HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mmcalees@cs16.UVic.CA (Michael McAleese (One of 'Those Dudes'))
Subject: Submissions for Sauramud's Advice Column #8
Organization: The Forgotten Legions of... uhh... umm...
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 02:12:40 GMT

   Have you ever pondered the advantages of the various fighting styles?
Puzzled over the diversity of armour and the best combinations for every
occaision?  Ever wondered just exactly *what* a guisarme-voulge is?

   Well DON'T write to Sauramud's Advice Column for Young Wizardlings
with your warrior's problems.  If, however, you have a question for the
Curt Jester of magic, send it to mmcalees@csr.uvic.ca and I'll try to 
get Sauramud to include it in the next column.  It's not easy, he keeps
trying to get me to bribe him with gold pieces for the service (though
a few bottles of Canadian Club seem to pacify him).  Sheesh, Ed 
Greenwood got Elmister(tm), I get a burned-out wizard who's been raised
a few too many times, if you get my drift.

-- 
*     mmcalees@csr.uvic.ca (Michael McAleese) : I speak only for me...       *
  "Man can believe the impossible, but never the improbable." - Oscar Wilde
From: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Anyone Heard of Rifts
Date: 28 Jul 92 19:48:29 GMT
Reply-To: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Organization: Department of Chemistry, UCLA

Just for accuracy, I'd like to point out that I did not merely say that the
Palladium system was related to *D&D.  I said that it seemed like an
*EVOLUTIONARY PREDECESSOR* of *D&D, which, in my opinion (and that of many
others on the net) is a much stronger statement and best conveys the true
odor of the system.

As for the setting, it's marginally interesting, but that's about it.

-Doug Gibson
 doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu

Neither UCLA nor the National Science Foundation has a clue what I am doing.
They just pay me to do it.

"We have to tear you to shreds because we care." - EAC
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Subject: Re: Champions
Reply-To: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 23:24:14 GMT

silber@m.cs.uiuc.edu (Ami A. Silberman) writes:
>A couple of comments. First, skills still cost too much. If one has three
>INT skills, its cheaper to buy up INT rather than the skills. 

	Not true. +1 to all INT skills costs 5pts, the same as INT. You 
might want to adjust this to 4pts, but for heroic games I think it is 
fine. 
	Single skills costs 2pts per +1, but if you have any related 
groups of skills, then they costs 3pts per +1 in a group of 3. This is 
Hero's way of encouraging related skills. 

>
>Another comment. The armor and body given to inanimate objects is far too
>low. 

	I don't think so. I think the armor DEF values are a little inflated, 
actually. The problem is that BODY damage works for single blows, but multiple 
blows are too effective on high-BODY objects. This is because BODY (like just 
about everything else in Champions) works on a exponential scale. 
	As a rule of thumb, you can say that if an attack does all the 
BODY of an object, then it is broken. If the attack does one less than the 
BODY of an object, then that object is half-way to being broken. If it 
does 2 less, then it is 1/4 broken, etc. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Kim                    | "All the world will be your enemy, Prince with
jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu | a Thousand Enemies. And when they catch you, 
Columbia University         | they will kill you."        - Watership Down
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: gray@visix.com (Gray Jones)
Subject: SRun:  Dragon Spawn
Reply-To: gray@visix.com (Gray Jones)
Organization: Visix Software Inc., Reston, VA
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 20:54:37 GMT


What if a Dragon male in human form mates with a human female or a 
Dragon female mates with a human male?

I could see the first case producing a magician of great power or something.

What about the second case?

In AD&D there were some sortof dragon men in the dragon lance series, does any body
know anything about them?

--gray
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Axly)
Subject: Re: Huge Robots as weapons, are they valid? Does it matter?
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 14:03:43 GMT

ratinox@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Richard Pieri/Stainless Steel Rat) writes:

>JF> What it is, is a _silly_ point. If you're going to build an army of
>JF> 'mechs just to scare primitive natives, I wager that you'll lose any
>JF> war.

>I'm not talking about "primitives," I'm talking about *you*, "J.D. Frazer."
>Which would scare the bejezes out of you? Which is more likely to scare an
>infantry company sh*tless?

*shrug* That really depends. I'm more scared of an Abrams than I am of
any BattleTech style machines 'cause their weapons have no range. Gee, his
machine guns can't hit us past 90 meters. *GRIN* Time for our antitank
missles. PBI strike back.

>Tanks aren't econimical, either. They're incredibly expensive to
>manufacture and serious fuel hogs. Doesn't stop the world's armies from
>using them, now does it? :-)

That could be because there is very little that will stop a modern tank
except air power. If you gave the vehicles an even break in BTech 
construction rules and gave them a critical hit chart like the 'Mechs
instead of the critical chart where 50% of the time the tank is killed,
vehicles would mop up BMechs. You can still give 'Mechs a run for their
money with vehicles by using hover vehicles in Btech. 3 Gabriels up front
using small lasers and TAG to target for Arrow IV in the rear will leave
the 'Mech dudes hurting fairly quickly. 

Axly
From: a_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: HERO vs. GURPS
Date: 28 Jul 92 21:47:04 CST
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

In article <1992Jul27.232850.9086@athena.mit.edu>, jen@athena.mit.edu (Jennifer Hawthorne) writes:
> In article <1992Jul27.194442.19451@news.columbia.edu> jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim) writes:
>>joshua salter <jsalter@silver.ucs.indiana.edu> writes:
>>> Suggestions on what supplements to buy? (For each.)
>>
> 
> I've only used two GURPS supplements extensively, but I'll tell you
> what I think of those:
> 
> GURPS Space:  Excellent.  It had everything I wanted for my
> space-opera campaign and then some.  

	One of my players owns this; excellent book -- the solar system
generation system is better than Basic Traveller, but not nearly as
convoluted as Book 6: Scouts. The starship construction and combat system
are very nice as well.

> 
> GURPS Psionics:  Good as a campaign source book, but the Psionics
> mechanics are, IMHO, simply unsatisfactory.    (A specific example:
> Although it gives nicely detailed rules for some specialized uses of
> Telekinesis, _nowhere_ in the supplement does it tell you how to go
> about using TK to simply grab an opponent, or an opponent's weapon, or
> to trip up said opponent -- all of which I would consider to be basic
> TK maneuvers that should have been covered.)  

	Remember that a TK's effective strength equal to the maximum weight
he can move divided by 25. I would simply treat the above maneuvers as if the
attacker was physically there, and use the normal rules. I haven't looked
through the book enough (not owned by me) to comment further.

GURPS Magic: This is pretty neccessary if you want to run a campaign where
magic is fairly common and powerful, but you won't regret buying it. It has
about 400 spells and about 30-35 poti..., er, elixirs.

GURPS High Tech: If you really like guns and other things that go bang, this is
for you. However, you can pass on this one unless you and your players really
want to get involved in a lot of TL4-7 combat. Some non-combat stuff.

GURPS Ultra Tech: Lots of nifty gadgets, and quite a few don't deal with 
combat. You don't really have to have this for a space campaign, but is
handy to have.

GURPS Cyberpunk: despite the fact I've had this 2 months, I still haven't
heavily read it. I will admit I got along for quite a while without it,
pulling stuff from R. Talisorian's Cyberpunk and GURPS Ultra Tech.
(I don't use netrunning, though)

GURPS Supers: You can also use this to make alien and fantasy creatures as well
(thats why we got it :-)).

GURPS Swashbucklers: very useful if you want to play that genre; I still 
haven't used it yet, but I do like to read through it every now and then.

GURPS Update: hey, this *is* a handy book for a spare set of basic magic and
psionic rules...

Brandon Cope
From: cassidy@cps.msu.edu.cps.msu.edu (John J Cassidy)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: BANNED AT GENCON!!!
Date: 28 Jul 92 18:47:03 GMT
Reply-To: cassidy@cps.msu.edu.cps.msu.edu (John J Cassidy)
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Michigan State University
Originator: cassidy@indian.cps.msu.edu

In article <14qhidINNnsl@agate.berkeley.edu> stas@soda.berkeley.edu (Stan Malyshev) writes:
>In article <1992Jun26.004125.21363@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> bh967@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Greg Weller) writes:
>>
>>who only worry about the bottom line.  But that's the price
>>you have to pay I guess when you live in a corrupt 
>>Xtian/Capitalist society.  You have to have the patriarchal
>>morality shoved down your throat along with your 'products
>>of your imagination'. 

