HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
Subject: Re: RPG's That Belong on Every Gamer's Shelf
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, NH.
	<1992Nov21.173050.12689@oz.plymouth.edu>
	<1992Nov22.193500.2218@netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 92 20:18:06 GMT

jgrace@netcom.com (Joseph Grace) writes:
>sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan) writes:
>>I don't believe there are any specific titles that belong on every
>>gamer's shelf - tastes vary too widely.
>
>I don't think it's quite that simple, otherwise the same could be said
>of novels (and other books) --- and we wouldn't bother naming
>"classic" books.  

There's a difference between a "classic" book and one that belongs on
every reader's shelf.  I don't think any book belongs on every reader's
shelf, except possibly for a dictionary - and I don't think any one
edition of a dictionary is for everyone, even though I feel the OED is
vastly superior to anything else ever made ...

Likewise with games.  There may be classic games that advanced the
medium of role-playing gaming significantly, but that's not what the
poster asked.  He asked what games we thought should be on every shelf,
and I maintain that there ain't no such animal.

Looking at the five systems you feel should be on my shelf, I'd have to
disagree.  I've read them all and since sold all but one - I don't want
them on my shelf, and wouldn't leave them there if you gave them to
me.  As I said, tastes differ too much.

>I think there's definite milestones and classics
>already.  

No argument there, but why would I want to keep them all, cluttering up
my house?

-- 
  - Steffan O'Sullivan		         sos@oz.plymouth.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: seurer@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Bill Seurer)
Subject: Re: Character Detail
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 23:41:10 GMT
Reply-To: BillSeurer@vnet.ibm.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM Rochester

In article <1992Nov18.195427.4878@news.tufts.edu>, gharris@jade.tufts.edu (George W. Harris) writes:
|> 	However, HERO doesn't claim that point costs are assigned with any-
|> thing else in mind but balance.  Thus, since being the WBLinguist is far
|> from unbalancing in most campaigns, it can be much cheaper without contra-
|> dicting the avowed philosophy.

This is quite debatable.  Since every campaign is different, even those
run by the same GM at different times, the "value" of a skill or whatever
can vary tremendously.

|> 	This would be acceptable for GURPS, as well, if the pricing scheme
|> were consistant with *some* philosophy, be it balance, difficulty, or 
|> rarity.  Since it is not consistant with any of these, it is difficult
|> to generalize the point costs to new advantages or whatever, and can easily
|> lead to undesired results.

It is consistant with a philosophy.  Things cost what Steve Jackson thought
they should cost.  We can argue that we prefer a different set of values but
that doesn't make our costs correct and his wrong.  When I used to play
Champions a lot there were some things that for the style of campaign we
played were too cheap or too expensive compared to other things.  After a
while we stopped trying to fiddle with the costs 'cause it never worked out
anyway.

Personally, I agree with Steffan.  No matter HOW HARD someone tries, no
two characters are point balanced UNLESS THEY ARE EXACTLY THE SAME.  So
stop worrying about it so much, make an interesting character, and have fun.
If your idea of a fun character is one point optimized to the max and the GM
oks it, that's fine by me.

If the cost of something REALLY bothers you, change it.
-- 

- Bill Seurer     Language and Compiler Development      IBM Rochester, MN
  Internet: BillSeurer@vnet.ibm.com    America On-Line: BillSeurer@aol.com
From: jbridson@kean.ucs.mun.ca
Subject: Re: Science Fiction Role Playing
Organization: Memorial University. St.John's Nfld, Canada
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 16:06:19 GMT

In article <1992Nov17.181139.1@wharton.upenn.edu>, millerl@wharton.upenn.edu writes:
> In article <BxvrGr.Ms9@news.iastate.edu>, arakins@iastate.edu (Brother Andrek of the Violet Orchid Brotherhood) writes:
>>   I have a simple question...I'm NOT rying to start a thread, so
>> please e-mail your replies.
>>   I require the following rules:
>>     Combat: HTH, Ranged, Vehicle.
>>     Psionics.
>>     Non-combat interaction.
>>   The campaign world is VERY high-tech. Lasers, fusion guns,
>> power armour, robots, etcetera.
> 
> Get Torg with the Space Gods campaign book. You don't have to set your
> campaign in the Near Now. The combat rules are fast, easy, and
> cinematic, and they cover those huge swarms of snotlings easily. In
> fact, if you are going to use large swarms of opponents Torg will
> *always* be your best bet, because of the very natural *one against
> many* rules. Space Gods covers psionics. Torg has the best non-combat
> interaction rules around. Period. And the Space Gods bioweapons and beam
> weapons will cover all your super-blastem requirements. The only thing
> they don't have are giant robot rules, but those are *easy* to write in
> Torg. Just figure out how much your robot weighs and you have half the
> statistics right there. Torg is also one of the most fun *games* around
> because of the card play, and if your friends are into WH40K because
> it's fun to play then they just might like Torg because of its "fun
> first" attitude.

