HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: spanky@next13epsl.wam.umd.edu (Mephistopheles (The Devil))
Subject: Paladins
Organization: Workstations at Maryland, University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 20:42:49 GMT

   Has anyone ever seen a well played Paladin?  I know it's a tough class to
even qualify for, and then players go and spoil it by playing Paladins as
borderline evil.  One Paladin I knew travelled freely with evil players in
the group!  My Half-Orc Cleric/Assassin killed an NPC Elven Mage who he had
stolen a ring from, and the Paladin stood back and let it all pass!  Sure, if
he would've acted then, I would have toasted him too, but he never did ANY-
THING about it.
   Another Paladin I heard of was the leader of a group who strolled up to a
town gate, BENT the bars and walked right in.  Needless to say, the group was
immediately arrested, but upon being freed, they decided to wreak a personal
vengeance on the town.  They set up camp nearby, stopped all travellers
headed to the town, and warned them of a terrible plague there.  One group
of travellers happened to be a religious group in need of disease curing 
from the town, and several innocents died because of the Paladin's group's
hoax.  Real nice, huh?
   I've played a Paladin for a while, and it seems quite simple to me to
keep to my religious guns.  Not one party member of our group is evil, and
I even forced the destruction of some powerful intelligent evil leather
armour rather than allowing its use by any of the other players.  My favorite
little Paladin maneuver is to trash evil temples.  I've perfected that to a
near art.  Since our adventures almost always wind up opposing some evil
religious sect, I have a grand time toppling statues, burning books, spoiling
altars, dumping unholy water, etc...  My 18 charisma allows me to assert my
beliefs in the party very strongly, and my 74 hps at 7th level (17 con) don't
hurt either (really!  I rolled that!  The DM watched!).  Well, I'd like to
hear about some other Paladins, well played or not, to see if the class is
really as hard to play as it seems.

--JLW
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: cvl@athena.mit.edu (Craig V Lewis)
Subject: Re: Bastard DM From Hell Pt 2
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 14:02:16 GMT

Another ruling that got me - my spell book wieghs more than a suit of plate
mail!  We just captured this book which is about 2' *1'6" * 6" and it weighs at
least 60lbs!  So the dumb half ogre is lugging that around for me.....

From the CRC handbook, 	density of paper	=44-72 pounds/cubic foot
			density of oak  	=37-56 pounds/cubic foot

paper weight =5*22*16/12^3*50=51 pounds
oak weight   =1*24*18/12^3=10 pounds
Someone else can calculate the iron, I'm out of here.

Note that I took the conservative density values in each case.


--
 Craig Lewis                            cvl@athena.mit.edu                   
 Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution   (508)457-2000x4814                   
 Nobody but me has any idea what I'm doing; and I don't know either.
From: ecrjbruce@economics.adelaide.edu.au
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Movement Rates
Date: 20 Aug 92 11:36:32 GMT
Organization: Economics, University of Adelaide

In article <19AUG199209043769@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov>, spzkny@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (JAMES ZAKANY) writes:
> In article <1992Aug18.153900.24704@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,
>  cwatters@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Coyt D Watters) writes...
> 
> Question: daily movement rates for men, mounts, etc...
> 
> A general rule I use is one's movement rate in miles per day (twice that on 
> roads).  If twelve miles per day over random terrain seems a bit low, 
> remember that's twelve miles per day IN THE DESIRED DIRECTION.  I'll let 
> PCs travel twice that, but there's a chance of getting lost...
> 
> Wagons are pretty useless on anything other than roads and plains.
> 
There is no way you can consider 12 miles a day low.  In WW1 the British
Expeditionary Force was recorded as moving  30 miles in a day along roads. 
There is a mention that this left them "fagged out" and that "there was no way
they would have been able to do this 2days  in a row".  12 miles aday is
generous across open terrain.
 

regs

Rob
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: rparker@wpi.WPI.EDU (Richard E Parker)
Subject: Re: Kender
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 17:32:21 GMT


	Problem is, GOOD Role-playing (not ROLL-playing) says you have to
play a kender as a klepto for the most part.  It's a shame and a pity that
such an interesting race is, for all intents and purposes, unplayable.  At
least, that was my view the first time I played in a party with a kender.
That was, incidentally, the LAST time I played with a kender.  I was a hf
mercenary at the time with a strong desire to get rich quick and live like
a queen, something of the Kitiara complex, complete with CN tendencies.  I
saw the kender and kept one eye on him and one on my valuables at every
turn.  The guy who played the kender is one of the BEST role-players I know.
The down side of that is that he will play an annoying sort of character as
just that.  If you're a good role-player you have to.  I know I myself am a
little guilty of being a ROLL-player.  I once played a Paladin in a party
with a necromancer, and an elven vampire.  (Long story, don't ask.)  Both
necromancer and vampire were chaotic good, but they were obsessed with 
making undead, zombies, ghouls, and the like.  I let them, since I really
wanted to go on the adventure, and I wanted to play a paladin.
	The character race is too flawed for me.  I personally, as the DM,
would NEVER let someone have a kender.  REAL LIVE people (TM) would go 
ape-shit over someone picking their pockets at every turn.  It would help if 
the kender could check for will-power or understood that what they were doing 
angered other people, but they are described as vapid little bastards, who 
CAN'T HELP IT.  They HAVE to steal, if for no other reason than that the item 
in question is interesting.  Playing a kender can't help but bug SOMEBODY,
and if you're not bugging, then you're not playing the race right.
	Before someone calls to mind a similar discussion concerning paladins,
it's easier to play one since they're open to broader interpretation.  Nowhere
does it say that they HAVE to be AWFUL GOOD, book-bashing, cross-toting (excuse
me, holy-symbol toting :^)) jerks.  Kender are designed to be annoying.  They
succeed TOO well.


								A. Paladin
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: barth@wam.umd.edu (Kevin J. Barth)
Subject: Re: Question
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 17:17:56 GMT

In article <marios.714244180@knosos.cc.uch.gr> marios@cc.uch.gr (Marios Chrysopoulos) writes:
>I have some questions about some of the non-weapon proficiencies that a
>character can have:
>1) A character using the tumbling proficiency get a bonus (-4 ?) AC. Can
>he use this proficiency regardind the armor he is using? That is can he
>wear plates and at the same time jump from here to there and perform
>tricks and stuff like that?

Negative, as far as I am concerned.  if a thief can be hampered from free
movement by thge armour he is wearing, as he obviously can due to the
restrictions on moving silently, hiding in shadows, etc, it is only
reasonable that he be restricted in this proficiency as well.  I would
siubtract 1 from the roll for each 5% penalty for hiding in shadows
because of armour.

>2) Can a weaponsmith detect the magic cast on a weapon? That is if a
>weapon is enchanted maybe he could distinguish some differences between
>this weapon and other weapons? (Not anything about the magic, just some
>differences)

I am assuming you are talking about an NPC weaponsmith here rather than
a PC with weaponsmithing proficiency.  My answer is no.  The weaponsmith would
be unable to recognize the signs of magic, unless they were pretty obvious
(ie, glowing swords are pretty clear to anyone).  He WOULD be able to
identify weapons of quality, however, as they are exceptionally well made.  
Furthermore, he MIGHT be able to identify the material used as strange 
and something that he had never seen before (ie, mithril, adamantite) but
your chance would be better in a small town, IMHO, because in a larger
town the weaponsmith may have already seen such materials and not think
it unusual enough to mention.

>3) Same question as 2 but for armorers.

Same answer as #2 above :)

>And another question...would it be wise to let a 1st level dwarven
>player get a dwarven plate just because he says that his father was an
>armorer and he made it for him? I mean this is nice role play but
>dwarven plate?

Could be...depends upon your campaign...if you think that it would seriously
unbalance it, then no - don't allow it.  I personally would allow it if it were
NON-MAGICAL dwarven plate


Kevin Barth
barth@wam.umd.edu

Xref: sparky rec.games.frp.dnd:2859 rec.arts.sf.written:11334
From: schrey@oak.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Timothy M. Schreyer)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd,rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Elven Chain Mail (Why?)
Date: 21 Aug 92 20:25:25 GMT
Reply-To: schrey@prc.unisys.com
Followup-To: rec.arts.sf.written
Organization: Paramax Systems