	Yes better to live in a socialist world, where the people are
only right to tell you what you should believe!  And whether or not you
should be allowed to do something depends on how much money you DON'T
make.  "TSR is rich and has influence.  They should have to let in to
GenCon whatever anybody wants to bring."  In socialists mind Kuwaitis
deserve to die and lose their country because they were driving Mercedes
a couple weeks prior to the invasion.  And as long as someone can tell
you what the people think --- or what the people should think -- then
its okay to shove something down someone else's throat, like Socialism.
From: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Genres
Date: 30 Jul 92 16:02:29 GMT
Reply-To: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Organization: Department of Chemistry, UCLA

Who cares about the RPMs?  That's what a transmission is for.  What matters
is the power output.  Furthermore, we can set up a system which resembles
a pulley somewhat, to have a greater length of pseudomuscle and thus get a
greater contraction in the same physical space.

-Doug Gibson
 doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu

Neither UCLA nor the National Science Foundation has a clue what I am doing.
They just pay me to do it.

"We have to tear you to shreds because we care." - EAC
From: Joe_Neldrett@lppl.mi.org (Joe Neldrett)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Dark Conspiracy
Distribution: world
Date: 20 Jul 92 22:29:14 EST
Organization: Les's Place BBS

In a message dated Mon 20 Jul 92  7:36, thantos@wyvern.via.mind.org
(Lord*Thantos Wyvern) wrote:

 LW>   There's not much activity around about DkCon, but  I suppose  it
might
 LW>   be said I'm one of the Net.DkCon.Psychos...  Though I haven't 
written
 LW>   up any stuff I'm willing to post yet.  :) Some  of it  needs a  bit
of
 LW>   polishing.

 LW>   If you have the Dark Races vol I suppliment, you've got a book full
of
 LW>   ideas right there, but feel free to tweak to one's heart's content 
on
 LW>   the entities...  Some of them might need some smoothing out to work
in
 LW>   your campeign.

Is Dark Races vol I a relatively new suppliment? I've only got the
rulebook, DarkTek Sourcebook, a minimodule, and the suppliment for
converting to a D20 based task system rather than D10. There were a few
modules I thought of buying but haven't got around to it (and spending
money on just about anything it tuff when I have to pay for my own school
tuition) But this Dark Races suppliment sounds quite interesting. My
girlfriend also bought me a few novels that were based on Dark Conspiracy
that one day I will get around to reading. I just don't have the time to
fully flesh out a good campaign. What kind of information does the Dark
Races contain? Anything else good on the horizon for DkCon? Sorry about all
the questions. I'm just in a babbling mood!


 -- AEd V1.36f/EvaA

-- Via DLG Pro v0.992

#========================================================================#
|Joe Neldrett a.k.a. Shmoominator    E-Mail: Joe_neldrett@lppl.mi.org  //|
|Ex-Michigan Technological University Chem/ME Student                \X/ | 
|                                                                        |
|      "Too-da-loo, go with god, and don't accept any wooden nickels."   |
|  //                                                     - George Carlin|
|\X/ (c)1992 Redfender's Red Army Hockey Team Enterprises INC.           |
#========================================================================#
From: mkkuhner@phylo.genetics.washington.edu (Mary K. Kuhner)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: SRUN: Combat, Initiative, Rule of 6's...
Date: 25 Jul 92 06:25:08 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Jul25.062508.4251
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

Another way to handle Shadowrun initiative is to allow wiring to change
mainly the interval between actions, not the raw Reaction score.  For
example, Wired Reflexes 1 might add only a modest +1 or +2 to Reaction,
but instead of getting an action every seven ticks like an unwired
person, the wired person would get an action every five.

We ran with this for the last third of our campaign and liked it a lot
better--for one thing, it helps avoid the silly problem where the
samurai uses up all his actions, then is fired at by several grunts in a
row and runs out of pools.

High wiring becomes very scary.  Duende used to show off his ability to
do several things in between anyone else's actions.  Quite a party
trick.

Mary Kuhner mkkuhner@genetics.washington.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca (David Lamb)
Subject: Re: New Name for Flesh Golem wanted!
Organization: Computing & Information Science, Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 23:39:50 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.171022.9040@uoft02.utoledo.edu> steiner@jupiter.cse.utoledo.edu (jason steiner) writes:
>jonathan@mantis.co.uk (Jonathan Egre') writes:
>> 
>> The name "golem" does indeed come from an Eastern European/Jewish myth.
>> The original "golem" was made from clay, and animated by writing "golem"
>> (in Hebrew) on the clay, I believe.
>
>the story i read mentioned a ghetto's holy man writing something
>on a piece of paper and placing it in the golem's mouth. the golem
>then protected the people from their oppressors or somesuch typical
>thing. just as typical, when the paper was taken from its mouth
>it collapsed on its creator.
>

As with a lot of legends, I wouldn't be surprised if this one exists
in several variations.  The one I read was of Rabbi Loew (or perhaps
Lowe) creating the golem from clay and animating it to protect the
Warsaw Jewish ghetto.

"The Red Magician" by an author whose name I forget (Ellen? Edith? /
Goldstein? Goldman?) has said magician discussing with a rabbi what
word might have been used to animate the original golem.  The magician
eventually makes a golem and picks "Adam" ("clay" but also the name of
the first man).  The rabbi is enraged, considering this blasphemy
(imitating God), and manages to strike out the aleph, leaving "dam"
("blood"), whereupon the golem bleeds copiously and collapses.

Some comic, probably a Marvel, once had a golem animated by the word
"emeth" ("truth") on its forehead.  I take both these variants as
support for the "writing on the forehead" school - but I have vague
memories of the "paper in the mouth" variant, too.

It strikes me that all these variants have the golem being rather too
easy to destroy.
From: Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Genres
Date: 24 Jul 92 23:20:11 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim) writes:

> Just postulate (as I think Btech has) that biotech is developed to cheaply
> produce tremendously powerful artificial muscle fiber. This cannot easily be
> used for driving tank wheels,...

Why not?  Your car is powered by intermittent linear motion that is converted
to rotary motion.  You could power a car by simply replacing cylinders with
muscle fibres, though that probably wouldn't be the optimum method.  It is much
easier to roll a mass on wheels than it is to carry it on two legs.  Four or
six legs might be more efficient than two, and more stable, reliable, etc,
which again ruins the argument for humanoid "mechs".

--

Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca
From: abrams@unislc.uucp (Howard Abrams)
Subject: Re: GURPS: Alien races -- Too powerful?
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Organization: Unisys Corporation SLC
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 00:19:42 GMT

I wanted to create an alien without a mouth (just a tube of sorts),
and it was to communicate with its environment telepathically. I
gave him the "Wild-type psionic talent" for telepathy and took the
mute disadvantage. (The details elude me at the moment) But the
entire thing cost me about 5 points.

I'm an advocate of starting with a base cost character and just add-
ing the advantages and disadvantages you need to make him into the 
alien of your dreams.
From: canders@isr.harvard.edu (Carl E. Anderson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Genres
Date: 21 Jul 92 19:19:03 GMT
Organization: Harvard University, Cambridge, MA

In article <1992Jul21.091958.89468@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au> jwadsley@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au writes:
>In article <1992Jul20.164625.25615@burrhus.harvard.edu>, canders@isr.harvard.edu (Carl E. Anderson) writes:
>> 	But I like to add as much realism to things as I can.  Does anyone
>> have any ideas about improving the 'science' in BattleTech to make it a bit
>> more realistic?
>
>Unfortunately, added realism for BattleTech would destroy the game as it is
>currently known. A few changes I can think of are:
>
>a) Higher destructive power on missiles, which are relatively pathetic.
>b) A move away from two-legged walking mechs. They are extremely unstable.
>c) Much better targeting and guidance systems. Consider Iraq. This is what
>mechs would have to put up with, missiles that hop down the cooling tubes or
>aim directly for the cockpit.

"c" is actually one of my pet peeves about the system (though I'm not
overly familiar with the system, I admit).  It seems almost like half the
reason these mechs are so tough is because you can't target specific
segments, despite each segment being the size of a tank!  Some kind of
"called shot system" maybe ...

>d) A reduced role for individual pilots. A mech could be run far more
>efficiently by a team of pilots and computers than a single man. Considering
>the cost of the things, entrusting them to a single pilot is silly.
>e) Increased range of combat. It should be more like: 'target sighted at 10 km
>range - release missile(s). He's dead'
>f) Much greater use of aircraft / coventional weaponry. In reality, a single
>plane or tank could be equipped with enough firepower to disable a mech. 

"f" is sort of like "c".  Tanks are only wimpy because they don't have as
many segments to spread damage over.  They ought to be harder to hit, and
faster than some giant robot.

>Battletech is a 'what if' science fantasy, not real science fiction.

	Aw, now I'm going to feel all guilty for enjoying it! ;)

Carl
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 15:20:08 -0400 
From: William Henry Timmins <wt0b+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Military Mechs?
	<Bs323p.GC3@acsu.buffalo.edu>

>Mechs are generally built using a substance similar to muscle tissue, a
strong 
>polymer which contracts when it has a current run through it.  Given proper
>experimentation and development, such a material could be more efficient than
>A tank engine, lighter, and cheaper.  If you can develop the substance
such >that
>it requires relatively little current to operate, then you can also
save on the
>size, weight, and cost of the power supply.  
> 
>Why this can't be used in a tank is left as an exercise for the intelligent.

I suppose pistons have been 'forgotten' in the ensuing centuries? I can
think of several designs for tanks which would utilize myomer muscle.

Intelligence is in the eye of the intelligent, bub.

Mind you, I agree that robotic armor and robots will be useful in
certain areas, but humanoform piloted robots more than 4 meters tall in
1 g is silly. Powered armor, exosuits, and the like (near human in size)
make sense for infantry.

Legs on robots (essentially, tanks with legs) makes sense if a high
center point is desired (lots of low cover), but leave the robot
vulnerable. In this case, however, 3+ legs would be good, so that damage
needs to be severe before immobility occurs. Tanks, or vehicles
utilizing treads, are useful for a number of other situations, where
profile is important.

The question is, do you want vehicles high off the ground or low off the
ground. True, legs let you get closer to the ground (if you have 4+),
but wheels are much more efficient.

In any case, multiton humanoid robots are silly.

-Me

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: ins769v@lindblat.cc.monash.edu.au (Veltyen)
Subject: Re: Military Mechs? Hexapod
Organization: Monash University
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 23:28:25 GMT

: ratinox@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Richard Pieri/Stainless Steel Rat) writes:
: >Show me a tracked tank that can get past a trench cut into the ground like
: >this:
: 
: >      _______________
: >             ^^^^^^  |
: >            Mines    |       <---Tank
: >                     |     ____________
: >                     |    |
: >                     |____|
: 
: >where the deep section is just wide and deep enough to really mess up a
: >tracked tank. Pretty standard desert anti-tank setup. The hexapod can
: >(hopefully) just step over it, two legs at a time so it's never unbalanced.
: 
: >--Rat


Anybody thought of jump jets??
Third type of locomotion devices, etc.?

Remember something that you should have learnt about warfare,
It is all fire and movement, Fire being much less important.
Mechs are just extremely maneouverable, especially compared
to tanks.

-Veltyen
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: kyle@Csli.Stanford.EDU (Kyle Wohlmut)
Subject: Re: Milk Crates
Followup-To: rec.games.frp.misc, alt.milkcrates
Summary: Exactly!
Organization: Rocking Pig Enterprises
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 22:06:04 GMT

In article <RATINOX.92Jul22104836@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu> ratinox@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Richard Pieri/Stainless Steel Rat) writes:

>Milk Crates. Yes, those plastic crates that hold 4 1-gallon jugs, the kind
>you find really cheap a the local K-Mart. They stack neatly, they hold your
>books (or other stuff) neatly, and best of all...
>
>Everything's already packed when you move!
>

Not only that, but those things are for all practical purposes
indestructable (kinda like Wolverine's skeleton).  And somehow each
weighs only a couple of grams... I keep telling NASA that all they
need to make the manned space station are milk crates and duct tape,
but so far haven't sold them on the idea.

You wouldn't even need to launch the fucker, you can just build a
tower out of more milk crates, since they stack so well, and then have
a couple of guys walk the thing into orbit.

Why doesn't George see it my way?

-/-/-/-/-/-/
Kyle
'Women: a mistake?  Or did He do it to us ON PURPOSE?' --D. van Horne
/-/-/-/-/-/-
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc