HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gm1116@albnyvms.bitnet
Subject: something for nothing
Reply-To: gm1116@albnyvms.bitnet
Organization: University of NY at Albany
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 20:03:34 GMT

	Well, I'm not sure how shadowrun explains it(my knowledge of
shadowrun is vague, limited to skimming VR and the rulebook. I 
never managed to quite get through it all and with no group to
play with, have no inclination to) but, getting something for
nothing by magical means:
	I would assume that you chanell energy FROM "astral space"
through your aura to the target aura.  You have to worry about
damage to your aura for transferring that much energy(your aura
basically acts as a really really BIG capacitor.  First you
hook it into the "astral pool" and charge it.  Next you
take it off the link to the astral energy and link it to
your target, all the energy flows to him in one big burst.
Maybe think of astral space as having REALLY large emissions
and mages convert their aura into "solar cells" for astral
eminations.  ok, so its pure pseudo-science gibberish but you get
the point).  Now, the amount of energy generated could be quite a lot
depending on what spell you cast, the problem is its INSTANT and
therefore almost impossible to contain or channel efficiently to
use a power source.  Theoretically, you could build a rocket ship
and use atomic bombs to supply the thrust but its more efficient to
use jets, no?

	Of course, I'm of the opinion that increased magic use is
breaking down the "walls of reality" in the shadowrun universe.
As reality weakens, the astral space grows(I heard somewhere that
you can only travel so far from the earths surface in astral space
before passing out).  As the use of magic is increased, you will
be able to travel further and further away!  Magic users being
piss poor scientists haven't really applied the scientific method
to examining the dimensions of astral space and so haven't noticed its growth
by a few centimeters yet.  Even worse, the few physicists who have come
forward with proof from experiments that the speed of light has been
DECREASING have mysteriously disappeared (mysteriously, HA, its the
Dragons who 'et them!).  BEWARE the coming of Cthullu.

Badger
Gm1116@albnyvms
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: samik@maths.tcd.ie (Samik Sen)
Subject: Star trek game
Summary: help
Keywords: star trek
Organization: Dept. of Maths, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland.
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 13:25:55 GMT

  Just a short question.What is star fleet battles like?(or whatever it is
called).

Samik.

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: dunkelza@titan.ucc.umass.edu (KEITH C MCCORMIC)
Subject: Re: Palladium/Wizards of the Coast Lawsuit
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 23:26:34 GMT


    One note.  WotC should have stated on the cover, usable with the Palladium
Game system or any other Role-Playing system.  This is a a loophole which has
allowed countless companies to make and sell "unofficial" supplements to T$R
games, namely D&D and AD&D.  To get this case decided, in your favor, quickly,
go to a store in your area which sells used games and supplies.  Buy some 
unlicensed D&D supplements and display them as evidence.  Doing so may help
establish the legality of producing a game off of another, existing system.
This will hopefully reduce Palladium's case down to Trademark infringement 
, or if you have not used any of their LOGOS, will hopefully get the case
thrown out.  Now if you have used any of their logos on your cover, you are
in deep ca-ca in that regard.  I would advise either getting a REALLY good
lawyer, or trying to settle the Trademark battle by offering to remove the
logos and paying whatever you can.  Especially if you are sole-proprietorship
or partnership, because your personal assets can be called upon to pay any
fees you have.  A corporation is only liable for its own funds, not those of
its owners.  I would incorporate as soon as you can, this will protect your
homes, cars, etc.  

   I have been looking into this legal crap for my own company, but since you 
are in trouble, and a fellow game designer (Although I don't like your choice
in systems to develop porducts for), I hope this advice helps you.  One thing
though.  You should try and develop your own, private system as soon as
possible.  Very few companies have succeeded by producing products for someone
else's game.

Dunkelzahn

  Note that I am not a lawyer, and therefore my advice should only be taken as
that between one businessman and another on a friendly level.  No professional
contract or agreement exists, real or imagined.  

:)

-- 
_____________________________________________________________________________
| Dunkelzahn the Greater Western Dragon | "Eternal vigilance is the price   |
| Dunkelza@titan.ucc.umass.edu          |  of Freedom"                      |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Organization: Freshman, CIT general, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 23:07:15 -0500 
From: Robert Everett Brunskill <rb6t+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: clo=DECKER FROM HELL

From: ath@LNS62.TN.CORNELL.EDU (Aron Helser):
>And the load rules may keep deckers under control, but they don't
really >make any sense.  Why should MPCP affect the load in the node? 
It's in the >decker's deck, after all... 

I don't exactly know how to word this, but I'll try.  The core of the
MPCP, or as you say the MPCP itself is in the deck, but it also imposes
a 'software frame' into the system which allows the decker to modify and
operate programs within the node.  The larger the MPCP rating the larger
the frame, and so the larger the load on the node.  If you think about
it the MPCP is just a program written into perminantly active memory.

>and what about programs in his active memory that aren't running?  They
>have even less reason to affect load, yet they do in VR rules.

Actually all programs in your active memory are considered to be
running.  Think of storage as a harddrive, and active memory as RAM. 
Again those programs are then linked to the MPCP so that they can
interact with the system.

At least that's how I look at it.

Rob Brunskill
From: v124jw4y@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Benjamin R Pierce)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: STAR FRONTIERS:does anyone remember it??
Keywords: STAR FRONTIERS
Date: 15 Dec 92 02:06:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <Bz9rnz.C2u@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, irvine@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (Brent Irvine) writes...

>IMNSHO, TSR experimented with the bland Care-Bear whitebread no substance
>generic game feel, ditched the beta system and took the theme over to 
>their AD&D game!  [2nd Edition AD&D - blech!, also when they first
>quietly removed Melnibonean Myths from Dieties and Demigods, and then
>quietly changed the name to Legends and Lore I knew the end of the 
>'golden era' of TSR was gone, reploaced by respecability/blandness].
> 
>Enough rambling,
>Brent




Well, the Melnibonean removal had nothing to do with 'respectability'...
rather, it had to do with TSR attempting to avoid getting their butts
sued off by the Moorcock estate (TSR knows about lawsuits :).


                                                         --Ben
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: sl9b4@cc.usu.edu (Deep Six)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: GURPS Vehicles?
Date: 17 Dec 92 01:11:46 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

Does anyone know what stage GURPS Vehicles is in?

Okay,
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Chadd VanZanten SL9B4@CC.USU.EDU  ``You pay for love, but the hate 
comes free.'' --Sting, Lowlife
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: irvine@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (Brent Irvine)
Subject: Re: Palladium/Wizards of the Coast Lawsuit
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 05:35:08 GMT

In article <MAVRA.92Dec17175908@bailey.cpac.washington.edu> mavra@cpac.washington.edu (Peter D. Adkison) writes:
>In article <1992Dec17.223531.4921@oz.plymouth.edu> sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan) writes:
>
>The problem is that even though we did everything legally, we're being
>sued anyways.

Isn't America great? :) :) :)

>>   I also remember saying I didn't think putting in system-specific stats
>>   was either wise or necessary.  As I said, I haven't seen your product,
>>   so I don't know how much space you devoted to system translations, but
>>   it's bound to be a waste of space to most people.  If you give stats
>>   for twenty systems, nobody will use nineteen of them.
>
>I've engaged in many discussions with people on the usefullness of the
>integration notes.  Remember, that just because you don't think
>they're useful that doesn't mean they're not useful to others.  We've
>received so many letters and compliments about the integration notes
>that we're convinced that they are a major contributor to the success
>of our capsystem line.  Those who prefer a more storytelling approach
>don't see the need for them, but there are still many people out there
>who like rules and want to know exactly how to convert stuff into
>their systems.

I for one, would not have bought the system if it weren't for the 
conversion notes!  I am a busy person, so prefer things that require
as little modification as possible or time-consuming work on my part.

I think TPO was a real innovation on the market, and it has real
possibilities for my WarpWorld campaign [if it ever gets off the ground!:)]
and for RuneQuest. [though Ars MAgica and Pendragon are a bit too
far fetched, EXCEPT for the pawns supplement which I plan to use
around 1450AD {current Ars year is 1388AD}.

I think that Palladium is getting a bit crazy - after all how can 
TPO even be perceived as a threat?  What was their specific bitch
anyway?

>Yes, I realize that many GMs are highly intelligent and wouldn't have
>any trouble coming up with their own translation notes.  But what
>about those GMs who aren't?  I know that *I* would prefer precise
>translation notes so that I can at least get an idea of what the
>original authors intended.

And those of us that have a hard enough time finding time to play,
and shell out $20, want those notes right there so we can PLAY THE GAME
rather than waste time converting and tinkering with our translation.