In article <matt.714425950@unidata.ucar.edu>, matt@unidata.ucar.edu (Matt Hicks) writes:
|> >For a history of elven chain mail, the reader is referred to "The Lord of
|> >the Rings", a fantasy novel series by T.R.R. Tolkein.  Of course, EGG and
|> 
|> That's _J._R.R. Tolkein. And "Lord of the Rings" and "The Hobbit" (you can't
|> have one without the other) is much more than just "a fantasy novel series."
|> It is a classic. To me it defines the genre of fantasy and is the work to
|> which all fantasy writers must try to measure up--few have any hope of suc-
|> ceeding however. Beyond being an incredibly well conceived epic, it is 
|> masterfully written. I really can't imagine anyone being even remotely 
|> serious about D&D and not having read these books; that would be like
|> someone calling themselves a devout christian, never having read the Bible.
|> Buy the series, read it, and you'll _never_ forget it. Amazing.
|> 
   Actually, I see "The Worm Ouroboros" as being the seminal fantasy work.
   It predates "The Lord of the Rings" and includes many elements that I'm
   sure Tolkien borrowes.  I believe it's by E.R.R. Eddison.

        Tim
-- 
 Timothy M. Schreyer                         schrey@prc.unisys.com
 Center for Advanced Information Technology  (215) 648-2475 
 Paramax Systems Corporation                 FAX: (215) 648-2288
 PO Box 517, Paoli, PA 19301
From: swann@acsu.buffalo.edu (Stephen Swann)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Anecdotes... Death... How come?
Date: 12 Aug 92 23:45:00 GMT
Organization: UB

In article <4210@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp) writes:
>
>	The lowest level character death was first. The highest level character
>death of mine was 67th.

Funny, you never before really struck me as being a munchkin.  Was
that a one-off, Monty Haul (or Monty Python) campaign, or do you 
have wagonloads of way-better-than-godlike characters?

-- 
Steve Swann                 |    Speak to me in many voices; make
swann@acsu.buffalo.edu      |      them all sound like one...  -BOC
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: glb1@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (GREGORY LEO BROCKWAY)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Monty Haul (was Re: Levels)
Date: 19 Aug 92 12:04:22 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <Bt6sv4.24v.1@cs.cmu.edu>, cscott+@CS.CMU.EDU (Curtis Scott) writes:
>In article <batemanc.714062879@p4.cs.man.ac.uk>, batemanc@p4.cs.man.ac.uk (Mad
Chris) writes:
>|> CC100PG@GITVM1.GATECH.EDU (Paul Goodwin) states:
>|>
>|> >I'm really gonna show my age here, but Monty Haul (in campaign terms) means
>|> >a campaign where characters (of any level) get rewards which have no logica
l
>|> >connection to the risks they take.  Anyone remember 'Let's make a deal' ?
>|>
>|> I know that this term has been used since second edition D&D at least ( I
>|> believe it appears in the glossary ), but I wondered if anyone knows where
>|> the term actually comes from? A DM called Monty? I've been waiting nine
>|> long years, and no-one seems to know.
>|>
>|> As for remember 'Let's make a deal' - they're still SHOWING it over here!
>
>If so, then you should remember that the host of the show is one Monty Hall.
>And THAT'S where the name "Monty Haul" comes from.
>
>Curtis Scott
>Yet Another Greybeard
>
Yes, Monty Haul is based on the host Monty Hall, but the whole thing was
introduced into gaming way back in a series of short stories in DRAGON, which
were based on a campaign (I forget who's).  The basis for the campaign
was that treasure was plentiful, and that the characters got very powerful
very quickly.  As the DM tried to rectify the problem, the plots got weirder,
the monsters impossible to kill, and the magic/treasures were beyond belief.
It was because of those stories that gamers started to refer to games where
there was an unjustified amount of treasure as Monty HAUL, and the term just
stuck.


-Greg Brockway
-- 
<< I'm not dumb.  I just have a   >>
<< complete command of thoroughly >>
<< useless information.  -Calvin  >>
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: marios@cc.uch.gr (Marios Chrysopoulos)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: illusion of armour
Date: 13 Aug 92 18:58:10 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Department, University of Crete HELLAS

>>What would happen if a mage used a somewhat permanent illusion of armour on
>>himself?  Would he effectively gain ac2 (for plate) if his opponents failed to
>>disbelieve?  Would he gain a halfway bonus due to the fact that his opponents
>>attack him in a different fashion then if he appeared to be wearing no armour?

>>just a thought....


Does an illusionary bridge support any weight? Does the illusion of a
wall prevent someone from going through it?

You see as you say an illusion works if the poor guy believes it. But
even then it's not real! So maybe the wicked wizard had cast the
illusion of a bridge over a cliff so that some fool would fall off.
And maybe he had cast the illusionary wall so that anyone who sees it 
believes that the passage doesn't continue on that direction.

Finally, maybe the fighter who's looking menacingly at our poor
illusionist will hesitate seeing him armoured in plate. Maybe he thinks
that it's better to leave him alone. Nevertheless if he decides to
attack him, he will certainly find his armour SOFTER than the usual.
More like flesh!!! 

	
		 	        	Marios,
			Master of Slaugther and Disaster...
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: u894793@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (Timothy D Little)
Subject: Tarresque - Anyone killed one?
Organization: University of Tasmania, Australia.
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 17:43:19 GMT


I'm interested in knowing if anyone has ever actually killed a Tarresque in a
non-Monty Haul campaign.  Any stories?
--
dom..
--
Timothy D Little   a.k.a.   u894793@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au
"Slicing up eyeballs I want you to know "pixies   doolittle

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: rjg@doe.carleton.ca (Richard Griffith)
Subject: Re: The cure for Liches
Keywords: lich
Organization: Dept. of Electronics, Carleton University
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 02:16:42 GMT

In <Bt7F6B.A2A@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca> alongley@cape.UWaterloo.ca (Allan Longley) writes:

>>In article <1992Aug17.230552.4470@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov writes:
>>>In article <14518@borg.cs.unc.edu> taylorr@debussy.cs.unc.edu (Russell Taylor) writes:
>>>>	While furiosly attempting to save his skin from the impending
>>>>assault of a giant sword-wielding Lich, Lamdor [cast Anti-Magic Shell]
[And destroyed the Lich by running into it.]
I would say bad call by your DM.
PHB2ed says 
``The anti-magic shell also hedges out charmed, summoned, or conjured creatures
. It cannot, however be, forced against anycreature that it would keep at bay;
any attempt to do creates a discernible pressure against the barrier, and
continued pressure will break the spell. Normal creatures (a normally
encountered troll, rather than one conjured up) can enter the area, as can
normal missiles. Furthermore, while a magical sword does not function magically
within the area, it is still a sword. Note that creatures on their home plane
are normal creatures there. Thus on the elemental plane of fire, a randomly
encountered fire elemental cannot be kept at bay by this spell.''

We have two possible rulings or a Lich
1) a lich is a normally encountered creature (like the troll in the quote)
 and has no problem with the shell. 
2) the lich is magical and the anti-magic shell cannot be forced against it.

In either case Lamdor should have ended up in the lap of the Lich.

I would probably rule 2 and let the Anti-magic shell be a zone of protection
from undead.
To rule 1 you let undead be creatures, magical in nature like dragons or trolls,
that can function normally in a anti-magic shell. This makes it hard to select
what abilities of the magical creatures are magical, and are shut down by the
shell, and what are intrinsic and still function.

>>>Now, if your DM has magical creatures utterly dispelled by this spell,
>>>it becomes much too powerful.  You can kill deities that way.  Any
>>>Elemental is instantly extinguished.  Any undead is instantly
>>>destroyed.  Any god becomes just a guy with lots of hit points.

>According to the old DMG, an artifact is not affected by dispel magic and
>anti-magic shells.  I would consider a God(dess) more powrful than an
>artifact, and a lich could arguebly be an artifact -- a least give it a
>save (my ruling).  Remember that a lich is more than just magic, it is a
>life-force.

>free-willed (and, as usual, mad as hell).  Now what about demons, solars...
>they assume a material form when in the inner planes -- an anti-magic shell
>does not destroy that form but does make it non-magical.

Rule 1, or Rule 2.
A mix: the shell cannot be forced against demons, solars etc. However,
the creature may enter if it wants to and loses all at will magical
abilities but still keeps all resistances.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: alongley@cape.UWaterloo.ca (Allan Longley)
Subject: Re: Question:  Liches & Phlacteries
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 17:36:45 GMT

In article <Bsv1nJ.2nF@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> 
l2wang@napier.uwaterloo.ca (  Lei Wang  ) writes:

>In article <1992Aug9.033600.7176@unixg.ubc.ca>, educ@unixg.ubc.ca 
(Vicki Domansky) writes:


>> As I understand it, phlacteries are a crystal or some other item that
>> holds the life force of the lich.  How far can the lich's body travel
>> away from that phlactery?  
>
>  There is no normal limit.  With a Lich's tendency to travel across the
>unknown dimensions in search of knowledge, it would seem illogical.

I'll have to disagree.  Dimensional travel is not a trivial event.  A
"normal" phlactery can only be reached from the same plane and dimension.
Also, liches don't have a tendancy for planar travel -- although some can do
it -- liches are encounter most frequently on the prime material.  It is
dangerous for an undead entity to risk confronting immortal and/or divine
powers.

>>How does it gain a new body?

>  As a mage residing in Magic Jar.  By seeking to possess a live vessel
>within the range of the phylactery.

Actually, possessing a live body is MUCH more difficult than possessing a
dead one.  Normally, a lich will have a freshly dead or preserved body
stored with the phlactery in the event that retreat to the phylactery is
nessecary.

>> If PC's come to destroy the phlactery after destroying the body can the 
>> lich  use "magic Jar" or whatever to try to take over one of them?  

Yes.

All these details are covered in a good article in an old Dragon (50-60?)
and was reprinted in Best of Dragon II (maybe III, maybe I, aahhh!!!).  The
article is called "A Blueprint for a Lich".

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allan Longley, University of Waterloo, Department of Chemical Engineering
e-mail: alongley@cape.uwaterloo.ca
voice: (519) 885-1211 x3816		To live
home: (519) 746-5747
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: spzkny@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (JAMES ZAKANY)
Subject: Re: Bastard DM From Hell Pt 2
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Date: 17 Aug 1992 09:15 EST  

In article <1992Aug15.214337.1@economics.adelaide.edu.au>,
 ecrjbruce@economics.adelaide.edu.au writes...

>The latest ruling from the BDMFH is that if a Ranger wears armour heavier than
>studded leather then he is not acting as a ranger but as  a fighter, and so
>does not gain any experience.  Does this seem logical to anyone?

No.  A ranger has no armor limitations.  He just loses his two-handed 
attack bonus when in anything heavier than studded leather.  Bad ruling.

>Another ruling that got me - my spell book wieghs more than a suit of plate
>mail!  We just captured this book which is about 2' *1'6" * 6" and it weighs at
>least 60lbs!  So the dumb half ogre is lugging that around for me.....

Go to a library and pick up one of those huge dictionaries!  Them suckers 
ARE very heavy.  I'd invest in a travelling spell book, if I were you...
Good ruling (shows a lot of insight, too!).

>Just as a general question how do you guys rule on recharging things like wands
>etc.  I can't seem to find it anywhere - all the books seem to give is airy
>fairy well-it-can-be-done-but-we-aren't-going-to-tell-you-how sort of rulings. 
>Ideas would be appreciated.

This is for your DM to decide (and he doesn't have to tell you 'til your 
character does something to DISCOVER the information...).  Personally, I 
make recharging most items nearly as difficult as making them in the first 
place.  Guess you didn't want to hear that...

                                                  James S. Zakany
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: dmccart@gomez.intel.com (D. J. McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Question:  Liches & Phlacteries
Organization: Architecture & Software Technology Group, Intel, Santa Clara CA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 21:47:17 GMT

One (not-so-)minor nitpick:

educ@unixg.ubc.ca (Vicki Domansky) writes:

> As I understand it, phlacteries are a crystal or some other item that
> holds the life force of the lich.

Phylacteries are *not* crystal; they are leather.  Specifically, the
American Heritage Dictionary describes one as:

	"Either of two small leather boxes that contain strips
	of parchment inscribed with quotations from the Hebrew
	Scriptures, with one strapped to the forehead and the
	other to the left arm by Jewish men during morning worship."

So maybe it's something a lich has to *wear* to have work.


--
D. J. McCarthy <dmccart@gomez.intel.com>
"What would be the appropriate newsgroup to discuss a friend who got a back and
 chest rash from eating bad squid?"       --Kibo
"comp.sys.amiga.games".                   --Ron Echeverri, talk.bizarre, 7/7/92
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: cstudly@athena.mit.edu (Todd Sterling Anderson)
Subject: Re: Gender in D&D
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 21:00:58 GMT

	I think that your response to your gender inquiry will be highly male.
It seems to be that you are going through two filters instead of just one
by asking over internet.  I think that everyone will agree that most of
the people with net access are male and that most of the people who play
DnD are male.  Thus, if you can assume mathematical independence of
the two probablities, then you can multiply these two numbers together
and get an even smaller fraction.   Of course, it could be argued that
the probabilities are dependent in which case all I can say is ...
Never mind.


todd