HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: lnorton@acsu.buffalo.edu (Louis Norton)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: SF roleplaying--fave system
Date: 22 Jul 92 18:29:17 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: UB
Originator: lnorton@hydrogen.chem.buffalo.edu


In article <1992Jul22.165442.20016@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>, A@A writes:
>In article <Broy0L.CA8@acsu.buffalo.edu> lnorton@acsu.buffalo.edu (Louis  
>Norton) writes:
>>
>>In article <1992Jul20.010456.21087@midway.uchicago.edu>,  
>deb5@ellis.uchicago.edu (daniel edward brighoff) writes:
>>>
>>>	I'm interested in starting a sci-fi campaign and, not having experience
>>>with a lot of systems or the cash to make a lot of purchasing mistakes ...   
>>>Here's my background:
>>>
>>>STAR FRONTIERS:...
>>>TRAVELLER(Original): ...
>>>SRUN(i know it's c-punk; bear w/ me): ...
>>>GURPS:...
> 	
>>>Overall, i find Ars Magica, CoC, and Hero the best systems.  Whether 
>>>i'd go for hard or soft depends on what my players would want.  Though I have 
>>>no _particular_ interest in playing something w/ a Star Trek background, i 
>>>wouldn't rule it out if the system were good.  Also, what supplements or  
>>>references (system dependent of no) do y'all find most helpful?  E-mail me at 
>>>dada.uchicago.edu if y'all don't wanna eat up bandwidth.  Thanks.
>>>-- 
>>>	Daniel "Da" von Brighoff (deb5@midway.uchicago.edu)  /\
>>>	951 E. 54th Place				    /__\
>>>	Chicago, IL  60637				   /____\
>>>							  
>>
>>	Well, I think that if you're interested in a SF campaign you should
>>check out Battlelords of the 23rd Century, which is a relatively new game. 
>>It has an excellent system and original races and background. Support material 
>>is still in the production stages but based on the first book, it should be 
>>excellent. I don't know if you will find the book at this time but it might
>>be worth looking for.
>>
>>Babbling DM
>
>That reminds me of an interesting, if uneven, game called 2300AD.  I like the  
>low-powered technology ALOT, I like the way that characters will not be jetting  
>to wherever they want to go, the GM can schedule more conflicts this way,  
>without having to worry about character whim.  I bought Traveller 2300 when it  
>first came out, the combat system stunk (if you do not like severely-lethal  
>combat), and so I hijacked it all for Hero source marterial.  I've seen little  
>of the current system, though.
>
>John J Cassidy 		Cassidy@cps.msu.edu
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

	I think the BattleLords system is complete enough and comes with enough
bacjground that it doesnt have to be hijacked to any other game. In fact it has
just about the best combat system Ive ever seen.

Babling DM
From: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Generating races...
Date: 27 Jul 92 22:01:43 GMT
Reply-To: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: Department of Chemistry, UCLA

Regarding comprehensive race design, the GURPS supplement GURPS Aliens (for
SF) and GURPS Fantasy Folk (for fantasy) has what you want.  If you want
to run SF in GURPS, you probably need the Basic Book and GURPS Space (for
background, world generation, starship building, etc.).  You may want
GURPS Ultra-Tech (essentially a gadget list) as well.  There also exists
(I think) some sort of SF-oriented bestiary, a campaign setting or two,
and some other stuff that you probably don't need.

Hope this helps,
-Doug Gibson
 doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu

Neither UCLA nor the National Science Foundation has a clue what I am doing.
They just pay me to do it.

"We have to tear you to shreds because we care." - EAC
From: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Subject: Re: SF or FF (Future Fantasy)?
Reply-To: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 14:24:31 GMT

Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow) writes:
>Does anyone know of any better terms, or have some terms to propose?  Should 
>Star Wars be listed as "Future Fantasy"?

I have seen the term "Science Fantasy" for very 'soft' SF used in a number of 
places. 

>
>The following uses the definition of SF as "extrapolation of scientific
>principles or technology":
>
>Extrapolating from some measured results is science fiction.  Reading a report
>of "unexplained results" in an experiment and then writing a story where the
>characters read minds instantaneously across galactic distances or toss a car
>aside using telekinesis is not science fiction; that's writing fantasy. If you
>take a few desired psi powers and write up a consistent set of laws regarding
>a "new basic force" that explains them, and then make sure that those laws 
>apply to everything in the book/game that they should apply to, then it's SF.
>If you simply say "psi is based on a new basic force" and then add psi powers 
>to suit a storyline or game plot, then it's fantasy.

	There is a vast grey area in here which is where most SF lies. For 
most SF authors, I think, the storyline is more important than the consistency 
and rigor of the science. They will do things like postulate that fusion 
reactors become workable and dream up some likely sounding specs for the 
reactor, without showing that it would work or making new assumptions about 
nuclear theory and applying them everywhere. They will avoid glaring consis-
tency errors, but they must stop checking after a certain point unless they 
want to spend a lifetime ensuring their SF is 'valid'. 
	The typical 'fantasy' elements that I can think of include FTL drives, 
fusion reactors, high-temperature superconductors, super-strong monofilaments, 
and psionics. All of these are generally introduced as "X is based on 
currently unknown theoretical principles", but nothing else is changed 
because of that. I.E. Fusion reactors work this way, but nothing else is 
changed. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Kim                    | "All the world will be your enemy, Prince with
jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu | a Thousand Enemies. And when they catch you, 
Columbia University         | they will kill you."         - Watership Down
From: cassidy@indian.cps.msu.edu (John J Cassidy)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: HERO - increasing acceleration
Date: 27 Jul 92 21:15:04 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Michigan State University

In article <seah.712112520@sfu.ca> seah@fraser.sfu.ca (Simon Seah) writes:
>In HERO, one can buy movement, and then get non-combat multipliers.  It's
>not impossible to buy 10"x1,024.
>My question is, how do you accelerate faster?  I believe the rules state that
>acceleration per phase has a maxima of combat movement per phase.
>That means, in the above example, it would take 2 phases to reach 10" (5" acc.
>base), then another 1,024 phases for max. speed.  For a SPD 5 character, that's
>1,026 phases or about 205 turns, or 41 minutes!
>Correct the math all you want, but no flames over it, please.
>
>The point is, acceleration for high non-combat speed can be quite ridiculous.
>
>Options I have thought of :
>1) Buy SPD with limitation "for acceleration/deceleration only"
>2) Buy combat movement, with "concentrate to half DCV"
>	(poor simulation of non-combat movement)
>3) Buy Autofire with the non-combat multipliers (wierd...)
>4) Buy skill levels (but seems a little cheap? <- instinct, not thought)
>
>Any other options?
>
>Simon
>- liberal GM
>- and I HATE BENDING RULES! (personal bias against warping existing systems
>without putting a lot of thought into it first)
>

  	I think the rules stand that you can accelerate 5" for every 1" you
run.  Check the Combat section on that.  But if you say that combat movement is
the maximum then what you can do is buy movement with a -2 limitation "only to
accelerate" I guess.  Defending the -2 limitation:  All you can use this 
movement for is to increase your acceleration factor, this adds scant to the 
speed that you can accelerate anyway.

	Hey!  I just thought that if you are buying 10"x1024 then what you are
saying is that my character can run really fast when he gets going good!  So 
buy more base and less multiple or forget it

	John J Cassidy		Cassidy@indian.cps.msu.edu
	~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: johne@iti.gov.sg (Dr. John S. Eickemeyer (SE))
Subject: Re: Generating races...
Organization: Information Technology Institute, National Computer Board, Singapore.
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 05:59:53 GMT

In article <0095E35F.146EED20@abby.chem.ucla.edu> doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu writes:
>Regarding comprehensive race design, the GURPS supplement GURPS Aliens (for
>SF) and GURPS Fantasy Folk (for fantasy) has what you want.  If you want
>to run SF in GURPS, you probably need the Basic Book and GURPS Space (for
>background, world generation, starship building, etc.).  You may want
>GURPS Ultra-Tech (essentially a gadget list) as well.  There also exists
>(I think) some sort of SF-oriented bestiary, a campaign setting or two,
>and some other stuff that you probably don't need.

GURPS Uplift is even better for designing races -- it came out after 
GURPS Aliens and GURPS Fantasy Folk, took the best race design rules
from them, and added some excellent race generation material which isn't 
found in any of the other supplements.  Bundle this with the Uplift background 
(as found in the trilogy "Sundiver", "Startide Rising", and "The Uplift War" 
by Dr. David Brin, who also helped with GURPS Uplift), and you have a
book worth getting (IMHO, of course :).

- John :)

 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. John S. Eickemeyer                                          johne@iti.gov.sg
Member of Technical Staff                                          (65) 772-0406
Information Technology Institute     "He will never fail you nor forsake you..."
Singapore 0511                                                       - Deut 31:8
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: A@A
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: SF roleplaying--fave system (GURPS)
Date: 22 Jul 92 17:06:44 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Michigan State University

In article <gdfm#6n@lynx.unm.edu> lundgren@vesta.unm.edu (Chad Lundgren)  
writes:
>(Richard Pieri/Stainless Steel Rat) writes:
>>I'm partial against GURPS. People complain about number crunching in HERO,
>>I complain about complicated number crunching in GURPS.
>
>I find this hard to believe.  I've used both systems, and GURPS is 
>much easier.  With GURPS, you *know* right away whether you've made
>a roll or not; in Heros I had to consult a little chart to see if
>the roll made it.  Could you give me some examples?  I don't mind a
>few simple calculations *before* play; HERO requires you do some
>*during* play.

I don't know what you're talking about. . .and I'm not sure you do either.
In Hero, when the players know what they are doing, they already know how much  
OCV they've added through levels and maneuvers.  And there is NO hit chart.
                                                              --
I've seen GURPS combat go slower than Hero as somebody checks the maneuver,  
checks the hit location, rolls criticals, rolls again for criticals, somebody  
rolls active defence.  Both GURPS and Hero can go slower if the players don't  
know what they are doing.  And I think that the reason that you see the  
accusations levelled at these games it that nobody has take the time to get  
really fluent at say Hero.  ( I have resolved Fantasy Hero battles in the same  
time that I have ever resolved complex AD&D battles--- and I NEVER used the  
weapon speed, and bonus per weapon vs. AC rules.)
>-- 
>Chad Lundgren:  lundgren@ariel.unm.edu BITNET:	lundgren@unmb.bitnet 

John J Cassidy		Cassidy@cps.msu.edu
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: mperry@waikato.ac.nz
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Psionics/Science
Date: 31 Jul 92 11:54:00 +1200
Organization: University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

In article <1992Jul29.191916.12331@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>, cassidy@cps.msu.edu.cps.msu.edu (John J Cassidy) writes:
> In article <1992Jul28.183601.12340@cs.yale.edu> heintzelman-george@CS.YALE.EDU (George Heintzelman) writes:
>>In article <1992Jul28.164746.4299@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> cassidy@indian.cps.msu.edu (John J Cassidy) writes:
>>>In article <13742@mindlink.bc.ca> Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow) writes:

> Yes taken to this extent
> psionics do pose to make the world something other that what current
> 20th century scientists believe it to be, but 20th century science is SO
> different to what 18th or 19th century scientists expected it to be.
> Whether or not it makes it acceptable SF is something each person has to
> judge.

And 21st, 22nd century science will be SO DIFFERENT FROM 20th century science.
Don't assume that humanity won't continue to advance technology in the same
rappid manner that they have done for the last 100 years.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: joshua salter <jsalter@silver.ucs.indiana.edu>
Subject: HERO vs. GURPS
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 18:10:20 GMT


	Which is better, (and for what)? HERO or GURPS?

								-jsalter

PS, is it my imagination, or does a RIFTS Glitterboy Boom Gun do as much
damage as one full Mark III phaser-bank on the starship Enterprise?
	(40,000 SDC).
	(Excuse me, 1d4 x 10 MDC).
From: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: SF or FF (Future Fantasy)?
Date: 30 Jul 92 16:05:51 GMT
Reply-To: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Organization: Columbia University

canders@isr.harvard.edu (Carl E. Anderson) writes:
>jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim) writes:
>>	The typical 'fantasy' elements that I can think of include FTL drives, 
>>fusion reactors, high-temperature superconductors, super-strong monofilaments
>>and psionics. All of these are generally introduced as "X is based on 
>>currently unknown theoretical principles", but nothing else is changed 
>>because of that. I.E. Fusion reactors work this way, but nothing else is 
>>changed. 
>
>	Well and good, but fusion reactors and high-temperature conductors
>are somewhat closer to reality than things like psionics (which isn't to
>say that they can be extrapolated from modern science, just that they're
>more likely to appear soon).

	On what basis do you judge this, if not from modern science? Perhaps 
they are easier to imagine than the others, but that does not mean that they 
are more likely to appear soon. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Kim                    | "All the world will be your enemy, Prince with
jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu | a Thousand Enemies. And if they catch you, 
Columbia University         | they will kill you."       - Watership Down
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: dzik@access.digex.com (Joseph Dzikiewicz)
Subject: Re: Psionics
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 22:37:09 GMT

In article <13710@mindlink.bc.ca> Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow) writes:
>
>Is psionics part of the SF genre, or is it mistakenly considered SF rather than
>fantasy by people who have little or no science knowledge?

No more so than FTL drive, which is *impossible* by current science
knowledge.  As far as I know, there is no proof that psionics is impossible,
as there is for FTL drive (ie, relativity forbids it).  Therefore, I would
think that the inclusion of psionics in SF is more defensible then the
inclusion of FTL drive.

And, BTW, I think that psionics is in enough work that is unarguably
science fiction that I'm willing to accept it as part of the genre.  
Some examples: Heinlein's future history, Niven's known space, 
Asimov's robot stories and foundation series, McCaffrey's dragon 
books (yes, they are SF: the first part of _Dragonflight_ first 
appeared in Analog, and a truer home for hard SF doesn't exist).

Of course, it isn't in ALL SF, but then no one said you have to use
psionics!

Joe Dzikiewicz
dzik@access.digex.com
From: wwallace@ucrengr.ucr.edu (wayne wallace)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: HERO - increasing acceleration
Date: 26 Jul 92 04:29:20 GMT
Organization: University of California, Riverside

In article <seah.712112520@sfu.ca> seah@fraser.sfu.ca (Simon Seah) writes:
>In HERO, one can buy movement, and then get non-combat multipliers.  It's
>not impossible to buy 10"x1,024.
>My question is, how do you accelerate faster?  I believe the rules state that
>Any other options?

Ok, from what the rules say, your acceleration never gets any better, but
you can always accelerate your combat movement per phase, with a minimum of
1" per 5" acceleration, so:

SPD 5 char, w/ 10" movement with 1024 NCM.
Velocity per phase * SPD = inches per turn.
MAX SPEED= 10,240"
Acceleration per minute = (50" * 5 = 250")
10240/250=41 minutes.

Yuck! However: A quick look at page 195 of Champs 4th ed. shows that
an F-15 Eagle has 110" (One hundred and ten) combat flight with a x8 NCM.

that costs.... 110*2=220 WOW! Something tells me fast acceleration is more
affordable for vehicles than characters. Buying an F-15's combat flight
then costs 220/5=44 pts. Wow. Speed is cheap for vehicles only. And it's
SPD 5 and DEX 25 on top of that. Wow.

110" combat flight? Wow. If Atra had that, he could half-move and shoot,
and with his range skill levels, he'd be invulnerable to anyone but Marksman.

If you really need the acceleration, combat flight, only for acceleration,
is more legal than a 5pt acceleration multiple which isn't even in the rules.
Hmm.... Maybe a -1/2 or -1/4 limitation? I can't see a -1 lim because that's
too cheap, and getting somewhere fast IS an advantage.

Wayne
-- 
*    // Only /\      |Lord Zar,Commander Of All He Surveys|Stay Alert! Trust  *
*\\ //      /--\MIGA |(and hater of spaces near commas.)  |No One! Keep--AHHHH*
* \X/ Internet: atra@ucru1.ucr.edu wwallace@ucrmath.ucr.edu GEnie:W.WALLACE9  *
* I'm a Purple Hearts & Yellow Moons kinda guy; I'm vay-teeng for you, dahlink*
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: joshua salter <jsalter@silver.ucs.indiana.edu>
Subject: Arguing about opinions...
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 19:49:40 GMT


	It is kind of immature to argue about opinions, perhaps in this group
we should be un-critical of others opinions. Put out the flames...

