HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sl9b4@cc.usu.edu (Deep Six)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Do U customize games 4 players?
Date: 13 Aug 92 23:40:27 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

In article <86152@netnews.upenn.edu>, 
 millerl@jeremiah.wharton.upenn.edu (Loren J. Miller) writes:

> Hey Chadd,
> 
> Thanks for posting the new thread but you missed the point of this
> group. You're supposed to post advice type threads on .misc. This
> group is for advocacy. You're supposed to advocate some game system or
> method or some other obnoxious opinion that immediately polarizes 90%
> of the readers and offends everybody. Stop asking for advice here, we
> don't want the advocacy to spill over into misc or the constructive
> discussions to spill into advocacy. And I don't care what the shlubs
> say about "oh, that group's too busy! i want to talk here where it
> isn't so busy." 

No Loren, actually I think it's fine where it is, thank you very much. 
There are, after all, two positions in the post to advocate, and I am 
hoping for some really decent polarization to occur somewhere down the 
line. But Loren, if you do per chance have some more of that smug 
politeness to spread around, could you please write to the folks who 
are keeping the ``Chili Wars'' and ``Forkless..'' threads alive?

> if you lost your contact lenses would you look in the
> room where the lenses were or in another room that was quiet and well
> lit?  (yeah, old joke)

I uh, guess you had to be there, huh?

Okay,
+  Chadd  L.  VanZanten   SL9B4@CC.USU.EDU  +
+  ``You know,  I thought this was a good   +
+  idea but this is one weird mama-jama.''  +
+                    -- TV's Frank, MST3K   +
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: singley@helix.nih.gov (Erick D. Singley)
Subject: Re: Roleplaying vs. gaming, was Re: Diceless or Senseless?
Organization: (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 15:13:49 GMT

hile listing gaming qualifications would be pointless, I have done a bit of both.  I tend to agree with boths sides of the issue; and both extreames.
Gaming with dice: can get dragged down into book-keeping
                  can cause surprise and humor into dead-end situations
Gaming without  : can deteriate into simple grunts of "I search for traps"
                  can generate the most immaginative interplays that will
                      be remembered and passed down as sagas for the ages

Note all the CANs, as one person pointed out:  There are many stawmen that can
be created for and against each system.  As others have pointed out, the GM
CAN take advantage of either system or CAN let either let it take control
over their plotline.  It's up to the people involved to talk things out.

  As a point: all of our gaming group are GMs for one system or another and we
add our suggestions to the game plot, suggestions on how one characters actions
should be handled, and reality checks.  If the GM asks "just HOW do you fire that grenade launcher in this forrest?"  my character might plead CHARATER STUPIDITY and ask "does my character know that firing a projectile with a kill radius
of 30 M into a obstical ridden arc might be BAD?" the GM will tell me one way
or the other- and continue role playing.
 
  If some topic of reality come up that the GM or players don't have experience
in that they wish to role-play I might say to another person in the group 
"your character is a renowned scientist [I am a Biochemist, personallly] and he would probably know that being on another planet with life does not NESSESARYLY
mean that you can eat the plant life here (stereo-chemistry, alternate bio-chem
pathways, etc.)"  The GM will say "oh, never thought of that. Yeah, Jim, your character figures you'll need to find another food source" or "Nope, his characteris a particle physist- he probly wouldn't think of that".

  My opinion? Dice when needed. (combat, player non-knowledge [ie my character
knows better that I do], and any sisituation not covered under everyday life)
[agreed role playing firewood gathering, unless it has something to do with the plot, is excessive.]
  Lee Garvin, the creater of The Floating Vagabond, games with us. He would agre
that dice shoudl be used as little as possible, and then only to futher the story line.

As a GM, expect the unexpected, remeber that it's YOUR world- don't let players
push you around, don't let the rules get in the way of gaming-
but don't be unfair- give people some warning before you decide that in Shadowrun being able to HOLD a grenade and only take med dam is now going to change.
Have fun- rules fighting is stressful- its your game to have fun with, its the players game to have fun with. Share. Compromise.

'Nuf said. Happy thread, I'll try to follow.

Erick Singley




Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: swaim@owlnet.rice.edu (Michael Parks Swaim)
Subject: Re: 10% XP bonus (oppression of natural talent)
Organization: Rice University
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1992 19:01:33 GMT

In article <64900@hydra.gatech.EDU> ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge Diaz) writes:
>In article <1992Aug3.083652.20141@mtu.edu> mrmach@mtu.edu (MARK R. MACH) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug3.162537.9819@waikato.ac.nz>, mperry@waikato.ac.nz writes:
>
>>>>Personally, I'd like to do away with the +10 XP thing. But if its going
>>>>to be used, it should go to low-stat characters who are learning more
>>>>about how to deal with not having a great deal of natural talent. 
>
>>>Thats right, anyone with natural talent should be penalised.
>
>>What?!  There's no penalty involved in saying they don't get a bonus.
>
>You missed the point.  The original poster said that he would give *low*
>stat characters the bonus.  Then the follow-up poster said what's quoted.
>He wasn't saying that you should give the bonus to the high-stat characters,
>just *don't* give one to the low-stat characters.
>
>Do so *is* penalizing the high-stat characters.
  You could look at it making low stat characters better able to survive.
>>I don't think extremes would go that far, but I bet you'll see people a lot
>>less disappointed when they roll up a mage with a poor int.  Let's face it, 
>
>This is silly.  Our DM let us roll up our stats, then decide what goes
>for what.
>
>For example, I had an 18, a 15, a 13, and three 9s.  I could choose what
>my 18 would be Intelligence, etc....

  I, on the other hand, rolled  two 15s, a 12, two 10s and an 8. I threw
him away because I don't have any scores over 15. The origional posters
point was that characters with high scores gain the benifits of their
attributes, and they advance rapidly, putting poeple who didn't roll
as well at a double disadvantage. 
  The origional suggestion was to give the low stat characters the bonus
to balance the usefulness of high and low stat characters. As such, I see
nothing wrong with it. Sure, it's hard to justify, but this is a game
where priests who practice human sacrifice can't draw blood in combat.
-- 
Mike Swaim            | "What izzis wunnderful thing? S' Beautiful
swaim@owlnet.rice.edu | I think I'll put my tongue on it." -Arthur
Rupp doesn't even know who I am,
 much less care what I think
From: a_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: What's Wrong with SUPERS?
Date: 21 Aug 92 12:30:01 CST
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

In article <RATINOX.92Aug20122747@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu>, ratinox@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Richard Pieri/Stainless Steel Rat) writes:
> 
> Supers, by my definition, are *not* realistic. GURPS Supers also puts too
> much emphasis on points and mechanics. For example, it's the only game I
> know of where you have to *pay points* just for a costume. For cryin' out
> loud, why bother? Everyone gets one, so why charge them for it? Just to
> make it indestructable? Superman's outfit ain't, and neither is Spider
> Man's (Supe's mom made his and Spidey made his himself, both out of whole
> cloth, as it were :-).
> 

	You *don't* have to buy the costume advantage unless you have powers
that would destroy your costume or leave it behind (Body of Fire,
Insubstantibility with no weight carried, etc). It just keeps you from having
to go out and get a new costume after every fight (or in the middle of one...).

Brandon Cope
From: batemanc@p4.cs.man.ac.uk (Mad Chris)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: VOTE NOW!
Date: 14 Aug 92 15:21:11 GMT

Todays 'phone poll question is:

HAVE YOU BEEN ANNOYED BY LOREN YET?

If 'yes', dial 0898 345 456
If 'no',  dial 0898 435 457

--

Mad Chris, donning large, flame proof suit...
From: millerl@wharton.upenn.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Pomposity
Date: 20 Aug 92 15:04:16 GMT
Organization: Newt World Order

In article <3382@bcstec.ca.boeing.com>, hall@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Robert J. Hall) writes:
> So, where do you fit in? :-)

Hmm. Looks like a table to me. Roll a D6 and figger it out yourself.

-- 
whoah,
+++++++++++++++++++++++23
Loren Miller                           internet: MILLERL@wharton.upenn.edu
The more corrupt the government, the greater the number of laws -- Tacitus
From: seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Chili Wars
Date: 17 Aug 92 16:05:44 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
Originator: seawasp@pmax1.cis.pitt.edu

In article <1992Aug17.154150.7510@burrhus.harvard.edu> canders@isr.harvard.edu (Carl E. Anderson) writes:
>	Sir, I cannot account for your taste or mine, but perhaps you are
>unaware of the health _benefits_ of house rule BEER systems and related
>games.  It is well known that several short sessions per day significantly
>reduce the risk of heart diesease (though it is well known that too many
>sessions can lead to severe problems with your character - too much of a
>good thing ...).

	I'm afraid you've been misled by distorted PUBlicity on this matter.
While it is true that people who indulge in the more advanced WINE system
in moderation tend to do better in the physical endurance arena, this may
simply be a statistical correlation rather than a cause and effect 
relationship. Moreover, this smacks of minmaxing. You completely neglect the
established fact that even a single game... er, glass of BEER reduces your
effective Wisdom and dex stats, putting you at penalties for judgement.
Is this questionable character longevity benefit worth the constant 
penalties to your other intellectual and coordination stats?


                                 Sea Wasp
                                   /^\
                                   ;;;

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: paul@sco.COM (Paul Jackson)
Subject: Re: Stuff in AMBER (was Re: Diceless or Senseless?)
Organization: SCO Canada, Inc.
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 16:45:09 GMT

In article <RATINOX.92Aug10201453@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu> ratinox@meceng.coe.northeastern.edu writes:
>Yup. If anyone missed my post about Han Solo and good stuff, this is it.
>Having a ton of good stuff doesn't mean everything goes your way all the
>time and life is a bed of roses. That would be dull-dull-dull, not to
>mention boring. Good stuff means that when you *do* get bad breaks (and Han
>Solo gets hit with 'em left, right, and center), things will eventually
>turn themselves around to your benefit.

Actually, I'd say Han (and a huge number of fictional characters) have BOTH
lots of Good Stuff and lots of Bad Stuff. The fact that this is illegal in
Amber is, to me, a bug and not a feature. I LIKE characters who have both
lucky advantages and unlucky disadvantages (I don't like playing them, but
I'm amused to have them around).
Organization: Central Michigan University
Date: Thursday, 20 Aug 1992 07:55:13 EDT
From: <34ZBTXQ@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU>
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: What's Wrong with SUPERS?

 What is it that so many people hate about GURPS Supers?! I admit, it ain't
Champions, but it's not a bad supers game! It beats DC, Marvel, Enforcers, V&V,
and just about any other game I've seen. It's not a meta-system like Champs,
which reduces flexibility somewhat, but mainly for munchkins, as far as I can
tell; I've played and run it, and found it quite enjoyable (but then again, I'm
fanatic enough to buy GURPS Bunnies and Burrows). I haven't yet found a hero
concept that I can't build with Supers, and the injection of somewhat more
"realistic" effects is interesting. So what's the problem?
                                         Allen Shock
From: canders@isr.harvard.edu (Carl E. Anderson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Chili Wars
Date: 17 Aug 92 15:45:42 GMT
Organization: Harvard University, Cambridge, MA

In article <loydb.08j8@fnordbox.UUCP> loydb@fnordbox.UUCP (Loyd Blankenship) writes:
><sigh> Ever do something you really regret? I regret this thread. I regret
>the wasted bandwidth. I shall go flog myself now, head hung in shame. :-)

	I disagree! :)

	I find this thread humorous and I think it serves a useful purpose.
It lets us know when a normal thread as gotten out of control.  I really
laughed when the chili thread picked up with "Forkless or Senseless".  It
keeps the flames low I think, by making the issues humorous.

Cheers,
Carl

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl Edlund Anderson	            	"Hefi ek ok aldri sva reitt vapn
canders@isr.harvard.edu			at manni at eigi hafi vidh kommit."
OR
anderso2@husc.harvard.edu			- Skarphedhinn Njalsson 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: sl9b4@cc.usu.edu (Deep Six)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Do U customize games 4 players?
Date: 13 Aug 92 13:47:51 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

In article <-b4m7nm@lynx.unm.edu>, 
 tkogoma@triton.unm.edu (Gym Z. Quirk) writes:
In article <1992Aug11.214904.58074@cc.usu.edu> 
 sl9b4@cc.usu.edu (Deep Six) writes:

>>Please can we have a new thread?

goodwin@orionsci (Ben Goodwin) writes:
>Please don't try to stop a thread just because you don't like it.

Please don't try to presume that I'm trying to stop a thread. All I asked
was if someone could come up with a new thread (there's hardly anything to
read anymore). And don't sling that kill file stuff around either, I have
been reading most of the posts on that thread, it's just getting old now.

tkogoma@triton.unm.edu (Gym Z. Quirk) writes:
> Care to suggest one?