I concur.  Actually, having only just got Torg , I must be honest in sayign 
that I balked at the amoutn of rules.  But then I took my first look at 
Hero:  Torg seems like the height of simplicity and elegance!  The one word 
that kept coming to mind reading through the Torg rule-book was "elegant".  
That logarithmic scale is fantastic.  So even if you can't get the Space 
Gods source book, I'd still go for Torg; the additional rules would be a 
snap to make.

> -- 
> whoah,
> +++++++++++++++++++++++23
> Loren Miller                           internet: MILLERL@wharton.upenn.edu
> Mediocrity is a hand rail.                         -- Baron de Montesquieu

Robert Bridson (usign the account of jbridson)
From: gharris@jade.tufts.edu (George W. Harris)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Character Detail
Date: 17 Nov 92 02:19:49 GMT
Organization: Tufts University - Medford, MA

In article <1992Nov16.064507.11440@oz.plymouth.edu> sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan) writes:
>>
>Got me.  I *like* the GURPS PA system, though I confess I don't really
>play GURPS as GURPS anymore.  I've drifted into SLURPS: Simple,
>Laid-back Universal RolePlaying System.  I don't worry about point
>balance, and neither do the people I play with.  If you do, then I can
>see how you'd be frustrated with GURPS - characters won't be "balanced"
>with each other, whatever that means.  Certainly not every character
>will be as "powerful" as the next character - fortunately, that's not
>an issue in my group.  We *are* balanced in that we all play
>interesting characters that we want to play - and GURPS *does* allow
>you to do that very well.
>
>Come to think on it, though, I don't know any system that will create
>very diverse individuals with talents in radically different areas that
>will be perfectly balanced with each other.

	Be careful, you're setting up a straw man and knocking it down (eneryone
does it; it's satisfying and easy).  No one suggesting that a points system was
a failure if characters aren't *perfectly* balanced; the complaint against GURPS
was that there was no attempt at even a semblance of balance (well, I 
exaggerate).  Although DX is more useful than ST in *every* genre or campaign
(except maybe some extremely bizarre & limited ones, like GURPS Powerlifting),
they have the same cost, so generally people buy more DX than ST.  Moreover,
the pricing philosophy varies from skills (difficulty) to stats (rarity) to
advantages (utility), so that there really isn't a general rationalization 
for what prices should be.

	If GURPS were to give balance more than lip-service, that is, try and
price things so that, in a typical campaign, characters with different empha-
sis constructed on the same number of points will  be comparable in their
expertise, then the complaints you see about the GURPS pricing would be no
more numerous than the ones for Hero.  As it is, you can create the World's
Best Linguist (or Musician, or Mathematician) for far fewer points than you
could create the World's Best Martial Artist, which is at odds with GURPS'
purported philosophy, but there are still numerous munges in the system 
that tend to make it optimal for characters to concentrate on the same 
things in the same way.

>  - Steffan O'Sullivan		         sos@oz.plymouth.edu
--
gharris@jade.tufts.edu          
George W. Harris              	"He'd kill us if he had the chance."  
Dept. of Mathematics            
Tufts University              			The Conversation
From: gharris@jade.tufts.edu (George W. Harris)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Character Detail
Date: 17 Nov 92 20:28:08 GMT
Organization: Tufts University - Medford, MA

In article <1992Nov17.173458.28067@oz.plymouth.edu> sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan) writes:
>bell@beethoven.cs.unc.edu (Andrew Bell) writes:
>>sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan) writes:
>>>Certainly not every character
>>>will be as "powerful" as the next character - fortunately, that's not
>>>an issue in my group.  We *are* balanced in that we all play
>>>interesting characters that we want to play - and GURPS *does* allow
>>>you to do that very well.
>
>>GURPS doesn't -- ignoring the rules allows you to do that.  
>
>Strange, I could have sworn I'd made some interesting characters that
>I've enjoyed playing.  However Mr. Bell informs me this is not
>possible, so I guess I've been mistaken all these years ... sorry.  I
>wonder how he knows?  Has he been snooping on my gaming sessions all
>these years?

	Steffan, you should read what you're replying to before being snide.
When you don't, you look like a fool as well as a jerk.  Much better to just
look like a jerk (I should know :-{)> ). 

	What the esteemed &ru was saying was, the reason that you were able
to play balanced characters wasn't that you were playing GURPS, but that you
were (by your own admission) pretty much ignoring the GURPS character 
creation rules, and were mature enough not to abuse going outside the system.
Reasonably, you could have done the same thing by ignoring the character
creation rules in RuneQuest, AD&D, Star Wars or Spawn of Fashan, and most
probably you *couldn't* if you adhered strictly to the character creation 
rules in any of those systems, or in GURPS.  So, the key here isn't GURPS,
it's ignoring the rules.  OK?

>  - Steffan O'Sullivan		         sos@oz.plymouth.edu
--
gharris@jade.tufts.edu          
George W. Harris              	"He'd kill us if he had the chance."  
Dept. of Mathematics            
Tufts University              			The Conversation
From: dseal@armltd.co.uk (David Seal)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Advantages
Date: 18 Nov 92 13:16:15 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: A.R.M. Ltd, Swaffham Bulbeck, Cambs, UK

In article <1992Nov11.185411.945@news2.cis.umn.edu>
thornley@milli.cs.umn.edu (David H. Thornley) writes:

>There are certain advantages and disadvantages that can modify some of these.
>By using Strong and Weak Will, you can tailor the Will to any desired value.
>You can raise, but not lower, Perception.  Therefore, if you want a brilliant
>scientist, he or she will be very perceptive, whether you like it or not.
>You can have a magician with average IQ and some magical talent, but if you
>want the magician to have great magical talent you need a high IQ.

Two solutions to the "lowering Perception" problem:

(1) Several disadvantages include effects on perception: e.g.
    Absent-mindedness and Bad Sight. If one of them is suitable, use it.
    This may not be the case, since each of them has some "baggage" that
    comes along with it. In that case:

(2) Design a "Non-alertness" disadvantage and ask your GM to approve it.
    If my memory of Strong Will and Weak Will is correct, I believe a
    suitable value for the disadvantage should probably be half the value of
    the Alertness advantage. If the GM asks why e.g. Absent-mindedness won't
    do the trick, explain why - e.g. you don't actually want to play the
    character as absent-minded, it's just that you don't want the character
    to notice things as much as the IQ implies. If the GM questions whether
    such player-designed disadvantages are within the rules, point at the
    relevant rule sections and make it clear that you're *asking* for the
    disadvantage to be approved, not demanding it. The GM may still refuse
    to even consider the idea: that's the GM's privilege. But then your
    problem is a lack of flexibility in the GM, not in the GURPS system...

David Seal
dseal@armltd.co.uk

All opinions are mine only...
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: seurer@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Bill Seurer)
Subject: Re: Point Allocation vs. Random Generation
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 23:48:13 GMT
Reply-To: BillSeurer@vnet.ibm.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM Rochester

In article <1992Nov18.154752.1@wharton.upenn.edu>, millerl@wharton.upenn.edu writes:
|> The debate doesn't always hinge on the internally consistent character.
|> The other part of the debate is character generation time (and character
|> mortality). If you have a game with high character mortality then you
|> need to have quick and easy character generation. Also, some people just
|> prefer faster character generation. RA is okay for making moderately
|> complex characters quickly, but PA isn't. PA will always take more time,
                                                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|> because it offers more choices, and if you require the players to
|> account for points then PA gets even lengthier.

Not true!  I used to be able to write up a TFT character (the first PA
system I think) in 5 minutes or less.  Even a fairly complicated mage.
TFT was pretty simple, true.  But it took about the same time to create
an AD&D character (lots longer now if you include the optional skill
rules) and oodles longer to create a C&S or Traveller character.  Of
course with Traveller it took about 3 tries to get one that lived through
more than one term.  :-)

I can do a solid GURPS character in about 15 minutes, 5 minutes if I use my
character creation assistant program to help keep track of the numbers.

Familiarity with a system

That said, 90% of this "debate" has boiled down to "Big Macs taste better
than Whoppers" which of course can never be proven since different people
have different tastes.
-- 

- Bill Seurer     Language and Compiler Development      IBM Rochester, MN
  Internet: BillSeurer@vnet.ibm.com    America On-Line: BillSeurer@aol.com
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: ericg@sopwith.ucs.indiana.edu (Eric C. Garrison)
Subject: Re: Bell vs. Linear
Keywords: bell linear
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 20:04:58 GMT

In article <41327@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> bkoike@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Bryce Koike) writes:
>	I have a big problem with the Xd6 curve, though...it's a
>little too steep and only gets worse as you increase the number of
>dice.  (Check out, say, the bell curve for 8d6...strange results, or
>so I think.)  

0's: 23.43
1's: 37.03
2's: 26.09
3's: 10.22
4's: 2.73	
5's: 0.43
6's: 0.07
7's: 0.00
8's: 0.00

Here's what the results of rolling 8d6 one million times. The
numbers are percentages of all rolls.  0's are when no sixes came
up on any of the dice, 1's are one six result, 2's are two, and
so on...

I prefer the Xd3 method (5 or 6 on a 6 sider), requiring more 
successes.  You need fewer dice that way:

ericg@sopwith... prob 1 3
0's: 66.99
1's: 33.01
ericg@sopwith... prob 2 3
0's: 44.07
1's: 45.07
2's: 10.86
ericg@sopwith... prob 3 3
0's: 29.69
1's: 44.63
2's: 22.14
3's: 3.54
ericg@sopwith... prob 4 3
0's: 20.03
1's: 39.59
2's: 29.27
3's: 9.91
4's: 1.20
ericg@sopwith... prob 5 3
0's: 13.13
1's: 31.80
2's: 34.06
3's: 16.77
4's: 3.83
5's: 0.41
ericg@sopwith... prob 6 3
0's: 8.58
1's: 26.06
2's: 32.82
3's: 22.63
4's: 8.21
5's: 1.57
6's: 0.13
ericg@sopwith... prob 7 3
0's: 5.60
1's: 20.31
2's: 30.67
3's: 26.19
4's: 12.92
5's: 3.64
6's: 0.65
7's: 0.02
ericg@sopwith... prob 8 3
0's: 3.58
1's: 16.03
2's: 27.29
3's: 27.59
4's: 16.98
5's: 6.71
6's: 1.65
7's: 0.17
8's: 0.00

I think it is a much more useful method.  

[WARNING: shameless plug mode]

It is incorporated in my simple system RPG as part of the single
mechanic I use (no details until I release the game to the
public).  Look for it being posted to the public domain in a frp
newsgroup near you soon!

[shameless plug mode off]

Eric
From: markk@pongo.West.Sun.COM (Mark Allen Kampe)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Medieval Pain-in-the-Arse
Date: 16 Nov 1992 17:01:47 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems
Distribution: world
Reply-To: markk@pongo.West.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: pongo.west.sun.com

Well, if I had to come up with an authentic twelfth century character 
and wanted something interesting, I would almost surely be a Moorish
scholar.  At that time Europe had fallen into the dark ages, while
the Moors had spent the last 800 years building on the knowledge of
the Greeks.  After 1000, moorish scholars were writing alot of very
impressive commentaries (submitted under latin names of course) and
were in communication with all of the great minds of Europe as well
as the middle east.  Moorish traders were the only path by which goods
from China and India could make it to Europe.  Moorish libraries were
the greatest storehouses of knowledge on earth.  The Moors knew far
more about Europe than Europe knew about them.  The church of the
East has not yet fallen, so the Moors could have been party to all
manner of European intrigue.  The Polo brothers had not yet been
born, and noone had even started to write of the miracles of central
asia ....

That's who I think the most interesting people in a medeival european
campaign would be.

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Subject: Re: Vampire vs. Hero vs. Gurps etc...(Long!)
Reply-To: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 17:50:54 GMT

news@sifon.cc.mcgill.ca writes:
>jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim) writes:
>>Sometimes it will be easier to represent certain probabilities in two rolls 
>>rather than one, certainly, and some other probabilities are easier to take 
>>into account in one roll. But the former is not 'innately' more flexible.
>
>Well, John, I'll agree that two rolls are not any more *flexible*;
>but there are a few situations where two rolls have some type of
>advantage over one. 

	Uh, that's what I said. Reread the above statement. 

>
>     In fact, this example is simply a very specific case of
>the more general situation where a bell curve is artificially
>truncated, or a linear distribution is made non-linear. 

	Agreed. 

>
>     The contest situation is not easily represented with a
>single roll. What a contest is, in effect, is a situation where
>character A is trying to make a roll at minus the amount character
>B did. There is a random roll *and* a random modifier, in effect.
>This is what a contest can be reduced to. How would one do this
>with a single roll? You can't, without being unfair.

	Only if truncation is involved. A 'quick contest' in GURPS is just 
a 6d6 curve: (Skill1 - Skill2) + 3d6 - 3d6. The same thing can be represented 
by trying to roll under (21+Skill1-Skill2) on 6d6. 
	The 'normal contest' in GURPS - where is does not matter how much 
you succeeded by - is difficult to represent in a single roll unless you 
use a table @-(. 

>
>     The other **major** reason for a two roll system is that
>it allows *both* parties to feel like they are doing something,
>which is important in a game. Which is more interesting: the GM
>rolling dice and saying "You're hit!", or him rolling dice and
>saying "Roll a defense, or you're hit"? What about situations
>where two players are competing? Is it fair to let just one
>player determine the outcome? I, for one, don't think so!

	Hmm. It seems to work just fine in Hero, AD&D, and a great 
many other games. Obviously this is a matter of opinion. I have 
no objections whatsoever to the two-roll systems - I have objections 
to misconceptions about their 'added flexibility'. 
	Some probabilities are easier to do in a single roll, some are 
easier in two roll. Certainly there is the trivial case that a two 
roll can cover everything done by a one-roll if one roll is ignored, but 
that is merely quibling. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Kim                    | "Nostalgia ain't what it used to be."
jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu | "The future's not the same anymore."
Columbia University         | "What the hell's wrong with my langauge."
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: dago@stud.cs.uit.no (Dag-Frode Olsen)
Subject: Grayhawk...
Organization: University of Tromsoe, Norway
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 13:46:21 GMT

I'm not sure if this is the right newsgroup, but I have a 
question about the world Grayhawk. I'm planning to start
gaming as a GM, but I've got not so much information about
the world.

I was wondering if some of you guys out there could tell me
something about your experience with the world.

I was also wandering if you had some old Grayhawk books for 
sale...


Thanks!!

Dag-Frode Olsen
	dago
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy,rec.games.frp.misc
From: cwatters@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Coyt D Watters)
Subject: List of respondents
Followup-To: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Summary: list of accounts who have responded so far on the poll
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 14:30:53 GMT

Here's a list of who has responded so far re: Do we begin a discussion on
rec.games.frp.shadowrun?

If a name appears more than once, don't worry - only the newest one will
be counted as part of this poll, this is just a "stupid" list generated w/o
checking for matches.

If you are not on this list, but you responded, please try again, my 
automated mailhandler has been a little cranky.  Some of you may have gotten
a little note from my mailhandler.  Please correct your response and resend.

IN NO PARTICULAR ORDER, THE RESPONDENTS HAVE BEEN:

From: ads3@PO.CWRU.edu (Andrew Shults)
From: lunatix!lmollett@ms.uky.edu
From: urbin@interlan.interlan.com (Mark Urbin)
From: Ridley McIntyre <gdg019@cch.coventry.ac.uk>
From: MGROSSMAN@hamp.hampshire.edu
From: Luke Kendall <luke@research.canon.oz.au>
From: jamtgaar@CS.ColoState.EDU (arne jamtgaard)
From: Punk Rocketeer <SLB3Y@CC.USU.EDU>
From: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
From: adray@mcs.kent.edu (Adam Dray)
From: franklir@GAS.uug.Arizona.EDU (Ryan J Franklin )
From: capitol!thomas@uunet.UU.NET (Mark Thomas)
From: adam@das.harvard.edu (Adam Shostack)
From: hades@coos.dartmouth.edu (Hades)
From: Tim Dunn <tdunn@ecst.csuchico.edu>
From: durrant@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (unknown)
From: hillgrov@feserve.cc.purdue.edu (Martin Hillgrove)
From: pound@ruf.rice.edu (Christopher Brian Pound)
From: matt <hachiman@u.washington.edu>
From: IK20001%MAINE.BITNET@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU (Solipsist at Large)
From: "Phil Scadden, Scadden Research" <mdlcpgs@lhn.gns.cri.nz>
From: Jon Rothstein <splash@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu>
From: Peter Kaminski <pkaminsk@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca>
From: roking@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu (robert king)
From: loren@wmkt.wharton.upenn.edu
From: William Pasqual Flint <claymoar@wam.umd.edu>
From: Tim Dunn <tdunn@ecst.csuchico.edu>
From: amigaman+@pitt.edu
From: mstorer@ponder.csci.unt.edu (Mark Storer)
From: Christopher A. Wood <woodc@rpi.edu>
From: Joseph Dzikiewicz <dzik@access.digex.com>
From: dseal@armltd.co.uk (David Seal)
From: joshua@veritas.com (Joshua Levy)
From: Nathan Y Pearlstein <npearl@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
From: Chaz Stevens <harmonix@u.washington.edu>
From: lavonius@cc.helsinki.fi (Ville Lavonius)
From: mchance@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Chance)
From: Robert King <roking@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu>

-Coyt