[IMHO, I think _Rifts_ planned a supplement that was dealing with 
what TPO was about -- dieties -- and R.S. got torqued because
you all beat him to market, so had the typical American reaction -
LAWSUIT!]


-- 
+-------------------------+--------------------------------+-----------------+
| Brent L. Irvine         | For a mere $50 these personal  | I will be gone: |
| irvine@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu | opinions can also be yours!    | 20 Dec - 4 Jan  |
+-------------------------+--------------------------------+-----------------+
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: hcs+@cs.cmu.edu (Henry C Schmitt)
Subject: Re: RQ - Combat System Modification
Summary: No Class
Keywords: RQ Rules Changes
Organization: Engineering Design Research Center, Carnegie Mellon
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 17:34:39 GMT

In article <BzFn0v.CJ1@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> jacobus@symphony.cc.purdue.edu (Bryan J. Maloney) writes:
[Previous messages omitted]
>
>Uh, you COMPLETELY missed my point.
>I called for realism over BALANCE not "realism" over simplicity.
>
>Do you understand what I mean?  I mean that, if a given possible combat
>rule/system could be written to favor a realistic outcome (virtually anyone
>can learn to use a sword) vs. a "balanced" outcome (those who are good
>at magic are forbidden from learning to use swords), then go for the "realistic
>outcome. 
>
>Admittedly, anyone can come up with a good bullshit "explanation" as to why
>those good at magic are "incapable" of using swords--the example I used
>was just an EXAMPLE, not the crux of my argument.  The main point is that
>rules can be inserted in order to enforce some sort of "power balance" or
>they can be used to more strongly reflect a certain metaphor.  I prefer the
>latter by a landslide.
>
	My apologies, I did not find you clear in what you meant by
"balance."  I understood you to mean "balanced playability."

	If I understand you correctly (now), you seem to be opposed to
the idea of "Classes" that D&D uses.  I couldn't agree with you more.
I always found it ridiculous that fighters couldn't use magic to heal
themselves.  I think that healing is one of few magics a fighter would
learn.

	I find that even without Classes, RQ tends to keep the
character's powers balanced.  This is because a character which spends
a lot of time learning magic won't have as much time to learn weapons.

-- 
Henry C. Schmitt
Home: 2863 Beechwood Blvd.,Pittsburgh, PA 15217-3114 (412) 421-8482
Work: 2212 Hamburg Hall,5000 Forbes Ave,Pittsburgh, PA 15213 (412) 268-2257
E-Mail: InterNet: hcs@cmu.edu CIS: 72275,1456 AppleLink, AOL, GEnie: H.Schmitt
From: jacobus@symphony.cc.purdue.edu (Bryan J. Maloney)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: RQ: scripts and written language
Date: 16 Dec 92 02:30:44 GMT
Organization: Purdue University




I'm a little rusty on the RQ learning times, but how long would it take
someone who was trained for, say, three or more hours per day, five days
a week, from the age of 5, to attain the "Master" level?  However, your
classifications do tend to fit within a pre-industrial paradigm.  Saint
Augusting (or was it Thomas Aquinas?) once wrote of a marvellous scholar
who was gifted by God with such amazing skill at reading that he could
read a manuscript without vocalizing, moving his lips, or even tracing the 
words with his hand!!!  The venerable Church Father considered this 
truly miraculous.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: mcvos@cs.vu.nl (Vos MC)
Subject: Re: GURPS Luck
Organization: Fac. Wiskunde & Informatica, VU, Amsterdam
Distribution: rec
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 17:56:34 GMT

Seth "the Lesser" writes:
[lotsa uninteresting stuff deleted]
: 
: Umm, David, you've got your equations wrong.  It should be _easier_ to make a
: roll if you get three chances, not _harder_....

Did you read the rest of the article? This table wasn't about luck, but
about if for difficult tasks a penalty or several rolls was better.

In the case of luck you're right. The best of three rolls has a bigger
chance of succeeding than just one roll. (amazing, isn't it)




I don't think I've ever written an article this short..

Anyway..

Great Greetings, 
mcv


(mcvos@cs.vu.nl)
From: lward@husc11.harvard.edu (Lester Ward)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Shadowrun Question -- Auras and Spells
Date: 14 Dec 92 18:37:56 GMT

hyatt@owlnet.rice.edu (David Waterman Hyatt) writes:

>In article <lward.724315878@husc11> lward@husc11.harvard.edu (Lester Ward) writes:
>>It always makes me kinda roll when, in a system where generating energy from
>>nothing is accepted as fact, something is objected to on the grounds that
>>it doesn't make sense.

>The astral energy is drawn from the spellcaster's aura.  That's why
>he rolls drain.  I don't have any problem with this.

I do.  Energy from your aura was just used to create fire where there was
no fuel; you feel a bit woozy.  I think not.  At that rate of power transfer,
a few auras could power greater New York for years and feel only mildly
uncomfortable.

Wordman
From: CX6L@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA (CX6L)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: GURPS Running (was Re: GURPS 1/8 and 1/4 Points, & high defa
Date: 14 Dec 92 22:34:36 GMT
Organization: McGill University

In article <G.DALE-141292114600@17.9.6.23> G.DALE@applelink.apple.com (Geoff Dale) writes:
<Snip't>
>using the measly acrobatic dodge skill. I've always been disappointed
>by the lack of dodge training in GURPS. (I've also been dissapointed
>I used to have a rule that running didn't affect dodge, but acrobatics
>did (using the same 1/8 rule) but it got to be too much book-keeping,
>and I was trying to reduce the number of house-rules I was using.
>Does _Martial_Arts_ have a rule? I'll have to look tonight.

Well, you have a few options:

1) There is an Enhanced Dodge "cinematic maneuver" in Martial-Arts.
   It costs 15 points, and adds +1 to Dodge. Only one level can
   ever be learned, but it seems to apply to all Dodges against
   all attacks, and has no encumbrance requirement (like Karate
   does).
2) There is the Acrobatics Dodge, requiring an Acrobatics roll.
   On a critical success, you Dodge automatically, on a success
   you get +2 Dodge (yes, the Basic Set says +1, but that was
   replaced by +2 ages ago, in some Roleplayer errata), on a
   failure, -1 and on a critical failure, -2 (I think). It gives
   no help vs. missiles.
3) The Boxing skill allows a +1 Dodge per full 8 skill levels,
   versus thrusting and unarmed attacks only. Unlike the Boxing
   Parry, this Dodge bonus adds to defenses vs. kicks and sword-
   thrusts, too.  It does not help vs. missiles.
4) Increased Speed is available at 25 points / +1, and has no
   upper limit on it, although a GM who assigns stat limits will
   also want to assign a SPD limit. It adds to Basic Speed, and
   increases Move, Dodge, and reaction time (SPD).

...in theory, all of the above can be picked up during play, and
From: gobeski8618@iscsvax.uni.edu (Steve 'Gobes' Gobeski)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: RQ: Runelords and Heros question
Date: 16 Dec 92 21:40:57 -0600
Organization: United Anarchists of the World Association, Inc.

In article <1992Dec15.142724.7686@email.tuwien.ac.at>, Scheirich Harald <scheirich@eigcl1.una.ac.at> writes:
> Can anybody here explain to me, somebody with access only to RQ3 stuff,
> what on 
> earth Runelords and Heros are.
> I am posting this for my GM who has most of the books out but only from
> the 3 edition on and those crop up from time to time but are not
> explained any further so please,
> what are they, what can they do, what does it take to be one ....  
> I am in Europe and have no access to 2nd edition material.
> 
> Thanks in advance 
> 					     Scheirich Harald
> Replies on this list or to
> scheirich@eigcl1.una.ac.at

First off, the other two followups were pretty clear, IMO; but I'd like to drop
in some extra stuff... ;-)

An oversimplified (?) view of the difference is that Rune Lords are warriors
and Rune Priests (also called Rune Mage) are the mages.  There are also Rune
Priest-Lords and Rune Lord-Priests (which are not the same thing, BTW).

One trivial difference has to do with the Rune that is mastered with each rank.
If I remember correctly, Rune Lords gained the Mastery rune and Priests the
Magic rune (it's the Rune Lord I'm not sure of).  The priest-lords and
lord-priests have both.  And, you can gain the other Runes of your god(s) via
HeroQuesting.  (BTW, it's god(s) not god, because you can become rune-rank in
more than one cult, though subject to the restrictions of your current cult;
Wind Lords (Orlanth) could join some/most/all (?) of the other LightBringer
cults, for example -- check Cults of Prax if you can find it ;-) )

I haven't really kept up with AH's RQ, but didn't they drop (or at least
greatly downplay) the idea of the Runes?  I think they did... kinda makes the
name "RuneQuest" a lot less significant.