								-jsalter

				"Cogito, Ergo Sum." -Descartes
				<If you don't know this by now, learn Latin.>
From: canders@isr.harvard.edu (Carl E. Anderson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: SF or FF (Future Fantasy)?
Date: 28 Jul 92 18:34:45 GMT
Organization: Harvard University, Cambridge, MA

In article <1992Jul28.142431.10732@news.columbia.edu> jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim) writes:
>	The typical 'fantasy' elements that I can think of include FTL drives, 
>fusion reactors, high-temperature superconductors, super-strong monofilaments, 
>and psionics. All of these are generally introduced as "X is based on 
>currently unknown theoretical principles", but nothing else is changed 
>because of that. I.E. Fusion reactors work this way, but nothing else is 
>changed. 

	Well and good, but fusion reactors and high-temperature conductors
are somewhat closer to reality than things like psionics (which isn't to
say that they can be extrapolated from modern science, just that they're
more likely to appear soon).

Cheers,
Carl

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl Edlund Anderson	            	"Hefi ek ok aldri sva reitt vapn
canders@isr.harvard.edu			at manni at eigi hafi vidh kommit."
OR
anderso2@husc.harvard.edu			- Skarphedhinn Njalsson 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: bdianton@cs.ulowell.edu (Brian Diantonio)
Subject: *** Help!?! ***
 The group I am suggesting would have (and not limited to)
Originator: bdianton@cs.ulowell.edu
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Lowell Computer Science
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 16:29:21 GMT


(a) Monster Beastiary
This would be a section posted weekly.  It would consist of new monsters's
decriptions, info (THAC0, AC, etc.), and ways to fit these into your
campaign.  Anyone could add thier own ideas and they would be added
to this list.  DM's and players  could both use this.
(b) New Spells list
This would be like the Beastiary in the way that it would be posted weekly.
Anyone could send thier own spells, be it priest or wizard, to this.
Feel free to NAME your spell EXAMPLE: Higler's Happy Shoes.  Spell
Throwers from almost anywhere could use more spells to cast and
baffle thier friends.  Every week the "Spells Books" would be judged
and the top spell would be listed (vote via e-mail).
(c) New Equipment
How many people look through thier equipment list and think
same old stuff.  Brighten your horizens with new equipment and armors.
They could be magical or non-magical.  Weapons, armor, misc.
just post like WEAP:Double Mace, ARM: Spike Shield, etc.  They 
would be compiled into one large collection weekly.
(d) Adds
Anyone that is looking for players or DMs in thier area could advertise.
Contact each other through e-mail and maybe be playing soon.

Anyones ideas on names for the sections (Grepkor's Shoppe, etc.), 
HELP running one of the sections (Name it yourself), or suggestions
on either the group in general, or new sections of the group would
be accepted openly.  Any discussions of problems can be ironed out
with me.

Mark DiAntonio
bdianton@cs.ulowell.edu

Keywords:
From: Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Psionics
Date: 31 Jul 92 03:38:54 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

dzik@access.digex.com (Joseph Dzikiewicz) writes:

> Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow) writes:
> 
>+ Is psionics part of the SF genre, or is it mistakenly considered SF rather
>+ than fantasy by people who have little or no science knowledge?
> 
> No more so than FTL drive, which is *impossible* by current science
> knowledge. As far as I know, there is no proof that psionics is impossible,
> as there is for FTL drive (ie, relativity forbids it).  Therefore, I would
> think that the inclusion of psionics in SF is more defensible then the
> inclusion of FTL drive.

Neither psionics nor FTL travel is definitely SF or definitely not SF.  If
you've been reading the prior messages you'd see that either element can be SF
or not SF; it depends on how they're handled.

> And, BTW, I think that psionics is in enough work that is unarguably science
> fiction that I'm willing to accept it as part of the genre.

Most SF characters wear clothes, but that doesn't make a fashion catalogue SF.
:)    If a writer postulated a new type of clothing (smart cloth) and
extrapolated its effects on the fashion industry, that would be SF.

If you write a SF story--possibly built on FTL travel--and give the character
psionics just to get him out of a tight plot situation, then the story is SF
despite the psionics element.  The previous sentence is just as valid if you
switch the positions of "FTL travel" and "psionic".

--

Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy