subway stops.  The first person to name
>> Mornington Crescent wins.  Of course, you can't say it too soon or it's no
>> fun to play with you . . .

i thought that was a joke reply, but then....
>
>This is an extremely simpli[f]ied version of the game, though...
>moves are determined by a very strong aesthetic sense of what
>is a "good move"; while these aren't rules, just conventions,
>they are universally understood and a good player must work within
>them to gain any respect.  See the group alt.games.mornington.cresent
>(yes, spelled wrong) for some excellent playing.

there isnt enough traffic there to get a clue.  i have seen 1 post in
the last week or so and it wasnt about the game.

so its a very subjective interraction of people saying things to each
other and having the group as a whole decide the merit of the move?
then you say the conventions are "universally understood" - just what
do you mean?  perhaps its a sophomoric exercise to get the "insiders"
group to feel smug about themselves and chuckle at the "outsiders"?

there are legit possibilities with this sort of thing, but who knows?

- nate
From: dseal@armltd.co.uk (David Seal)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: Re: defects in abstract games
Date: 7 Jan 93 13:25:11 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: A.R.M. Ltd, Swaffham Bulbeck, Cambs, UK

In article <1993Jan6.174837.15285@midway.uchicago.edu>
kwhyte@arthur.uchicago.edu (Kevin Whyte) writes:

>In article <1993Jan6.085328.28673@risky.ecs.umass.edu> trodrigu@spock.ecs.umass.edu (Tao R or Stephen L) writes:
>  This is definitely not true.  The games which can be reduced to Nim
>(Sprouts can't, and hasn't been solved ... another good game, but the
>three lives per vertex is too arbitrary to call it perfect.) ...

I wouldn't call the "three lives per vertex rule" arbitrary, since it is the
only number of lives per vertex that leads to an interesting game. I.e. let
N-Sprouts be the same game as Sprouts, except that each vertex has N lives.
Then:

  0-Sprouts is uninteresting: it is an immediate loss for the first player.

  1-Sprouts is uninteresting: starting with N spots, the game will always
  last a total of floor(N/2) moves, ending with the spots joined in pairs.

  2-Sprouts is uninteresting: starting with N spots, the game will always
  last a total of N moves. (Outline of proof: at any stage in the game, the
  position consists of a number of chains of 1 or more spots, each with 2
  lives left, plus a number of loops of 1 or more spots, ech with 0 lives
  left. Each move either connects the two endpoints of a chain, converting
  it into a loop, or links two chains into one: i.e. each move reduces the
  number of chains by 1. The game cannot end until there are no chains left,
  since a chain can always be converted into a loop by joining its
  endpoints. So we start with N chains of length 1, lose 1 chain per move
  and must end with no chains: there are therefore N moves.)

  3-Sprouts is interesting, and is the game usually known as Sprouts.

  N-Sprouts for N=4 and above is uninteresting, since they *always* lead
  to infinite games provided there was at least one initial spot. (After a
  move, the newly created spot can always be connected to itself, so there
  is always another move available.)

David Seal
dseal@armltd.co.uk

All opinions are mine only...
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Date: Sat,  9 Jan 1993 15:42:36 -0500 
From: "Jonathan R. Ferro" <jf41+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Booklist, anyone?

claudius@zeus.calpoly.edu (King_Claudius (Chris Knight)) writes:
> Is anyone maintaining a list of books relating to abstract games?
> If not, I'd be interested in starting one...

The current list is on agora.scs.leeds.ac.uk in the file
/pub/rec.games.abstract/books.  It still has lots of blank spots and
??'s in it due to missing information so you're welcome to add to it.

-- Jon Ferro               Einsprachigkeit ist heilbar
From: dbush@csugrad.cs.vt.edu (David Bush)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: Re: Twixt - please comment
Date: 4 Jan 93 21:28:17 GMT
Organization: Virginia Tech Computer Science Dept, Blacksburg, VA

rbr@well.sf.ca.us (Bob Rossney) writes:

>The problem with Twixt, if indeed it's a problem, is that it's difficult
>if not impossible to recover from a failed gambit.  Playing Twixt feels very
>much like working out a tesuji in Go, except there's no broader strategic
>context in which to place it.  As I say, I'm not sure that it's a problem.

>Bob Rossney
>rbr@well.sf.ca.us

Certainly Twixt is a much shorter game than go, and can easily be lost by one
careless move. IMNSHO, a good game can still "keep the tension" for several
moves, and surprising resources are available even when one is at a disad-
vantage. Perhaps a way of increasing the overall depth of the game is to
increase the board size, say, to 100x100 including border rows. Anyone
interested in a game?    >:)

David "Twixtmonster" Bush
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: trodrigu@spock.ecs.umass.edu (Tao R or Stephen L)
Subject: Re: defects in abstract games
Summary: "Flawless Games?"
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 08:53:28 GMT

In my (not very sophisticated) understanding of Chess, the weaker player
can try to reach a draw by forcing the stronger player into a situation
where any departure from a repetitive sequence is a disaster.  If the
repetition were simply ruled to be illegal, the idea of what constitutes
a strong position would change.  But the rule that no captures for some
number of turns is a draw could be unchanged.  It seems to me that this
is fairly simple, and removes many draws.  Is it a bad idea for some
other reason, am I missing something, or do some people consider the
draws desirable?
 
The latest candidates for 'flawless' games seem to be Hex, Traxx and
Twixt.  These are all games involving a sequence of placed pieces, with
no moves or captures.  If I'm remembering 'Winning Ways' correctly,
these games can all be reduced to Nim or Sprouts, and can be solved
without exploring the entire game tree.  I speculate that any game which
does not have the potential of infinite duration (thus requiring the no
repeats rule or some equivalent) is in the general class of games that
can be reduced to Nim.  Does anyone know of any proofs or disproofs of
this speculation?
 
- Stephen Linhart

Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
From: bcannard@hppcb36.mentorg.com (The Human Mi-Go)
Subject: Re: defects in abstract games
Originator: bcannard@hppcb36
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1993 16:19:58 GMT
Reply-To: bob_cannard@mentorg.com
Organization: Yuggoth Interstellar Travel Inc.
Keywords: 
Followup-To: 


In article <1993Jan5.232906.9595@news.arc.nasa.gov>, nicholso@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov (Melvin H. Nicholson YBH) writes:
|> Remember that rock-paper-scissors is more complex and challenging than
|> both go and chess in it's own way, and has a "search tree" of three.

Interesting statement, but I doubt that it's defensible.

The complexity of R-P-S arises from psychology. In Go there are no perfect
players, so it is necessary to adapt strategy according to the understanding
of the other guy's personality and perceived technique.  For example, I'm
less inclined to make risky moves against someone who I believe has a
strong understanding of tesuji. Given the much greater range of effects
that psychology can bring into the game, how is R-P-S more complex or
challenging? I'm sure Chess players can make a similar case for their game.

|> Trying to justify game preference logically is a futile proposal, and we
|> can do without the psuedo-logic that comes from the attempt.

Within limits. Would you argue with the claim that Chess is objectively
better than 3x3 tic-tac-toe because the latter is well within (adult)
human capability for complete analysis, with no room for psychology?
-- 
bob_cannard@mentorg.com			"More dynamite!" - Theron Marks
From: javhar@wsinfo03.win.tue.nl (Jack v Rijswijck)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: Re: defects in abstract games
Date: 7 Jan 93 10:37:57 GMT
Reply-To: javhar@win.tue.nl

wms@ssd.intel.com (William Shubert) writes:
>desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins) writes:
>>Kevin Whyte <kwhyte@arthur.uchicago.edu> writes:

>>> This is definitely not true.  The games which can be reduced to Nim
>>> (Sprouts can't, and hasn't been solved ... another good game, but the
>>> three lives per vertex is too arbitrary to call it perfect.)

>>It doesn't seem very arbitrary to me.  It has to be greater than 2 (or
>>else the game would be pointless) and less than 4 (so that the game
>>terminates).  How many integers are there in that range?

>   Ummm...the game DOES terminate with 4 provided that with a new point on a
>line the two new lines must appear on opposite sides.  Sounds odd, but it
>works as a game.  It's called "Brussell Sprouts" (sp?) and instead of points
>crosses are used so a game goes like:

I don't quite know if you meant this as a joke or puzzle, William. If it was a
puzzle, then SPOILER FOLLOWS:




Brussels Sprouts doesn't really work as a game because it inevitably ends in
exactly  5n-2  moves, where n = the number of crosses at the start.


+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
|         Jack van Rijswijck                javhar@win.tue.nl          |
|         Eindhoven University of Technology, the Netherlands          |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
| this is a crisis. a large crisis. in fact, if you've got a moment,   |
| it's a twelve storey crisis with a magnificent entrance hall,        |
| carpeting throughout, twenty-four hour service and an enormous sign  |
| on the roof saying `this is a large crisis'.                         |
|                                            captain edmund blackadder |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: baarniy@iastate.edu (Scott A Coon)
Subject: Re: defects in abstract games
Followup-To: rec.games.abstract 
Summary: keep the chess draws
Keywords: chess, draws
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 22:34:07 GMT

In article <1993Jan8.165103.5784@ll.mit.edu> nates@ll.mit.edu (Nate S.) writes:

>i was just thinking of another mod to lower...the occurence of draws in
>chess 
[stuff deleted] 
>what if you win the game if you can promote your king to the 
>8th rank? 
[deleted]
>Many of those "book draws" when the material dwindles 
>sufficiently, are now suddenly up for grabs.
>
>- nate


    The thing is, in an unbelievable number of endgames,
the person who wins is the one who is able to sneak behind
his opponent's pawns with his King, so he can attack them from 
the rear (they can't move any faster than he can, so this is effective.)
   If you have to prevent the King from getting behind your pawns
in order to hold a drawn endgame, you obviously can't let him get
access to your back rank, which is also behind your pawns.  I'm afraid
that this quick-fix is really going to make almost no difference
whatsoever.  Sorry.

Scott
baarniy@iastate.edu
From: nates@ll.mit.edu ( Nate Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract
Subject: Re: defects in abstract games
Date: 6 Jan 93 20:47:13 GMT
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory

In article <1993Jan6.085328.28673@risky.ecs.umass.edu> trodrigu@spock.ecs.umass.edu (Tao R or Stephen L) writes:
>....[].....  If I'm remembering 'Winning Ways' correctly,
>these games can all be reduced to Nim or Sprouts, and can be solved
>without exploring the entire game tree.  I speculate that any game which
>does not have the potential of infinite duration (thus requiring the no
>repeats rule or some equivalent) is in the general class of games that
>can be reduced to Nim.  Does anyone know of any proofs or disproofs of
>this speculation?
> 
>- Stephen Linhart
>

that would be a sad thing - Twixt reduced to Nim....it might be true
though...we need one counter-example - a game that ends finitely and
cannot be reduced to solving an equivalent Nim or Sprouts problem.

- nate

wait! i know!  pentominoes....
Newsgroups: rec.games.abstract