Okay, I guess if you want something done, you have to do it yourself, eh?
Here is something I have been arguing with myself about.

I'm running a GURPS game right now, and I have a really good group of
players. They all get into developing their characters and most of them
really play up their characters' personalities (and not because I require
it or prompt them to, they just seem to like it).

Now, the campaign is set in TL6, where most of the characters are hired
mercenaries. To avoid being carbon copies of each other, the players have
tried to specialize in different skills, and some of the characters are 
super specialized. The question is, when I write up scenarios, do I write
different segments in which each character can exhibit his/her talents? Or
do I just write up plausible scenarios and wait for opportunities (for the
characters to use their specialties) to present themselves?

Here are the arguments I've thought of for both sides. If I write ``custom''
scenarios, where each character has his moment in the limelight, each 
player will get to satifactoraly play out the character on a regular basis.
On the other hand, my players are pretty sharp, and they would know that 
I was customizing the scenarios. I dunno how they would react to this. They
like realistic scenarios, and at the end of each game we sometimes note the
plot weaknesses in the scenario. Customizing the adventures could be seen
as a definite plot-hole (it's really hard to realistically have something
to blow up in every scenario for the demolitions specialist).

So, if I write reasonable, realistic scenarios, the characters will not 
have as many opportunities to play out their specialties, but the plots 
will be more solid. What would you do? 

Alright, I have done my part to start a new thread. Now someone else have
a try.

Okay,
+  Chadd  L.  VanZanten   SL9B4@CC.USU.EDU  +
+  ``You know,  I thought this was a good   +
+  idea but this is one weird mama-jama.''  +
+                    -- TV's Frank, MST3K   +

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: gray@visix.com (Gray Jones)
Subject: Re: marvel
Reply-To: gray@visix.com (Gray Jones)
Organization: Visix Software Inc., Reston, VA
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 15:35:34 GMT

In article <57268@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>, jacobus@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Bryan J. Maloney) writes:
|> Warning, the following is going to be quite an unpleasant experience for
|> those who belive in basic human dignity.

uh, whatever....

|> In article <oeYaS=200h7bA1IVcn@andrew.cmu.edu> af2e+@andrew.cmu.edu (Alex Feely) writes:
|> >Hello,
|> >I just joined this bboard, but I'd like to say somthing. Has anyone
|> 
|> Bboard??  This is a newsgroup.  "Bboards" are what you found back when you
|> didn't have a real computer account, just a modem and too much time on
|> your hands.  Welcome to the big pool, hope you can swim with the sharks.
|> 

Bboard is just a word to describe a service.  Explain the actual difference between
the services provided by a bboard and a newsgroup (on alt.buzzword or somewhere
appropriate).

For those of you who are new to netnews, let me define a couple of terms:

big pool:  wonderful world of netnews
sharks:  frustrated individuals with a "real computer account" and too much time
               on their hands.

|> >heard of MARVEL SUPER HEROES! I'm not looking for a game, right now I
|> >play AD&D2, But this is a good game published by tsr, It's even been in
|> >DRAGON magazine. It's high time people recognize it for what it is. It's
|> >far SUPERior to any other comic role-playing system. 

I played Marvel for about a year and it's kinda fun.  It's a good beginners game 
because it has straight forward mechanics and tons of readily available background
materials.  I would recommend it as a good first Supers game for beginning role-
players, but more experienced players would probably enjoy Champions or something
derived from the Amber system.

|> I:  There are no good games published by "tsr" (hey, anyone notice a similarity
|> between that and "tsar"?  Might explain their tyrannic, paranoid, greedy
|> behaviour, no?

uh, whatever....

|> 
|> II:  Being in "DRAGON magazine" is no sign of quality whatsoever, especially
[stuff deleted]

I have to agree on this, game magazines associated with particular game companies
might have biased reviews.  This bboard is sometimes a good place to look for reviews
(if you can sift through the useless penis stroking).

|> 
|> III:  I "recognize it for what it is".  It's a badly-designed knock-off
[helpful information deleted, see previous post by jacobus@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Bryan J. Maloney)]

To give credit where credit is due, Mr. Jacobus can do multi-column arithmetic in his head.

If want to experiment with super human characters, I would recommend Amber. 
The world and setting is very specific, but the game mechanics (especially the
attribute auction) would make a very cool Supers game.

IMHO, of course.

--gray
From: batemanc@p4.cs.man.ac.uk (Mad Chris)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: VOTE NOW!
Date: 17 Aug 92 14:18:57 GMT

mvw@anywhere.umd.edu (Martin V. Walser) comments:

> No need to publicly try to make fun of Loren's efforts
>which are always, at least, polite and meant for the good of rgf.*.  If one
>doesn't agree with Loren's position, one can always press 'n'.

But this is the point. If Loren had been polite, I wouldn't have bothered
posting. It was precisely because Loren WAS insulting ( and inaccurate ) 
that I made my post. This is what annoyed me.

Mad Chris.
From: mperry@waikato.ac.nz
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: sprinters revisited (was Re: GURPS Total Rewrite)
Date: 17 Aug 92 11:14:52 +1200
Organization: University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

In article <1992Aug16.092638.11977@news.unomaha.edu>, PCHEM14@Zeus.unomaha.edu (FALL88) writes:
>> >How is this in terms of modeling atheletes.  In the Olympics, this year, we
>> >put forward a football player as a sprinter.  Sure, he was heavy, but hugely
>> >strong.  He had the same type of acceleration and top speed of most of the
>> >others.  Don't think he won, but he is proof that you can get Olympic times
>> >out of sheer strength...
I find this statement unusual. What does a football player do?
Don't they make lots of small sprints. What a footballer has is fast recovery.
The footballer could probably run several 100m races with only small breaks in
between.

From the shorts I see of american football, you americans could sure do with
some NZ kickers. Just take a look at the winfield cup (rugby league in
Austrailia) to see how good NZ goaler kickers are. Even the british league has
a large number of NZ goal kickers.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: uc-chan@mcl.ucsb.edu (Christina Callihan)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Put Up or Shut Up (Dice[less])
Date: 12 Aug 92 22:45:47 GMT

In <1992Aug11.012959.22593@u.washington.edu> rrn@milton.u.washington.edu (H++ Visser) writes:

>There seems to be this idea that people who don't like playing games w/o
>dice are some sort of neanderthal tribe, whose minds would be instantly
>enlightened if we tried one. Well, guess what? The idea isn't all that new.
>I don't know anyone who plays RPGs that hasn't done it once or twice. Most
>somehow missed the divine white light somehow. Maybe there's too much 
>background radiation where I live, or rain or something. 

There also seems to be this idea that people who are interested in the
concept of diceless roleplaying are on some holy crusade to "convert" all
the poor dice using shlubs out there.  Puh-leeeeeze.

May I put forth a few propositions that I think most people can agree on
(and which have already been mentioned, but I think some are missing them).
From: gt7219a@prism.gatech.EDU (Christopher Michael Lawyer)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Forkless or Senseless (Winging It)
Keywords: just a joke
Date: 16 Aug 92 05:11:57 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <13AUG199208241159@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov> spzkny@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (JAMES ZAKANY) writes:

>  And if you haven't tried WINGS (the Buffalo version) then all your 
>opinions are baseless and you're a snot.  So there!

You better damn well believe that I haven't tried the Buffalo
version of WINGS.  That would involve going to Buffalo.  I 
happen to know that it gets cold up there and besides, I'd
have to be in New York.  Blech!  I've had my fill of the local
WINGS and quite frankly, I am not impressed.  And since I no
longer can think of rational reasons to argue my point, I am 
now giong to resort to cheap name calling.

Loser.  Miscreant.  Fiend.  Bastard.  Son of a Bitch.  
Your mother should have aborted you.  Burn in Hell.
Kiss my ass.  You suck.  Test tube baby.  Piece of
filth.  Son of a motherless goat.  Betcha Dan Quayle
spells better than you.  Na na na na na na na.  Phbllllt.

:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

the manatee

>
>                                                  James S. Zakany


Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: dzik@access.digex.com (Joseph Dzikiewicz)
Subject: Re: marvel
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 03:34:04 GMT

In article <57268@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> jacobus@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Bryan J. Maloney) writes:
>I:  There are no good games published by "tsr" (hey, anyone notice a similarity
>between that and "tsar"?  Might explain their tyrannic, paranoid, greedy
>behaviour, no?
>

I must disagree.  The original D&D was excellent for its time.  Also, I
have seen good board games published by TSR recently.  I would include
"Buck Rogers" in this list.

Joe Dzikiewicz
"Down with categorical imperatives!"



Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy