HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From:  (Spike)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Random vs. Point Alloc CharGen
Date: 10 Nov 92 20:22:53 GMT
Followup-To: rec.games.design
Organization: GE Power Generation

Posts of late seem to indicate that people in this sub are trying
to design a unique new game system. Many of the comments 
I've seen thus far seem to be degenerating into the same old
"is point alloc or random generation better?"

Frankly, I can't believe you are all wasting time on this. After the
97 posts arguing (quite well, I will confess) the relative merits
of the two methods, it should be patently obvious to even the
socially challenged that, like so many issues in the real world, 
there is *no* right or wrong answer on this. (Thank God for RPGs
and escapism!) The better approach is dictated by what the 
*player* wants.

Therefore, I recommend that you stop approaching this problem 
as players, and start thinking like game designers. Since you 
know that, whatever method you choose, roughly 50% of the 
people are going to be disappointed, if you want to improve the
marketability of your product,* you should set the system up 
so that players can do it _either way_.

*By marketability, I'm not trying to imply that anyone intends 
to actually sell this thing. However, it's still an important 
consideration - if your game is no fun to play, then no one
will play it, and your efforts are wasted.

Spike (Not Jones)

(Just stirrin' up the hornet's nest . . . )
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: berlin@carina.unm.edu (joseph e berlinon)
Subject: Re: Skill and Hit Location
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 92 21:06:25 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

Why not have one picture for each target, and use different templates
for different weapons at different ranges (short, medium and long)?
Rifles, lasers etc would behave differently from shotguns. And you could,
as I think someone pointed out, use this idea with HTH combat as well...

Just a thought...
From:  (Spike)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Net.rpg - General comments
Date: 10 Nov 92 21:06:17 GMT
Followup-To: rec.games.design
Organization: GE Power Generation

Regarding the development of net.rpg, here are a few 
opinions:

1) If you're going to do it, do it right. Why bother designing 
		   yet another game to throw on the Same Old Shit (tm) pile?
     In order to justify expending the effort, why not plan to do 
     something *original* and different? You have the advantage
     over RPG companies in that you don't answer to the profit 
     margin. Make good use of it.

2) Before you consider saying "the game should have this stat, and
     these skills," you might think about what those things mean. 
     What's a characteristic? Does it represent a basic ability in an 
     area of human endeavor (e.g. Intelligence = Common Sense), or 
     an average of areas the character has studied? Do you really 
     need to have stats? Are you taking a "nature" or a "nurture" approach?
     And what about skills? Do skills represent the ability to function in
a 
     given profession, or the ability to perform a certain type of task? If
     the latter, you could group them together into professions, if you so
     wished.

3) Keep in mind that if you want to be multigenre, there are some 
     genres that break the rules. If you plan from the ground up to 
     support supers, for example, you may be able to avoid some of
     the problems that (again, for example) GURPS has with that 
     particular genre. 

4) I like d6's. They make it easier to trick non-gamers into playing with
     you ("C'mon, Bob, we're just going to play a little Monopoly, heh heh
. . . :-)
     Seriously, six-siders are more common than any other type of die,
period.
     Think about it.

5) A lot of issues seem to be cropping up. "Do we do combat fast&loose or 
     realistic and wargame-ish?" "Do we do a wound system or a hit point 
     system?" Most of these seem to boil down to "playability vs. realism."
     My current feeling is that a truly powerful game system would give
each 
     GM the tools to run the game the way *they* wish.

6) What do you plan to do with this monster when you're done? If you have
     multiple methods of handling combat, wounds, etc. you might think
about
     saving rules chunks as "modules," allowing players to create their
*own*
     systems from your components.

7) Go with one mechanic. This will affect the learning curve
*dramatically*; 
     Aftermath was a swell game, but it took a real die-hard to learn all
the 
     different mechanics for things. This is harder than it sounds; you
must 
     make it flexible enough to handle realistic rules, but general enough
that
     the GM who likes to wing things can easily use the dice to gauge the 
     result of an action.
 
And yes, in case you are all wondering, I *have* been working on a custom
RPG whose intent is much the same as rpg.net. I'll gladly donate it, if
asked,
but I feel that there are enough people offering core rules that this might
not
be necessary.

Spike (Not Jones)
From:  (Spike)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: Board game design
Date: 12 Nov 92 21:54:08 GMT
Followup-To: rec.games.design
Organization: GE Power Generation

In article <17353@mindlink.bc.ca>, Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce
Harper) wrote:
> 
> I still monitor this group out of habit, but there seems to be nothing at all
> from board game designers or people who are interested in that topic.
> 
> Is that topic covered by that group?  Is it worth posting on the subject or
> even bothering with this group if you aren't interested computer games or
> role-playing games?

I like board games, and am even considering designing one someday [smiley
deleted to save space]. But this group seems to be swamped with posts 
re:net.rpg right now. I'd say, hang tight.

Spike
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: hall@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Robert J. Hall)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: net.rpg(s): 'dating' service
Date: 12 Nov 92 16:36:16 GMT
Organization: Boeing Computer Services, Seattle

In article <1992Nov11.174310.20454@alf.uib.no>, magnus@bark-fddi.ii.uib.no (Magnus Alvestad) writes:
> I agree this is one whale of a project, and one not very likely to
> succeed, but I think if it did succeed, it could be something else.
> All these other projects are exciting, but nothing *really* new. 

If you want to produce something new and different, why don't you write a
"Computer-Aided Role-Playing System" (CARPS)? The underlying mechanics would
all have to be numerical and (probably) object-oriented, but the interface
could allow the GM to pick and choose which features he or she prefers.

CARPS would have tools for Character Design, Story Generation, Combat
Simulation, Mapping software, etc.

-- 
 Bob Hall                   |
 Boeing Computer Services   |  Behind every dark cloud,
 root@chicken.ca.boeing.com |  there's a Seattle Skyline.
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: mavra@cpac.washington.edu (Peter D. Adkison)
Subject: net.rpg and Envoy
Organization: Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 16:00:26 GMT

As some of you are no doubt aware, we are hosting a discussion on the
development of a system-independent development platform (called
Envoy) for the roleplaying community, and there are several brilliant
minds from the net participating in its development.  Once this is
complete we intend to make it public domain so that anyone who likes
can use it to publish roleplaying material.

One thing that you net.rpg folks might consider is participating in
this discussion and then designing net.rpg so that it's highly
integratable with Envoy.  Just a thought.

If you'd like to participate in the Envoy discussion, please write to
experts-l-request and ask to be signed up!

				--Mavra!
				  Peter D. Adkison
				  Janitor, Wizards of the Coast
				  mavra@wizards.com

The above internet address should be used for e-mail if it is
different from the e-mail address in the header.
From: tdunn@ecst.csuchico.edu (Tim Dunn)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: Net.rpg:Combat skills & damage
Date: 12 Nov 92 22:05:59 GMT
Article-I.D.: charnel.1dukg7INN4hf
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: guzzler.ecst.csuchico.edu

In article <1992Nov12.214513.7561@crd.ge.com> (Spike) writes:
>One thing I was thinking about earlier today from the net.rpg
>FAQ list is the assertion that higher combat skills (i.e. better
>combat results) should produce greater damage. At the same
>time, however, folks generally seemed to want a "to hit" 
>system that reflects hit location. 

Two possibilities spring to mind:

1) allow hit locations to be rather arbitrary.  The gm looks at
   the extra damage from the hit, then judges where and what
   took it.  If the player wants to aim for a location, then
   s/he sacrifices 'x' skill and if hits, hits that spot (the
   old-fashioned way of doing it.)  Or, if the player wants
   to hit a location, the gm subtracts the extra damage to reflect
   being choosy.

2) the character's skill maps to a number of hit location rolls,
   and the player chooses the best one out of the ones rolled.
   In this case, I'd recommend that the hitloc table be 1d'x', so
   the player can roll them all at once and select (parallel 
   search) as opposed to some 'x'd'y' roll, where each set has
   to be rolled sequentially.

-- 
Beware of Programmers who carry screwdrivers.
		-- Leonard Brandwein
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: Bruce_Harper@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Harper)
Subject: Re: Board game design
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 16:26:23 GMT

I still monitor this group out of habit, but there seems to be nothing at all
from board game designers or people who are interested in that topic.

Is that topic covered by that group?  Is it worth posting on the subject or
even bothering with this group if you aren't interested computer games or
role-playing games?
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: bjbisset@eos.ncsu.edu (BILLY JOE BISSETTE)
Subject: Re: 3D map appearance in a computer game
Originator: bjbisset@c00003-118dan.eos.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: bjbisset@eos.ncsu.edu (BILLY JOE BISSETTE)
Organization: Raise A Great Old One Foundation
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 20:14:43 GMT


In article <1992Nov11.154928.7162@odin.diku.dk>, torbenm@diku.dk (Torben AEgidius Mogensen) writes:
|>One possibility is to use the design of the radar in "Elite" (not the
|>star map, which is disappointingly flat and even rectangular): You
|>have a perspective view of the stars and of a rectangular (flat) grid
|>which shows depth (and width at every level). Every star is joined by
|>a vertical line to the nearest point on the grid. This actually gives
|>a fairly good impression of the relative positions of the stars. One
|>point of warning, though: the designers of "Elite" have patented this
|>display style.

 How the heck can it be patented by the designers?  I've seen the same
technique used in math books since I was around 6 years old!

|>
|>	Torben Mogensen (torbenm@diku.dk)
|>
-- 
----------bill the insane cultist, bjbisset@eos.ncsu.edu
Please make a donation to the "Raise a Great Old One" Foundation.
Everyone chant with me:  Ph-nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!
                         Ph-nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!

Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: tdunn@ecst.csuchico.edu (Tim Dunn)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: net.rpg(s): 'dating' service
Date: 10 Nov 92 17:34:03 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: hairball.ecst.csuchico.edu


I have no idea how the old net.rpg project work, having come one just
when it was in its last dying breaths, evidently....  I agree with
Steffan O'Sullivanm after seeing the Janow v. Nalle case in r.g.f.adv,
I don't think the net can ever agree to one rpg to play, much less
design.

We are thus presented three options:

1) "I am all things to all people."  We will out-generic Gurps.  We
   will include both a random alloc and a point gen, include each and
   every possible dicing mechanic, so as to satisfy all proponenets.
   We will probably be crushed under our own inertia and overhead.

   This is unworkable in the worst manner, IMPO.

2) We form different committees, and post discussions as prefaced by
   "Subject: Net.rpg(1)" where committee 1 is the KISS school, 2 is
   the genre-faithful school, etc.  Each committee is responsible 
   only unto themselves and should post periodic FAQ updates.  Flames
   within discussions should go email, flames between discussion should
   go /dev/null, or to r.g.f.adv.  The discussions themselves I'm not
   sure should be posted, or if people should set up aliases on their
   mailers and conduct in email.

3) As people here are interested in designing a rpg, chances are such
   that they have already one or an idea for one germinating.  Thus we
   get into the paranoia of rights and releases et all.  Instead, we
   can allow each person to post an imaginary cover letter, and should
   a reader find a cover letter from another reader/designer that is
   in line with his/her interests, s/he can ask to evaluate or test-
   play the rules.

That's all the ideas I have.  Care anyone to comment?
-- 
You can't carve your way to success without cutting remarks.
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: mike@isgtec.com (Mike Sellers)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: Skill and Hit Location
Date: 5 Nov 92 00:56:19 GMT
Organization: ISG Technologies Inc., Mississauga Ontario

jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim) writes:
> Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow) writes:
> >mfp+@CS.CMU.EDU (Michael Polis) writes:
> >> You only need to do this once, and then you can include a book of pictures
> >> with the game.
> >Player: "I want to shoot the sxybrian hiding behind that rock.
> >GM: "Just a minute.  <flipflipflipflip>  Hmmm, sxybrian crouching, turned 30
> >degrees.  <flipflipflip>  Rock cutout to place over image 1.  There!"

> 	You need just as many pictures as you would need hit location tables 
> in a non-picture system. Unless your hit location system takes into account 
> that third tentacle and the shape of the rock, I think you are just being 
> silly. 

No, he's not -- this is a valid playability concern.  Saying that you'll need
just as many pictures as you will tables *is* silly (and wrong too!).  Even if
it were true, having that many of anything that needs to be consulted during
combat drains the enjoyment right out of the game for a lot of folks (no, I don't
play Chartmaster).

Of course, if you can do hit location without a chart, as I do, then you've 
just eliminated a lot of senseless "flipping."

fodder
fodder
fodder



--
              Mike Sellers      User Interface Team Leader
           mike@isgtec.com      ISG Technologies, Toronto, Canada
              "Actum ne agas" -- Do not do what has been done.
                         Furare tantum ab Optimis
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: batemanc@p4.cs.man.ac.uk (Mad Chris)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: net.rpg
Date: 12 Nov 92 09:59:48 GMT

sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan) muses:

>I think the idea of *one* net.rpg is doomed to failure.

So do I. But we might be able to do it if we adopt a more practical
approach, i.e.

 (i) We set about to solve the classic A4 problem. Now, many of us here
     will have already done this, but it's always fun (AMA). The task
     is to create an RPG which fits on to one side of A4. I'll post mine
     if (a) you need an example and (b) I can find it.

 (ii) We set about to produce an RPG with a Clear, definable goal,
      e.g. we choose a genre, and try and make a game around it. 
      This could be enlarged to a more varied problem, where we choose
      a Set of genre's, join one development team and set deadlines
      when we'll compare the results. E.g. 'The Simpsons' RPG vs
      'The Evil Dead' RPG vs 'Wayne's World' RPG. You get the idea,
      anyway.

Opinions people?

>I don't think any single system can appeal to everyone.  You may be
>able to create two or three net.rpgs, though.

Agreed. But we can always solve the A4 problem again :-).

Mad Chris.
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: magnus@brisk.ii.uib.no (Magnus Alvestad)
Subject: Re: game system
Reply-To: magnus@ii.uib.no
Organization: UVBS -> SFK/T-DSA / SOPS - HOS / RNoN
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 03:44:11 GMT

>>>>> On Mon, 9 Nov 1992 03:02:15 GMT, mathers@sibelius.trl.oz.au (Steven Mathers) said:

	Steven> skills he/she has.  Having the system hobble your
	Steven> freedom is just a waste of time and effort.  Let the
	Steven> players design whatever character they want, without
	Steven> folloiwng some arbitary learning mechanics.

	Steven> Its quicker, involves less reading of rules for the
	Steven> players, and the players will be happier.  I cant
	Steven> think of one reason to do it any other way...can you?

I think I can. Characters with a multi-faceted personality often have
more of a lasting power. My experience is that characters created from
an idea 'Wow - that would be fancy!' most often are fancy for about
three weeks. Then all the jokes have been told, and the character just
doesn't have any more potential.

Characters created in a loose career-oriented system like I think we
should put in net.rpg, are more realistic, more life-like, and with a
number of abilities, specialities, and weaknesses, where a
choice-character would often be one-dimensional. 

Of course there should be left room for the dreams of the player, but
I think it is unrealistic and un-nice to assume that the life of the
character passed just like he wanted it to. Surprises! Problems!

-Magnus

Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: magnus@bark-fddi.ii.uib.no (Magnus Alvestad)
Subject: Re: net.rpg
Reply-To: magnus@ii.uib.no
Organization: UVBS -> SFK/T-DSA / SOPS - HOS / RNoN
	<1992Nov8.083753.5173@alf.uib.no> <10965@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au>
	<1992Nov9.032158.9364@alf.uib.no> <10976@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 15:45:12 GMT

>>>>> On 10 Nov 92 00:43:14 GMT, mav@cs.uq.oz.au (Simon Dennis) said:

	Simon> In principle I agree. Two points though. Firstly, in
	Simon> many situations and particularly in combat, there are
	Simon> alot of things happening very quickly. If as GM, I am
	Simon> responsible for 8-9 NPCs it becomes difficult just to
	Simon> come up with creative combat without slowing the play
	Simon> down, let alone make decisions about the outcomes of
	Simon> each of the encounters.  Certainly, if the GM wants to

This leads me to believe that we play RPGs in distinctly different
ways - or at least that our image of the ideal way to play is very
different. To me using two hours playing out a fourty-second
firefight is perfect as long as everyone has fun along the way.

If we quickroll through a scene, close to realtime, it gives me a
feeling - this didn't happen right! We missed some details!

	Simon> consistency. When the players are deciding what to do
	Simon> next they rely on consistency.

Yes, always make notes of rulings and catalogize them so you can use
them later when you need them again. The GM can be just as consistent
as the rules.

	Simon> Certainly, I'm for giving free rein in character
	Simon> creation although I understand why some people prefer
	Simon> random generation systems (see thread some months ago).
	Simon> Lore is very free form. Players allocate points to
	Simon> skill groups and choose traits from a set of
	Simon> suggestions. There are no ability scores to influence
	Simon> skill selection and there are no professions. At this
	Simon> point the only roll is for life points (which don't
	Simon> alter there after) and the range is fairly limited.

My best experiences are with very loose career path systems. Most are
much too tight. If a career path system is good enough, it stimulates
the creative process with the player instead of limiting it.

	Simon> I think that in essence we agree, the point of
	Simon> departure is where it is most important for the human
	Simon> touch to be applied. Perhaps, with the right sort of

Agreed. Maybe we just won't play the same games.. :-)

	Simon> Perhaps, an interesting observation. When I read the
	Simon> Iliad I only made it to the forth chapter. After that I
	Simon> just got sick of battles described in fine detail. For
	Simon> me the story comes at a level above the thrust and
	Simon> parry.  Of course, the Iliad is a classic, so my views
	Simon> clearly aren't shared by all.

I liked it, even the detailed combat scenes. I suppose the Odyssey is
more to your taste.. :-) I liked that one too, btw.

-Magnus
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: magnus@apal.ii.uib.no (Magnus Alvestad)
Subject: Re: Net.rpg - General comments
Reply-To: magnus@ii.uib.no
Organization: UVBS -> SFK/T-DSA / SOPS - HOS / RNoN
	<1992Nov12.112135.18747@odin.diku.dk>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 20:15:37 GMT


	Spike> 7) Go with one mechanic. This will affect the learning

	Magnus> Agreed. Now, my personal view is that 1d100 (1d10 x 10
	Magnus> + 1d10) is a very good starting point. Maybe
	Magnus> openendedness isn't neccesary either.  I thought it
	Magnus> would be nice, but .. playability.

	Torben> How is it that som people always think that
	Torben> "mechanics" means "what dice you roll". I have no
	Torben> trouble with e.g. letting different weapons use
	Torben> different dice and still call it a single mechanic.

You are right, of course. There is a lot more to mechanics than dice.
I just think it would be nice to use d100 for all rolls. That is if
you integrate the hit/damage roll into one roll. But that's combat.

-Magnus
From: ketil@ii.uib.no (Ketil M. Malde)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: I'm confused
Date: 10 Nov 92 14:10:25 GMT
Reply-To: ketil@ii.uib.no
Distribution: rec.games.design
Organization: student of numerical analysis at the University of Bergen, Norway

>>>>> On 9 Nov 92 09:44:35 GMT, griffinr@ucs.orst.edu (Robert Griffin) said:

	Robert> Now all must forgive me, but you all seem to be
	Robert> putting a lot of effort into a game design system.

Of course, that's what the group is for, isn't it?

	Robert> Is there a newsgroup that has online games that are GM
	Robert> moderated?  (not to be confused with your wonderful
	Robert> idea...)

Why would you want that?  I suggest using email for playing, and then
posting an edited (novel/short story format) resume on
rec.games.frp.archives.   Or how about an IRC rpg?  (Has anybody
actually done this yet?  Is it possible to "mute" people, so you could
have non-players watching? How about privacy?)

I sort of feel things would work better real-time.

-ketil
--
 = Ketil Malde                     In real life:  ketil@ii.uib.no =
 = Nuke the whales!                    Honk if you love unicorns! =
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: magnus@bark-fddi.ii.uib.no (Magnus Alvestad)
Subject: Re: game system
Reply-To: magnus@ii.uib.no
Organization: UVBS -> SFK/T-DSA / SOPS - HOS / RNoN
	<1992Nov9.034411.9463@alf.uib.no> <1992Nov9.235325.22262@trl.oz.au>
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 18:48:41 GMT

>>>>> On Mon, 9 Nov 1992 23:53:25 GMT, mathers@sibelius.trl.oz.au (Steven Mathers) said:

	Steven> This is a problem with the player, not the system.  If
	Steven> a player wants to design a real-life type character,
	Steven> he/she can.  If the player wants to

Agreed, but I think a career-based character will help the player do
the right thing. I know a lot of good players that have made somewhat
single-faceted characters, and then regretted it.

	Steven> system is fairly nice in this repect because it allows
	Steven> players to get more points for taking on weaknesses,
	Steven> and less points for taking on special abilities/
	
Weaknesses are nice as long as they are optional.

-Magnus
Newsgroups: rec.games.design