HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: u894793@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (Timothy D Little)
Subject: Re: GURPS: Percentile based
Organization: University of Tasmania, Australia.
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 06:46:25 GMT

This is vaguely related to this thread, so...

If you are really disinterested in mathematics, press 'n'.

After analysing the GURPS skill system for a while, I realised that the effect
of a '-1' penalty was worse at lower skill levels, in fact at skill=3,
made it impossible.  (Which brings up the point, if your skill is 4, is a roll
of 3 or 4 still 'critical' success?)

I've been working (as a pure mathematical exercise) on a 'rationalised'
bell-curve where a constant modifier (eg. -1) changes the success/failure
ratio by a constant multiple.  The formula for distribution is

    R(p) = B-A*log(1/p-1),  where A is a 'spread' constant, B is the 'average'

p  is the probability of success,
R  is the number which corresponds to this probability.

   (p = 1/(1+exp R)   is the reverse formula)

The closest approximation to a 3d6 curve is  B=10.5, A=4.5.

This system would have the advantage that, say, -4 *always* decreases your
ratio of success/failure by a factor of 4.
Tying in with my previous posts about the GURPS range tables, it also fits
my measured distribution of vertical and horizontal 'miss distances' *much*
better than either a 3d6 system, or the 1/(x^2-1) system I used in that post.

It has a nice differential distribution, is symmetric, scales nicesly, has
a simple mathematical form (try working out the formula for 3d6!), and
simple differences in number correspond to meaningful measures of probability.
- All in all, it is a very mathematically nice function.

- It also can't be easily modelled by dice.

The best I could come up with is a table that converts R-values to %ile
figures.  Oh well, that's life.
--
Timothy D Little   a.k.a.   u894793@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au
"I'm a Tasmanian." - Yahoo Serious, in the film Young Einstein.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: tmurray@socrates.umd.edu (Tony Murray)
Subject: Re: Improvisation!
Organization: University of Maryland University College
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 18:21:22 GMT

>From article , by ericg@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Eric Chris Garrison):

>> I was reading the GMing goals thread, and someone mentioned
>> improvisation vs. preparation, and it lead me to ask this
>> question of GMs in this group:  How much improvisation do
>> you do?  Do you improvise 10% of the time, when characters
>> "go off the map"?  Do you improvise 50% of the time, writing
>> up a skeleton for "run time" fleshing out?  Do you improvise
>> even 90% of the time, having a basic premise and just "wing" it?

Disclaimer: I do not intend this to be either criticism or praise
for any gaming system, and do not intend this to spark more
'my-game-is-better' flame wars.

I run an Amber game, and it has turned out to be quite different
from the standard 'party seeking a common goal.'  Each character
has his or her own motivations and desires, and the PCs don't all
travel in one group (or even in two...sometimes they're all off
doing totaly individual things).  In a universe as totally
freeform as Amber (the characters can virtually go anywhere they
want to), there's not a lot of room for planning. 

What I've found to work the best is this:  There are events going on
behind the scenes that the PCs don't know about.  These events 
affect the world(s) the PCs interact with, and may present them
with challenges.  I prepare in advance exactly what is going
on 'behind the scenes' and just remain honest when the game
happens (i.e., I don't alter my plans just because someone
does something I didn't count on.  On occasion, the plans of
the behind-the-scenes NPCs will change due directly to actions
of the PCs, but only if those NPCs actually find out about said
deeds).  Sometimes this means characters will happen to be present
during an important act, and sometimes they will accidentally
miss it.  I won't automatically reschedule a 'scene' involving
the NPCs just cuz the PCs aren't around.  If they miss it, too
bad...they might get to hear about it later.  This has actually made 
the game more fun.  A quick example:  I had someone plotting to
take over a realm during a game.  The PCs were not present
(I didn't know beforehand whether they would or would not be there),
but chose to return to that realm just after the takeover was
scheduled (in my mind).  I hadn't expected this, but they did
indeed pop in just as the invading troops were seizing the
castle.  This made for quite an interesting (and fun) situation.



-- 
--Tony Murray (tmurray@socrates.umd.edu)
  Graphics Illustrator
  University of Maryland University College
From: batemanc@p4.cs.man.ac.uk (Mad Chris)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: CP 2020: Novice GM question
Date: 17 Aug 92 16:30:48 GMT

sorflet@bnr.ca (Winston Sorfleet) pleads:

>I am planning on running a CyberPunk campaign in a few weeks (though not
>in the CP2020 world or with their "classes".  I just bought the rules this
>weekend....  Anyways, what I want to know are the flaws and problems that
>experienced GMs and players have spotted in the system, and advice on how
>to correct them.

>I've spotted one potential problem already: It's much better
>for the starting characters (read: more efficient) to specialize in a few
>skills, rather than being well-rounded, because the skill improvement system
>makes it _much_ cheaper to buy new skills at low level than improving
>existing ones.

In point of fact, any character that does so tends to have a low survival
rate because in cyberpunk you need to be well rounded or you have no
purpose in life. In my campaign, the longest living character has
no skill higher than +4, and the characters that die/retire quickely
tend to have high skills.

> Therefore, everyone will want to buy as high "useful" skills
>as I allow at start, rather than having some "roleplaying" skills mixed in.

I suggest that players are given two sets of pick-up skills. The second set
should be spent amongst the kinds of skills that players would never otherwise
choose. You can decide for yourself what these are. However, the best solution
by far is to have good players who choose skills because they are building 
a character they are going to like, and not a super Combat god.

>Another problem that I noticed people mentioning is that Attributes way
>out-perform Skills.

Amen! At the very least, have a -2 or more penalty when people use skills
on the attributes alone (e.g. they make an Athletics roll on Reflex 
because they don't actually have Athletics ). If you have time, I 
recommend throwing out the mechanics and writing your own, but this
can be a little time consuming! :-)

Other problems:

*Armour is too good
Solution: Use Fast-Kill rules from Challenge or Hardwired OR
  Use legal restrictions, as described in Interface.

*Netrunning is flawed ( Matter of Opinion - MoO )
Solution: Fix it. The problems are not easy to fix, and it is easier
  to simply throw out the existing rules and replace them. A 
  discussion of flaws with the netrunning rules is too long to 
  use here. If you are a novice GM, I advice keep netrunners as
  NPC's, or omit them entirely.

*Skill development is too slow.
Solution: Award more IP. Believe me, that's all you need do. In my 
  campaign you get 1-2 IP for using a skill in a relevant situation,
  and up to 8-10 IP for exceptional use of a skill. Also, good 
  role-playing is rewarded by bonus IP. This may sound Monty Haul
  but any experienced Cyberpunk-er will realise that the IP 
  suggestions given in the rules will show no improvement in even
  a year of playing!

There are more, but those four are the biggest gripes for me and my
group. I would write more, but I have to go. Hope this is of some
use,

Mad Chris.
From: eeb1@ellis.uchicago.edu (e elizabeth bartley)
Subject: Re: Diceless or Senseless?
Reply-To: eeb1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 05:55:46 GMT

In article <batemanc.712924905@p4.cs.man.ac.uk>
batemanc@p4.cs.man.ac.uk (Mad Chris) writes:

Re: luck vs. Good and Bad Stuff

>Why is it better because you know when and who it is going to happen to?

It isn't always.  It can be, though....  One of my characters in an
Amber game (Llarana, Llewella's daughter, raised mostly in Rebma) has
ten points of Good Stuff, which is what we decided the practical
maximum was.  She's always been lucky, and it's fun playing with the
ways that affects her personality.  (She *tries* not to rely on luck,
but since she's always had luck it's really rather difficult to do so;
she has to learn to do so based entirely on other people's
experience.)

>This is completely supporting my argument! The good and bad stuff defeats
>the point of the random element in games: if a player KNOWS he is going to 
>be lucky, what's the fun in BEING lucky!

Hm.  Well, you never know quite in what *way* you're going to be
lucky....  And it's fun to have the breaks go your way regardless on
how much you know.  If that doesn't make sense to you, then take my
word for it: it's fun at least for some people to see their lucky
characters be lucky.

--
                             - E. Elizabeth Bartley, a distant Shadow of
Llarana of Amber and Rebma, possessor of ten points of good stuff
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Review: Dangerous Journeys, Character Creation
From: ajross@husc9.harvard.edu (Andrew Ross)
Date: 13 Aug 92 18:18:21 GMT
 tus.com><1992Aug10.134609.1@wharton.upenn.edu> <CHRIS.92Aug11143450@yen.imsi.com>

chris@yen.imsi.com (Chris Payne) writes:



>> > The anal-retentive in me also cringes at words like "mythus".  That's not 
>> > a word!!  Use "mythos"!  It's just as easy to get this right!
>> 
>> Mythus isn't the same as mythos, it's a proper noun and the name of the
>> game system. However I agree that EGG used as many silly words as
>> possible in the manuscript. I've never seen so many craefts, magicks,
>> and dweomers in my life!

>Just why does EGG work so hard to make his work offensive?
	
	Offensive to whom? I am not offended by changes in spelling in
order to create "atmosphere", although I admit I am not impressed by it.
Gygax's liking for strange puns and alternate spellings is well known, and
I find it difficult to believe that anyone would take this as an affront.
People who don't like Gygax should be cautioned that wading through 400+
pages of his prose will be a chore. The only thing I found offensive was
the constant reminders that this is "roleplaying at its finest", and that
was in the blurbs on the back. I hardly consider tasteless advertising
Gygax's fault. 

 >Ars magica needs more publicity hounds.  DJ/M is a total non-event.
>If you're out looking at this EGG cruft, spend a little more time and
>check out Ars magica.  The pervasive tips and commentary on 'story'
>alone make AM material useful for the whole family...

	Although I find your tone little better than Gygax's (a mite on
the pompous side of confident) I do admit that Ars Magica is a fine game.
I doubt, however, that it is really in the same "market" as DJ/M, as it is
a gritty, single-genre, mostly "historical" setting, whereas DJ/M is more
of a high-fantasy, multi-genre, alternate history setting. Both make use
of some ancient beliefs (although I find Ars Magica limited in scope in
comparison to DJ/M). I actually prefer DJ/M; it's byzantine, but more
interesting. 
	I do wonder how the commentary on story in Ars Magica is useful
for the whole family. Perhaps everyone in your family plays AM? I hardly
found it useful myself, as it is the same common-sensical commentary that
is found in uncountable articles, games, and the like, not to mention
books on fiction writing. To each his own.

E. P. Ross
ajross@husc/harvard/edu
From: u9035281@cs.uow.edu.au (Paul John Davis)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Appleseed for GURPS...
Date: 19 Aug 92 23:30:57 GMT
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Wollongong University, Australia

jacobus@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Bryan J. Maloney) writes:



>I'd go for an Appleseed worldbook for GURPS.

>I have one or two friends who would, too.

GURPS????????????
just get RoadStriker II for CP2020 and have a ball.

OR

Get Mecha*Press 2 and 3 for TechnoCop 2100AD, which is based on Appleseed.
More due out soon to complete their system.

Stuff GURPS!
-- 
   	Paul Davis, [RENEGADE]	u9035281@wraith.cs.uow.edu.au
	University of Wollongong Simulation Games Secretary
	"Of course I'm Psycho - I'm a SOLO"
From: bcushman@bagpipe.reed.edu (Ben Cushman)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Lace and Steel
Keywords: hello out there
Date: 18 Aug 92 02:38:18 GMT
Article-I.D.: reed.1992Aug18.023818.5825
Organization: Reed College, Portland, OR


Hello gamers everywhere--

	I am a Lace and Steel enthusiast looking for other people  
interested in the most genteel game developed to date.  If there are any  
gamers of refined taste and broad experience out there who would like to  
share insights on this, the aristocrat of frpgs, please contact me.

	Thank you--

					Ben Cushman
					Reed College
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Improvisation!
From: mikew@mdcbbs.com (Mike 'the Bard' Whitaker)
Date: 18 Aug 92 08:41:53 PDT
Organization: Shape Data - a division of EDS Ltd

In article <1992Aug14.190727.25455@burrhus.harvard.edu> 
 canders@isr.harvard.edu (Carl E. Anderson) writes:
>	Well, I like to prepare as much as possible, but any GM knows that
>that ain't much!  I concentrate on having a very solid background in the
>campaign.  Before starting up a segment of the campaign I know the major
>NPCs of course, the basic geography and especially the cultures I'm moving
>the PCs in.
Yeah - sort of....
(grin)
In my world I know the general politics etc of the major areas etc... 
Frequently the way I will flesh things out is by doing a bit of prep (mostly
staring into space and thinking) on the area the players are about to reach,
and then letting their interactipos with it shape the rest, if I haven't 
designed it any further... Most areas of Altrion (my world) got designed by
this process of 'sketch out' followed by building around the players.
-- 
Mike Whitaker +44-223 | mikew@mdcbbs.com, bard@spuddy.uucp | Me: Bards just
Shape Data/EDS 316673 | -or- mwhitaker@cix.compulink.co.uk | KNOW things...
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: juola@bruno.cs.colorado.edu (Patrick Juola)
Subject: Re: Cyberpunk 2.0.2.0.
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 16:26:41 GMT

In article <77544@ut-emx.uucp> cwagner@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Christian Wagner) writes:
>In article <BsIMqH.9xH@news.cso.uiuc.edu> dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Axly) writes:
>>One of the ideas I've been toying with it to take the atmosphere of 
>>Cyberpunk and graft it onto SRun mechanics.
>
>Is it just me, or does this seem like an utter waste of time?

It's not just you, Mr. Wagner.  Everyone within my gaming circle who has
tried running SRun usually lasts between a month and two months before
trying to swap in a set of mechanics that work (usually GURPS).

If you can find a copy of the first edition of Cyberpunk, I think it's
got about the cleanest, simplest, and best designed game mechanics of
anything available.  If you *must* swap in something, I would recommend
getting Ars Magica and swapping in their rules.  (Shameless plug.)

Either Cpunk or AM have much better rules -- combat runs in a finite
amount of time, skills make sense, and its easy to balance.

Shadowrun's system is the most fundamentally broken rules system I've
seen in my 15+ years as a role-player.

	- kitten
From: uc-chan@mcl.ucsb.edu (Christina Callihan)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Diceless or Senseless?
Date: 13 Aug 92 02:17:11 GMT

In <1992Aug11.061646.5167@news.unomaha.edu> PCHEM14@Zeus.unomaha.edu (FALL88) writes:


>In both forms of the game, the GM has to make certian assumptions about the
>flow of the scenario.  Assuming these to be equal, then the diceless approach
>adds predestination, becuase it has done nothing to alleviate the other's
>(diced) predestination.  Thus, it is adding predestination that need not be
>there, which I don't see much point in.

To reply to this poster, and all the others who believe that a diceless
system like AMBER leads unavoidably to "predestined" game results ... I
will not lie to you and say it can't happen.  It can, in diced as well as
diceless games.

However......  

There is one very important factor limiting the "predestination" in a
diceless system like AMBER.  It's called GM/player interaction.

IF you have a GM worth his rulebooks, IMO, he will modify his scenario in
response to player actions.  The more creative a player gets, the more 
creative the GM will become in response--at least in the best game sessions
I've played in.

I played Amber last week, and after we were done, my GM told me that some
of my actions and decisions surprised him completely.  But he rose to the
occasion, and we enjoyed ourselves immensely.

Rankings and "stuff" in Amber are just bases to work with.  The results,
the real meat of the session is in the roleplaying.  And believe me,
nothing is necessarily certain.  


____________________________________________________________________________
If You Know What |     Christina M. Callihan     |  Doing STRANGE THINGS
 You're Doing,   |  AKA C-chan, Bwee, Chrystal-  |  in the name of Art,
   It's Not      |   Elf & Who Knows What Else   |  and STRANGER THINGS
   Research!     |       (I sure don't)          |    in the name of
 => => => => =>  |     uc-chan@mcl.ucsb.edu      |       CHOCOLATE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

(The opinions in this post are not endorsed by the University of California
at Santa Barbara....THANK GOODNESS!!!!!!!!!  ;^}  )
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: sprackle@rel8.ncsa.uiuc.edu (David Spracklen)
Subject: Re: Improvisation!
Organization: ncsa
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 20:26:37 GMT

I have been skipping several entries on this discussion to save
time (lots and lots of things to read here :-) ).  I enjoy both
worlds of structured modules and total free-form role playing.
Ad libbing a game can be extremely fun and is definitely a great
challenge to a game master.

My ad libbed adventures are generally not terribly involved
(my imagination doesn't work that far ahead), but my friends
said that they enjoyed the atmosphere I created in the game.  I
have another friend who ran an ad lib with the old "aliens invade,
everyone's gone, and you missed it" theme.  We had some awkward
moments, but he ran it in such a way that it was a very eerie
game.  Incidentally, the game took place in my home town which he
had NEVER visited.

The game master who usually ran the games for our group ran us through
a game in a world out of a set of books which he read and none of the
rest of us had ever read (Julian May's  Pliocene Exile series).

Total improvisation can work, but it depends on the group.  Try it.
You might like it.  Just don't expect an entirely smooth game with no
continuity problems; just have fun.

Dave Spracklen
"Blast!" -- Vax the space pirate.
From: batemanc@p4.cs.man.ac.uk (Mad Chris)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Improvisation!
Date: 17 Aug 92 15:14:04 GMT

sl9b4@cc.usu.edu (Deep Six) writes:

>I mean, pretty much
>everything we talk about on these groups comes down to personal 
>preference and taste, but if no one discussed anything just because
>everything was up to personal taste, then all threads would be three
>posts long. Thus:

>Post 1: I like my way.
>Post 2: I like my way, but it's all a matter of personal choice.
>Post 3: Okay. Nice chatting with you.

>Nice and polite, easy to follow, but not very enlightening, I'd say.
>I've really enjoyed this thread, and have learned a lot about the 
>merits of ``winging it.''

Whilst I agree that there's a lot to be said for a good argument, a large
number of net arguments aren't arguments at all - nor are they the polite
utopia in your example above ( thank Arioch! ). Let's face it: too many 
threads proceed like this:

Post 1: I think this.
Post 2: You think WHAT! [Long string of flames]
Post 3: Oh yeah? Well... [Long string of counter-flames ]
 etc.

Treasure the threads that read like a magazine article: there aren't 
enough of them.

Mad Chris.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: PCHEM14@Zeus.unomaha.edu (FALL88)
Subject: Re: Champions - Ambush - What are the rules?
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 03:32:48 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.11

paul@sco.COM writes: 
> I've always used the 2*STUN rule as doubling AFTER armour penetration. The
> actual rules as written seem ambiguous to me but this just makes the most
> sense (you're reaction to pain will be greater if you aren't expecting it
> but it still takes the same physical force to get through the armour!!).
> 
> Is this actuall a house rule? I'm using ONLY 4th edition rules, so if you
> quote rules please quote from this version.

This is a house rule, as the rules are quite clear.  Pg 151, bottom of 1st 
paragraph in right column:

"The STUN is doubled before any defenses are applied."

> Even if it is a house rule, I like the effect of it. Makes little difference
> for the minimally armoured types but means that it is still difficult to put
> the brick down (and being hard to put down is, after all, one of the primary
> roles of the brick).

I kinda agree with your logic.  And I like the effect also.  Further, I've
wondered if I wanted to put down everyone but a solid brick in one shot in
a suprise, and had considered x1 1/2 STUN.  Your rule makes it just as easy
(multiply by 2 is very easy to do in your head), less vicious and fairly
sensible.  I'll think about it some more.

-james
From: millerl@wharton.upenn.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: GMs: historical politics
Date: 19 Aug 92 05:32:35 GMT
Organization: Newt World Order

In article <1992Aug16.232217.26652@sq.sq.com>, lee@sq.sq.com (Liam R. E. Quin) writes:
> My technique can also work with more detailed plots, but if you get into
> historcal politics, whether Deryni-style or Luis-Nth-style, you'll have to
> keep careful records of everything and do a lot of planning.

Leaving aside the difference between Louis XVI and Deryni style of
political play (like what IS the difference?), how DO you plan and carry
off a political style campaign? What do you write down? Do you detail
factions, nations, guilds, individuals? How do you choose what to detail
ahead of time, and who will be the enemies and allies of the players? Do
you make the players central or peripheral figures in the action, and
how would you adjust for plotting depending on central or peripheral
status?

-- 
whoah,
+++++++++++++++++++++++23
Loren Miller                           internet: MILLERL@wharton.upenn.edu
The more corrupt the government, the greater the number of laws -- Tacitus