A HeroQuest is a heroic quest in the traditional sense of the word.  Epic,
arduous trials/questing/mission in the service of one's god(s).  Deliberately
left open to GM's interpretation as to what should constitute such a quest.

And, finally, a Superhero is to Heroes what Heroes are to the Rune- characters,
ie. a "hero among heroes."

-------------------------------------------------------------------
| Steve "Gobes" Gobeski | GOBESKI8618@iscsvax.uni.edu             |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|  more
| A BORING SIG IS WORSE | I don't believe the preachers           |  useless
| THAN NO SIG AT ALL!!! | They're just sticking out they're hands |  wasted
|-----------------------| I don't believe the government          |  space
| useless, wasted space | Who the hell is this Uncle Sam?         |
-------------------------------------------------------------------
From: lward@husc11.harvard.edu (Lester Ward)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: SRII questions
Date: 15 Dec 92 00:01:06 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc11.lward.724377666

ratinox@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Richard Pieri) writes:

>A shotgun choke is an add-on to the muzzle. A shotgun doesn't *need* a
>choke, and without one you get the normal scatter pattern. The choke
>works much like the focus of a camera: you turn it and it "chokes" the
>effective muzzle diameter. This takes but a moment (simple action) to
>adjust. The result is that by reducing the muzzle diameter you reduce
>the spread area and do more damage.

...per square area.  You can open wide and take out many people (but naturally,
you don't do as much damage to each).  The choke on smart shotguns can be
adjusted with a Free Action.

Wordman
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: dvandom@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Dave Van Domelen)
Subject: CyberHero and other related stuff
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 03:02:04 GMT

To reiterate my post about cyberspace, Champions In 3-D established that you 
have pretty much got fiat on how game mechanics are altered in strange new 
dimensions.  Thus if you define the Net as another dimension you can model a 
netrunning system without being tied to "real world" combat and things like 
dodging etc.  In trying to have a netrunner in a superhero campaign, I was 
really dissatisfied with how the FTL-Desol trick worked (that is how I built 
the character for my player, a few years back).  Even tweaking on the ability 
to carry programs isn't much help...it's still locked into the OCV/DCV 
paradigms.  I kludged together a reasonable system for a magical analog to the 
net last year, but it wouldn't stand up to much scrutiny in a 'punk campaign.  
I think I have the rules I thrashed out after reading (and being disgusted 
with) the Netrunning rules in CyberHero in my directory somewhere.  Email me if
you want a copy, see what you can do with it.
     Also, on Autofire: I agree that it is usually a wimp advantage.  There are
three times it is a Good Thing:
     1: You want to simulate real world weapons like shuriken or guns
     2: You want a weapon that can totally kill a large number of normals but 
leave Supers untouched.  Also known as the Guilt Bomb.  1d6 AE EKA Autofire/20.
Will kill all normals, but hardly be noticed by Supers.
     3: As a munchkin add-on.  Gimme Penetrating Autofire Kills any day against
powerarmor types.  Or doubly Penetrating AE Hex Autofire/10 No Range Mod 32 
charges 3d6 normal EB.  Used normally as 4 shot bursts does 12 STUN guaranteed,
and against a stunned or held foe, full blast for 30 STUN straight thru.  And 
so on, I've seen more evil Autofire attacks (some can destroy the whole 
universe).  This is probably why some people make ack'ing noises at Autofire, 
since it is SO damned devastating when abused by people who like having +6 in 
total advantages.  Alone, it tends to be useless except as an Agent-clearer.
     Dave Van Domelen, hasn't played Champs for 6 months now...plans to get to 
gether with his munchkins over break (Yeah, it's sometimes fun to kill the 
entire Enemies book with 200 point characters....)
From: tratclif@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (Tracy Ratcliff)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: lead toy ban      2/2
Date: 14 Dec 92 17:54:35 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: Ohio University CS Dept,. Athens

In article <1992Dec14.2467.6584@execnet> "jeff zeitlin" <jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com> writes:
 [long message about how we're all blowing the NY figures ban out of proportion
  deleted]
>  jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com
>---
> ~ QMPro 1.0 41-4533 ~ My reality check just bounced.
>--

I'd say your reality check bounced.  WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN THE PAST WEEK?  The
text of the proposal (which was posted OVER A WEEK AGO) definitely IS a ban and
EXPLICITLY foribids the sale of products from ALL  the major figure companies
(Grenadier, Ral Partha, etc.).

[expletive deleted]

)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc