HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Jim Ogle (Ks. Jim) <jogle@aoc.nrao.edu>
Subject: Re: Atheism as a defense
X-Gated-By: The Black Marble Wombat@morticia.cnns.unt.edu
X-Gated-From: torg mailing list
Organization: University of North Texas
X-Gatemail-Version: 1.0b
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 14:55:20 GMT

Colin writes (about Faith(Atheist)):

> Not quite...  The atheist uses his adds to increase the DN of ALL
> miracles he can witness in some way.  I hink the rulebook actually
> allows for selective use of this ability, but that's ridiculous.
> If he is going to snafu a miracle, he gets all of them.  The reason
> I add the '[that] he can witness' part is simple: if he can't
> observe it, he doesn't know that something miraculous is going on,
> and he can't 'disbelieve' it.  However, beneficial miracles can
> still be used on him (the atheist), like it or not, by applying the
> normal rules for a contest of faiths.

Something that Dave Oakes and I have been playing with is a variation
of Faith (Atheist) that would deny the existence of all supernatural
effects, not just miracles.  We've been calling it Faith (Science) and
the best 'real-world' example we have come up with is The Amazing
Randi; his presence is enough to prevent any magical, psychic, or
miraculous effect from happening if it is something that cannot be
explained scientifically.  

If you've seen the Palladium game 'Beyond the Supernatural' they've
got a type of psychic known as the Anti-Psychic or something similar
to that, whose sole psychic ability is the power to negate all other
psychic powers because he doesn't believe in them; this is basically
the same concept.

Granted, such a thing may be a bit too much for a single Faith skill
(negate magic, miracles, and psi abilities?) so perhaps there would be
'miracles' associated with Faith (Science), such as Negate Psionics or
Disbelieve Magic; the character with Faith (Science) wouldn't be
performing miracles per se, just "marshalling his disbelief".  The
verbal component might be something like "Oh get real, you don't
honestly expect me to believe that you're going to create a blazing
ball of fire and make it fly through the air, do you?"

One problem would be in defining how far to take the power.  Take it
too far and you start impinging on the Reality skill.  For example,
disbelieving a dragon can fly is fine, but making a mechanics attempt
to prevent such an occurance is denying the dragon its reality; a P-
rated person with Faith (Science) could be going around creating
reality storms left and right if he were to visit any of the invading
realms except possibly Nippon Tech.





Kansas Jim (jogle@nrao.edu)
Newsgroups: alt.games.torg
From: burt@ptltd.com (Burton Choinski)
Subject: Re: A Sean Sort Of Question (WWII rifle - panzerbusche)
X-Gated-By: The Black Marble Wombat@morticia.cnns.unt.edu
X-Gated-From: torg mailing list
Organization: University of North Texas
X-Gatemail-Version: 1.0b
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 18:44:47 GMT

Sean, any other gun designs you have already done and online?  Good stuff.
(and I'm still waiting to see your vehicle stuff. *drool* *slobber* :)
   -- Burton
Newsgroups: alt.games.torg
From: bhv@areaplg2.corp.mot.com (Bronis Vidugiris)
Subject: Re: Cyberpsychosis spell
X-Gated-By: The Black Marble Wombat@morticia.cnns.unt.edu
X-Gated-From: torg mailing list
Organization: University of North Texas
X-Gatemail-Version: 1.0b
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 15:51:03 GMT

> But if you don't use an essence for the mechanism, then the spell is 
> really an illusion.  So wouldn't the illusionary altered dark emotions, 
> revert back to their true state at the end of the durration?  In effect, 
> you've created the illusion that the target is under mental stress; when 
> the spell ends, the illusion should too.
> 
> If you had an essence (Life or Death I would suppose) as the mechanism, 
> then you'd actually be altering the targets mental state for real.

I finally looked up 'charm person' in Pixauds.  It's a conjuration, not an
alteration, so that explains it being illusory (which I recalled correctly).
(It creates the feelings, rather than alters them).

I believe that altering a person's mental state would be classified as a
modification, which doesn't require an essence.  You don't need an essence
to boost a person's strength, for example - if the result is less than
either the normal human/folk cosm  maximum and/or a maximum +6 power push of
the person's starting strength.   Turning a human into a different human
is a modification and not a transformation - turning a human into a dwarf
would be a transformation (requiring an essence) even though they are both
folk.  [This is all from PPG.]  Making a human stronger than any 'real' human
is also a transformation.

So I'd say that the c-psychosis spell is legal and NOT illusory as described.

A lot of strangeness in the published spells comes about because they were
designed before the system was finalized.  That's why you'll see some spells
listed as illusory in PPG (like charm person) but not in the basic Torg book
- the rules requiring conjurations to be illusions were not established yet
at the time the basic book was written.

Organization: Junior, Philosophy, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: alt.games.torg
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 23:58:15 -0400 
From: Andrew David Weiland <aw1s+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Faith(Science)

>Faith(Science) is a belief in a specific world view like any other faith,
>the basic tennents of which are that everything can be explained,
>and that there are certain immutable rules that govern the world around >us.
>this level of reasoning requires a social of 10 to function without contra
>(the minimum level to support this level of interconnectedness)

I don't know about the social limit.  I think that its possible to have
faith in technology at a lower axiom level; in fact, its practically
necessary.  A social axiom of 10 is the point where scientific
principles can be taught from generation to generation.

>the main thrust of the miracles of Faith(Science) are
>(since Science is more focused than Atheism, it has miracles
> rather than a blanket penalty.  Science also has the choice 
> to ignore the impossible, and just let it happen - Atheism never does)

It could work, and it could definitely work in the Star Sphere.

Newsgroups: alt.games.torg
From: "Terence A. Wynne" <taw8h@uva.pcmail.Virginia.EDU>
Subject: Torg PDF's
X-Gated-By: The Black Marble Wombat@morticia.cnns.unt.edu
X-Gated-From: torg mailing list
Organization: University of North Texas
X-Gatemail-Version: 1.0b
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 17:41:03 GMT

Torg PDF's 

Assumes skilled and unstymied roller


 Range       Prob./Digit in Range        Cumulative Prob. to Top of Range
 -----       --------------------        --------------------------------
  1-9                5%                                 45%
 11-19               5.25%                              92.25%
 21-29               0.5125%                            96.8625%
 31-39               0.27563%                           99.34317%
 41-49               0.05253%                           99.81594%
 51-59               0.01641%                           99.96363%

Probability of a "Natural" Glory Result:  0.03637%

Expectation Bonus #:  -0.8425
 
There is never time to do it right, but there is always time to do it
over. -- Murphy

Terence Wynne
taw8h@uva.pcmail.Virginia.EDU 

Newsgroups: alt.games.torg
From: "James H. Kiley" <jkiley@andy.bgsu.edu>
Subject: Re: Atheism
X-Gated-By: The Black Marble Wombat@morticia.cnns.unt.edu
X-Gated-From: torg mailing list
Organization: University of North Texas
X-Gatemail-Version: 1.0b
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 15:43:31 GMT



On xxx, 22 Jul 1992, Colin J. Wynne wrote:

> Actually, Atheism, as a belief, probably requires a fairly-high
> social axiom.  Low social axioms, I think, imply superstitious
> behaviour (i.e., belief in the supernatural), and usually one of the
> first big social organisations to develop is religious in origin.
> 
> Philosophical Atheism in our own world didn't hit it big until the
> 19th and 20th centuries (God is dead and whatnot).  Just glancing
> over the Axiom levels of the existing cosms, I'd be inclined to
> Social 18 is needed to support Atheism, perhaps even 19.
> 
> Whaddya think?
> 

Hoo boy, That's a good one.  Are the ideas of an individual limited by the
local social axiom?
My immediate guess is, unfortunately, yes, but not absolutely.  You can't 
conceive of things too far ahead, social-axiom-wise, but I don't think
it'd be a problem for an individual to have thoughts a few points above
his axiom, remembering that the axiom itself limits what society as a
whole can do, not a few members.  Think about Marxism, back when it was first
concocted.  Society as a whole didn't go along with it, though someone had
conceived of it...


Next question, are spiritual foo limited by the social axiom?
Erp.  That would set a dangerous precedent, IMHO.  I like to see the axioms
as more independent--otherwise, um, you have to have a certain tech level for
some spells to work?  Can't say I care for that general concept.

Are there any atheist edeinos? :)

Jim Kiley, Astronomer Wannabe
jkiley@andy.bgsu.edu
The_Gaunt_Man @ TorgMUSH, coming soon :)
From: jogle@aoc.nrao.edu (Ks. Jim)
Newsgroups: alt.games.torg
Subject: Re: Yet more high-tech stuff from Japan!
Date: 24 Jul 92 18:11:47 GMT
Organization: University of North Texas
X-Gated-By: The Black Marble Wombat@morticia.cnns.unt.edu
X-Gated-From: torg mailing list
X-Gatemail-Version: 1.0b

Rick Pim replies:

> > are Jim Ogle <jogle@aoc.nrao.edu> (Ks. Jim)
> 
> >Help!  Give me something to do before I read any further!  8-)

>   okay. write up an adventure or two and post them to the list and/or
> ftp site. :-)

You're outta luck; my boss actually came up with something for me to
do.  

Now if they'd just let me go to lunch....


Kansas Jim (jogle@nrao.edu)
From: cpearce%nemesis@nemesis.acs.unt.edu (Chris Pearce)
Newsgroups: alt.games.torg
Subject: Stymied/Unskilled
Date: 24 Jul 92 16:08:37 GMT
Organization: University of North Texas
X-Gated-By: The Black Marble Wombat@morticia.cnns.unt.edu
X-Gated-From: torg mailing list
X-Gatemail-Version: 1.0b

> BTW-it would help if unskilled and stymied (esspecally styimed were a little
> 	more effective)

Well, as far as unskilled goes, we play it that when you unskill someone,
for the next round, they have NO adds (In addition to the explicitly stated
limit on open-ending). This interpretation makes sense from the name of
the condition (Unskilled), and though it isn't stated anywhere, we kinda
think that's what WEG meant. It makes UNskilled a rather effective result.

As for Stymies, we have them stick around until the next open-end, just like
normal Stymies. Again, we think this is the proper way to play them. Stymies
are good because they keep you alive/cost the opponent a Poss.
-- 
Chris Pearce -- cpearce@nemesis.acs.unt.edu
From: usenet@transfer.stratus.com (Mr. Network News)
Newsgroups: alt.games.torg
Subject: Re: Induce Cyberpsychosis
Date: 22 Jul 92 15:08:45 GMT
Reply-To: Dave_Wetzel@vos.stratus.com
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc., Marlboro, MA

In article <76318@ut-emx.uucp> gdavis@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Grant R. Davis) 
writes:

> 1)Magic 12 is not high enough to sit down and design a spell. Talk to 
your GM.

Are you saying that you the caster's Magic Axiom must be higher than 12?
I am working this through with my GM, but since we're both new to spell 
design
(no one else in our group has tried before), we thought we'd get some 
outside
opinions as well.

> 3)C-psycho checks don't happen all the time, so just casting a spell for 
one
> seems unfair. Make it an illusion (Conjuration) and the effect is a Test 
of 
> Will. If a Setback is gained, he has to make a regular check (unskilled 
and
> stymie results apply normally, and Player's call is automatic C-psycho).

Being charmed doesn't happen all the time either (actually it's very 
rare), but there's a spell to do it.  Isn't that what magic's for?  And 
the target still gets his regular spi + bonus to offset my effect + bonus. 
 Plus the difficulty is not exactly trivial, so I may not get it off at 
all.

I wanted this to supplement my current spells.  I already have Chilling 
Darkness
which effectively does a Intimidate (at effect value 22!).

--------------
Dave_Wetzel@vos.stratus.com
Newsgroups: alt.games.torg
From: bpostow@occs.cs.oberlin.edu (Brian Postow)
Subject: Re: Faith(Science)
Organization: Oberlin College Computer Science
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 06:10:46 GMT
X-Posted-From: occs.cs.oberlin.edu
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

I have a big problem with the entire concept of Fath(Science) in Torg.
In the real world, I know that it exists, I have friend who is an
extremely strong believer in it. However, in Torg there is a problem.
what I see as Faith (science) is basically saying "Tech is the only
axiom that can actually have a real effect" which is dealing more with
Reality than faith. It is also, as has been mentioned too simmilar to
extremely localized reality storms. granted nothing this local exists,
but still...

It is basically a scientist saying "what you are doing doesn't exist
in my reality" which IS a reality storm. NO other faiths do this, Most
say "My G-d ******* will punnish the unbelievers," and then the
opponent is wreathed in fire. [ie, they call down some minor form of
devine intervention] or, in the case of Atheism, they disbelieve the
existance of the source of the devine intervention. Faith(science)
doesn't do either of these. Well, it could be said that it works like
atheism, but it doesn't really in the case of miracles, it does,
however in the case of psi and magic, the holder of the faith
disbelieves the process of magic and psi, but neither of these are
based on faith so,unless you are dealing with a reality storm, your
belief either way doesn't mean anything. 

another way of looking at it is to see it from the character;s point
of views, what is an atheist doing to hurt the priest? well, he
probably isn't just screwing up is eyes and concentrating real hard.
He is probably shouting "HEY! I don't believe in all of that sh*t, you
and your non-existant g-d can't hurt me!" and the character tries to
make the priests belief waver some. 
Now, a scientist could shout at a mage a similar thing, but it would
have no effect because belief is irrelevant.

There, I THINK that was clear, it is hard to tell sometimes... B-)
--
Brian Postow :: The Pasta Knight - that noodle head in shiny armour
reachable at:
bpostow@occs.oberlin.edu
sbp2530@ocvaxa.cc.oberlin.edu		this space left unintentionally blank.
sbp2530@oberlin.bitnet.edu

Yes, I KNOW that 6*9 is 42 in base 13.
Newsgroups: alt.games.torg
From: hudson@dragon.ulowell.edu (Kevin Maurice Hudson)
Subject: Spell design and knowledges
X-Gated-By: The Black Marble Wombat@morticia.cnns.unt.edu
X-Gated-From: torg mailing list
Organization: University of North Texas
X-Gatemail-Version: 1.0b
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 18:04:35 GMT


	People have brought up the fact the it makes sense for a mage
to be required to know all the knowledges in the state path, not just
the pattern knowledge.  I believe that a mage who has studied all four
Spell skills has a working knowledge of magic, including the basics
for all knowledges.  Likewise, she should understand the interactions
of knowledges that she does have with all others.  Thus any secondary
knowledges (and they must be secondary otherwise you would be required
to know them in order to learn a spell designed by someone else) can
be subsumed by the extensive study of the pattern knowledge.


--
hudson@dragon.cpe.ulowell.edu		uhqfba@qentba.pcr.hybjryy.rqh
Kevin Hudson, Systems Manager		Xriva Uhqfba, Flfgrzf Znantre
Center for Productivity Enahncement	Pragre sbe Cebqhpgvivgl Ranuaprzrag
University of Massachusetts Lowell	Havirefvgl bs Znffnpuhfrggf Ybjryy
Newsgroups: alt.games.torg
From: oakes@jupiter.nmt.edu (David Oakes)
Subject: FTL flight spells
X-Gated-By: The Black Marble Wombat@morticia.cnns.unt.edu
X-Gated-From: torg mailing list
Organization: University of North Texas
X-Gatemail-Version: 1.0b
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 18:50:55 GMT

Colin J. Wynne(wynne.c.j@p9955.wlu.edu/wynne.c@fs.science.wlu.edu) notes:
 ! However, I'll bet you that no Ayslish mage has ever observed a limit
 ! to the speed of light, or the Theory of Relativity.  Anyone up for a
 ! FTL travel spell?

actualy, with the average mage template and a better than average roll,
the flight spell as is makes dwarves go super-sonic!
(and since it is magic, there is no wind shear or sonic boom...)

on the other hand, FTLs closest relative, Teleportation, is a real bitch
under pixauds - as anyone done better than the "dimension travel" version?

dave "if we wont do cosmology, at least we can rape the spell creation" oakes
Newsgroups: alt.games.torg
From: "Colin J. Wynne"  <WYNNE.C@fs.sciences.WLU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Approved actions, changed from Idea to be kicked around
X-Gated-By: The Black Marble Wombat@morticia.cnns.unt.edu
X-Gated-From: torg mailing list
Organization: University of North Texas
X-Gatemail-Version: 1.0b
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 18:06:46 GMT

Rick Pim <RICK@QUCDNEE.BITNET> writes:

> > Colin J. Wynne" <WYNNE.C@fs.sciences.WLU.EDU>
>
> > Yup.  Just came to that conclusion after running an adven this
> > weekend, while rereading a few sections of the rulebook.  Then, one
> > of my players and I came up with the idea of using what we HAD
> > considered an unskilled result as a setback:  no use of adds for a
> > round.
>
> i think it suggests someplace that, if you can't come up with a
> better one, a "default" sort of setback is to lose an action.
> given this, "use no adds" is a pretty wimpy kind of setback.

Not really.  The 'take no action' setback means that the bad guys
won't hurt you, but it's still just as tough to hit them.  The
'completely unskilled' setback means that they are going to be hard
pressed to hurt you, and it will also be much easier to hit them.

If your party is being attacked by half a dozen ninja who each have
DEX 12, Martial Arts 16 (effective 17 against you round-eyed
barbarians), would you rather they not be able to attack you, or that
they attack you unskilled at DEX 12 with that same DEX 12 to defend
when you go?

Granted, there may be times when the adds don't make a big difference,
like chopping on a dinosaur or something.  But against most p-rated
opponents, where skill adds are a big part of their power, then the
'completely unskilled' setback can be devastating.

CJW

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>                                         wynne.c.j@p9955.wlu.edu  >>
==  Colin J. Wynne                                  - or -          ==
<<                                      wynne.c@fs.science.wlu.edu  <<
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Newsgroups: alt.games.torg
From: bhv@areaplg2.corp.mot.com (Bronis Vidugiris)
Subject: Re: your mail
X-Gated-By: The Black Marble Wombat@morticia.cnns.unt.edu
X-Gated-From: torg mailing list
Organization: University of North Texas
X-Gatemail-Version: 1.0b
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 23:19:23 GMT

Re: my formula

> I tried this, and I don't think it works, though it is likely I made a
> math error ;-(
> 
> Let N = 21 --> n = 2
>      = 0.005125
> 
> There are 4 ways to roll a 21.
> 
> 20 + 1       with a 0.0025 probability
> 10 + 11      with a 0.0025 probability
> 10 + 10 +1   with a (0.05)^3 * 2 (for degeneracy) probability
> 
> 0.0025 + 0.0025 + 0.00025 = 0.00525

The 10+10+1 case isn't degenerate, however.  You have to roll the 1
last - if you roll the one first or second, you get 1 or 11, not 21.

This changes the last probability to .000125 (.05*.05*.05)
Then the result is .005125

The formula is baced on a recursion relation

f(n) = .05*f(n-1) + .05*f(n-2) for n>=2 and the intial conditions

f(0) = .05,
f(1) = .0525

i.e to roll a 45 you need to start with a 10 and roll a 35 [.05*f(n-1)]
or with a 20 and roll a 25 [.05*f(n-2)].

Newsgroups: alt.games.torg
From: "Colin J. Wynne"  <WYNNE.C@fs.sciences.WLU.EDU>
Subject:      Re:  Shadow Stalker
X-Gated-By: The Black Marble Wombat@morticia.cnns.unt.edu
X-Gated-From: torg mailing list
Organization: University of North Texas
X-Gatemail-Version: 1.0b
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 13:48:28 GMT

jogle@dopey.vlba.nrao.edu (Jim Ogle (Ks. Jim)) writes:

> Well, it looks like a more powerful version of the Shadow out of
> the Orrorsh SB.  That's not bad, but that is what I first thought
> of.

Not really, I don't think.  The Shadow in the SB is really just an
animanted puppet.  It could be Punch or Judy for all it mattered
(Lambchop?  Bert or Ernie?)  The only thing that really made that one
a 'shadow' is that it was 2-d and got the stealth bonus.  It had no
real power to control shadow.

CJW

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>                                         wynne.c.j@p9955.wlu.edu  >>
==  Colin J. Wynne                                  - or -          ==
<<                                      wynne.c@fs.science.wlu.edu  <<
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
From: rose@acf9.nyu.edu (David Rose)
Newsgroups: alt.games.torg
Subject: Re: LL miracles
Date: 23 Jul 92 22:08:21 GMT
Organization: New York University

jogle@dopey.vlba.nrao.edu (Jim Ogle (Ks. Jim)) writes:

>Something that only a couple of the realms could provide would be
>regeneration of lost limbs/organs/etc (Living Land miracles, cyberware
>from France/Los Angeles, Akashan biotech, the occasional Orrorshan
>Occult ritual, etc).

  Oo.  Maybe the rich man already has a cyberarm but wants to get
rid of it, so that he can avoid the corruption of the CP.  Aside from
the minor annoyance of being converted into Keta Kalles, you would at
least get an original arm back.  (Maybe.)

>And don't forget the senior citizens!  In addition to the CP template
>example of how to extend life (and vitality), you can figure that in
>the Living Land its easy to rejuvinate (sp?) people thorough Lanala's
>love, and I'm sure the Akashans can do it with biotech as well.  (And
>again, there's always an Occult ritual that will make you young
>again...heh heh.)

  I figure that this is already the case in LL, so that some NPCs will
have been alive for a long time ...

  I'm working on the bio of Baruk Kaah's older brother.  The short story
is that B.K. thinks that he is dead, and if he didn't, he'd want to
make sure that he became dead PTQ.  I get stuck, because this amounts to
working out the entire history of B.K. as highlord, including the wiping
out of the Ustanah and the invasion of the Benthe and Stalenger homeworlds.
(There must be others as well, but I don't know too much how they should
go yet.)
--
David Rose
Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
251 Mercer Street, New York, NY 10012
rose@math12.cims.nyu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.games.torg
From: Rick Jones <albert@crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu>
Subject: Re: Idea to be kicked about. (expanded)
X-Gated-By: The Black Marble Wombat@morticia.cnns.unt.edu
X-Gated-From: torg mailing list
Organization: University of North Texas
X-Gatemail-Version: 1.0b
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 19:00:55 GMT

> Alternate initative system. All player generate a bonus which is added
> to their DEX to determine order of action. the others (in these games
> sometimes there "villans" see themselves as heros) the NPC fighting
> them also generate bonuses. Thus you get a "some of us go then some of
> them..." intiative. Hint: for large Gamemaster groups roll once and apply
> bonus to all.

> This should all work in theory, anyone see any holes.

	To keep the card flavor of the games, here's an idea.
GM flips card:  the group with initiative adds +3 to their init. rolls
	(+5 in dramatics combat perhaps)

	All combat line actions are the same, it's jsut sorted through the
party and villains.  IMHO, it's another darn thing to remember.


-- 
Rick Jones				Systems Support Center
albert@bcm.tmc.edu			Baylor College of Medicine
Voice: 713-798-7352			standard disclaimers apply
"Hmmmm, this sounds like *another* job for Stupendous Man!" - Calvin