HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wilder@nx02.mik.uky.edu (jeff wilder)
Subject: Re: ShadowRun HEROIC??? (was Re: Burn, GURPS...)
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 09:41:44 GMT

In <1k2sv4INNh5u@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu> cwagner@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Christian Wagner) writes:

|The GURPS CP Adventures book is -not- hard-linked with anything in the GURPS
|CP book. 'DNA/DOA' and company -are- hard-linked to the base SR rules. Do you
|get what I'm trying to say here?

This might explain a lot.  "DNA/DOA" happens to be the absolute worst of
the SR adventures.  It's written by Dave Arneson, and absolutely holds on
to the typical "dungeon crawl/kill the monsters/loot the bodies" feel of
original D&D.  Basically, this package sucks.  If you're judging a "typical"
SR campaign by this adventure alone (or even in combination with only a
couple extras--this one has enough odor to contaminate them all), you're
making a huge mistake.

So be honest (and the temptation will be there to exaggerate, Chris): how
many of the SR adventures have you looked over?

IMO, some of the packaged adventures are worth the bucks, despite the
linear, "read it to em verbatim" style that I despise.  For me, a full-
time worker and student, the plot-lines, the NPCs, and the maps justify
the $8 a pop.

Some of the better ones...Mercurial; Dreamchippers; One Stage Before;
Harlequin; and Universal Brotherhood.  Even with the major surgery I
perform, however, these types of adventures are few and far between;
the vast majority of playing time deals with simple survival on the vicious
streets of Seattle.  Kinda like Case, in "Chiba City Blues."  Except,
of course, with magic. :-)

|No shit. But having a maximum arbitrary limit for -all- characters is a lousy
|way to enfore game balance. The semi-random system of CP2020 is better, but
|not much; at least it doesn't lead to standard 'packages' of cyberware, but it
|still leads to artificial roleplaying problems for people with lots of gear.

|In a system where cyberware costs money, and one has an upper limit, one can't
|create quite a lot of interesting character types. Full-convertion 'borgs, 
|something one finds in quite a bit of CP, are impossible under SR and just 
|barely possible under CP2020. People with lots of 'ware but who are terminally
|broke and under-equipped (Molly comes to mind) are difficult to make; one has
|to have cyberware be ridiculously cheap for beginning characters to have any.

|I suppose most people don't have a problem with it; I find cheap cyberware and
|-- 
|    "Well, do you ever get the feeling that the Story's too damn real
|                        and in the present tense?"
|               Christian Wagner - cwagner@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu 
--
==============================================================================
| Jeff W  uk06666@ukpr.uky.edu | Meddle not in the affairs of cats, for they |
| Wilder  & wilder@mik.uky.edu | are subtle, and will piss on your cyberdeck.|
==============================================================================
From: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: ShadowRun HEROIC??? (was Re: Burn, GURPS...)
Date: 27 Jan 93 23:28:51 GMT
Reply-To: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Organization: Department of Chemistry, UCLA

In article <1993Jan25.005104.2125@dragon.acadiau.ca>, 900667c@dragon.acadiau.ca (Gerald Cameron) writes:
>>That's what I meant. In, for example, GURPS, or ever Cyberpunk 2020, or even
>>-Hero- for Christ's sake, an -unskilled- person can unload a 12-gague at PB
>>range and there is a chance (which varies from game system to game system) that
>>the target will be dead.
>
>>This cannot happen in SR; the -only- way to boost the damage of a weapon is to
>>be skilled with it. That 10S shotgun cannot kill, -period-, unless one is
>>skilled with it, and that is utter and complete bullshit.
>
>Oh come on.  Who wants to play a game where you're liable to get geeked by some
>normal shmuck who just got POed because you knocked over his convenience store?
>All RPG's are slanted towards heroic action, including cyberpunk ones.

I do.

If I know there aren't going to be any consequences for knocking over the
convenience store, where's the fun?  If there isn't any risk, there isn't any
fun, IMHO.  Guaranteed success is B-O-R-I-N-G.  I don't want to play any game
where there isn't any chance of that normal schmuck taking me out.


-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: lore@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (Lore Christian Sjoberg)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Nature of CP and gaming universes (was Re: ShadowRun HEROIC???)
Date: 28 Jan 1993 05:46:32 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz
Distribution: scruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucscb.ucsc.edu


In <1993Jan27.214139.23519@news.columbia.edu> jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim) writes:

>cwagner@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Christian Wagner) writes:
>>The idea is, that cyberpunk characters in general tend to be more powerful 
>>than characters in other genre's, but when you realize that applies to the 
>>heavy hitters and villians as well..... 
>>
>>"Cinematic" style, which is what we were talking about in the first place, 
>>has characters be the top-of-the-ladder. Most CP characters don't even come 
>>-close- to being the 'Best'.

>	OK - I think I see our difference here. I don't consider that 
>"cinematic" style requires that the PC's be top-of-the-ladder. They can 
>be defeated, and opponents may be better than them who they defeat just 
>by luck or cheating. I don't recall anything in the SR book or rules which 
>says that corp expediters are worse than the runners. 
>	A good example is "Raiders of the Lost Ark", which is rather 
>definitively cinematic, IMO - but hero was constantly beaten up on, 
>outmaneuvered, and in the end he failed to stop his opponents.

Gotta disagree with you, here. Indy IS top-of-the-ladder. (So were many
of his opponents.) If any NORMAL person were in Indy's shoes, they would
have been a BOULD-R-MADE brand pancake by the end of the first ten
minutes of the first movie.

 
-- 
Lore Christian          +     rec.arts.comics    + "Well, red means       
     Fitzgerald Sj|berg = Rarely Asked Questions = 'caution.' Or 'beef' if
  lore@ucscb.ucsc.edu   + #3 -- "So, who's this  + it's a bullion cube..."
  lore@cats.ucsc.edu    = Superman guy, anyway?" =  --Alastatia, "Toys"   
 

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: elandal@archtwr.tower.nullnet.fi (Ismo Peltonen)
Subject: Re: Thoughts on GURPS
Organization: Chambers of the Archmage
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 19:25:45 GMT
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Matt Madsen (mmadsen@bonnie.ics.uci.edu) wrote:
: "...a ST 19 character can reliably _lift_ 616 pounds..."  What does "lift"
: mean?  Does that mean dead lift (pick up off the ground)?

: The point is that someone with average strength can bench press 150 lbs. or
: so, in real life, and there are people who can bench four times that.  I
: don't have 2nd. ed. Supers, so can you tell how much you can lift with ST 10
: using extra effort?  I would suspect that it's about half of what you can
: lift with ST 19 (and it should be!).  If it's not, strength isn't linear in
: GURPS, as they claim.

  Extra effort isn't useful unless one's ST is already high. It requires
rolling against ST with negative modifier depending on how much you want
to lift (every 10% increase in weight normally allowed gives -1 to ST
roll).
  And ST is linear with normal ranges. Extra effort (can be used in
other cases also, such as jumping) is most often useful when the
stat/skill against which one's rolling is high enough to lessen the
risk involved.

: To clarify, the point is _not_ that you can't make a character who can lift
: 600 pounds; the point is that you can't make a character who is four times
: as strong as average.

  What's four times as strong as average? Does four times the damage?
Can lift four times as much? Has four times as many fatigue points?
-- 
Elandal		(aka Ismo Peltonen)			| Hanuripolku 5B15
home (UUCP)	elandal@archtwr.tower.NullNet.FI	| 00420 Helsinki
Univ (internet)	ipeltone@cc.Helsinki.FI			| FINLAND
data		+358-0-5072005			voice	+358-0-537515
From: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Subject: Re: Random Rolls
Reply-To: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 22:37:16 GMT

dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (RedSwordTarga) writes:
>dunkelza@titan.ucs.umass.edu (KEITH C MCCORMIC) writes:
>>  You wanna bet?  About half of the people who responded to my survey
>>wanted some element of randomness in character creation.  Much more fun?
>>Maybe for people who can't deal with weird characters...
>
>Well, since GURPS is based on 3-18 stats, and 3d6 can generate characteristics
>in that range, I don't see what the problem is. People who want
>random stats can have random stats, they just have to pay for them. 

	Whee! Combine the worst of both worlds! 

	You get the same lack of choice as in roll systems, and still have 
all the complication and number-juggling of the point system - to generate 
a character who will most likely be far less effective (on the same points) 
than those who allocated their points intelligently. Most notably, anyone 
who rolls 3d6 for his attributes in GURPS will very likely end up with a 
character with tons of points left over, leaving him the same point alloca-
tion head-aches as everyone else, and ineffective stats. 

	Many people have said that the mania over "game balancing" PC's is 
not the fault of the point systems- "those who want unequal characters can 
have them", right? Wrong. 
	Point systems have *created* the patently ridiculous idea that 
beginning PC's must be equally effective, or that a simply numerical 
formula can determine the effectiveness of a character. A point system 
is never going to be more than a rough estimate of the effectiveness of 
a character, and I think the emphasis on exact accounting in games like 
GURPS, Hero, and Amber is ridiculous. 

	Note here: I *like* point systems, and I enjoy games where players 
get alot of control in how their character turns out. However, I think 
there needs to be alot less emphasis on accounting, and a very clear 
signal that the points are only a rough guideline, and that characters 
do not have to be exactly equal in points. 
	Too many times I have seen GM's who can clearly see that a charac- 
ter is less effective than the others, yet he refuses to give that 
character more points, because of a blind faith in a simplistic pricing 
scheme. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Kim                    | "You're on the cutting room floor, Chaplin.
jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu | Not a good place to be."
Columbia University         |                  (from the movie 'Chaplin')
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow)
Subject: Re: eternal gurps flamewar
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 23:28:00 GMT

millerl@wharton.upenn.edu

> ...but guess he'd {Sea Wasp] rather play games that allow his character to
> survive hydrogen bomb explosions than games that let his character get
> killed by a stray bullet.

You're being unfair to poor Sea Wasp.  He'd probably agree that being killed
by a mundane bullet is intolerable, but an H-bomb just might be impressive
enough to make an acceptably HEROIC death.

Of course, a true hero would save for half damage, and thus survive.  :-)

--

Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca
From: corleyj@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (Jason D Corley )
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Burn, GURPS, BURN!
Date: 26 Jan 93 02:39:20 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson


*plonk*

Sorry to the guy who invented the *plonk* for wasting it on
such a _stupid_ argument.

--
*******************************************************************************
"Keep an eye on the species below us...because you never know who may be next."
	----Bertha's Save The Cat Committee (Garrison Keillor)
Jason D. "corleyj@gas.uug.arizona.edu" Corley, Poet, Polymath, Scoundrel.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: drac@uumeme.chi.il.us (Bruce Maynard)
Subject: Re: ShadowRun HEROIC??? (was Re: Burn, GURPS...)
Organization: UUMEME Public Access Xenix
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 15:47:52 GMT

>>Huh? The system has no bearing on what you have the characters do. If you 
>>don't like SR adventures by FASA, write your own stuff where you do things
>>that you find interesting. This sounds more like a bitch about one 
>>particular campaign than a constructive comment about a game system.
>
><ahem> This isn't the system I'm bitching about here. It's the background and
>the attitude of the game itself, an attitude which is shared by a lot of SR's
>players. 
>
>I haven't heard of an SR campaign yet that isn't seriously combat-intensive, 
>and which doesn't deal with that bastard plot device, having the characters get
>hired to go blow away someone/steal something/extract someone/etc etc. It's 
>barely an RPG in my book, closer to a &#@! tactical simulation. 

(sigh)   Ok, then, see if yer players have any imagination of their own...
turn 'em loose, DON'T hire 'em to a corp, DON'T set up something to lead 'em
thru... just see what they come up with for themselves... for that matter,
if you don't like the assassinate/steal/discover/extract jazz, think up
something original yourself! Why do people always depend on the game-writers
to supply the imagination for 'em? Don't be so lazy!

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: gharris@jade.tufts.edu (George W. Harris)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Random Rolls
Date: 24 Jan 93 16:54:51 GMT
Organization: Tufts University - Medford, MA

In article <C1A0Er.A0o@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> jacobus@symphony.cc.purdue.edu (Bryan J. Maloney) writes:
>In article <1jpbq2INN6k4@titan.ucs.umass.edu> dunkelza@titan.ucs.umass.edu (KEITH C MCCORMIC) writes:
>>  You wanna bet?  About half of the people who responded to my survey
>>wanted some element of randomness in character creation.  Much more fun?
>>Maybe for people who can't deal with weird characters...
>
>This also means that about half the people who responded to your survey
>DID NOT want some element of randomness in character creation.  

	Just to point out a logic flaw: this actually means that about half the
people either did not want some element of randomness *or* did not care if there
was some element of randomness.  You can't discount the no opinion/undecided
crowd.

--
gharris@jade.tufts.edu          
George W. Harris              	"He'd kill us if he had the chance."  
Dept. of Mathematics            
Tufts University              			The Conversation
From: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: ShadowRun HEROIC??? (was Re: Burn, GURPS...)
Date: 27 Jan 93 05:11:48 GMT
Reply-To: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Organization: Columbia University

cwagner@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Christian Wagner) writes:
>wilder@nx02.mik.uky.edu (jeff wilder) writes:
>>Most RPGers are munchkins.  It is completely system independent.
>
>Not entirely; certain systems -do- encourage rules raping, others encourage
>munchkin gun-fest play styles, others encourage other problems. 
>Every game has it's own particular brand of munchkinism attached to it.

	Just so you don't think you are *completely* set upon here, 
Christian - I'd agree with you on this point. Some systems do indeed 
attract and even encourage certain bad tendencies. However, it is 
not very easy to tell this, given that most gamers will only see a 
small segment of the gaming population. 

	OTOH, I don't that games which attract and encourage bad role-
playing are neccessarily bad to play in. Having seen alot of Champions, 
I do think that maybe it does encourage power-gaming. This doesn't mean 
that it is not a good system for non-power-gamers to play. I think the 
kind of role-playing a system encourages probably has fairly little to 
do with the quality of the rules, and more to do with the wording of 
the books - which can be ignored. 

>
>At this point, I'll probably just respond to a few more posts, and give my 
>'summing up' and apologize for wasting bandwidth with a flamewar that 
>essentially boils down to personal opinions that no amount of discussion will
>change.

	Don't worry. This group was created with flamewars in mind. 
Occaisionally something even useful gets said in them, and sometimes 
people do alter their opinions (at least a little). 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Kim                    | "You're on the cutting room floor, Chaplin.
jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu | Not a good place to be."
Columbia University         |                  (from the movie 'Chaplin')
From: mmadsen@bonnie.ics.uci.edu (Matt Madsen)
Subject: Re: Thoughts on GURPS
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Reply-To: mmadsen@ics.uci.edu (Matt Madsen)
Organization: Univ. of Calif., Irvine, Info. & Computer Sci. Dept.
Date: 26 Jan 93 03:26:22 GMT

In article <25JAN93.21297613.0159@VM1.MCGILL.CA> CX6L@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA (CX6L) writes:
>In article <loren.287@wmkt.wharton.upenn.edu> loren@wmkt.wharton.upenn.edu (Loren Miller) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan24.103017.9919@archtwr.tower.nullnet.fi> elandal@archtwr.tower.nullnet.fi (Ismo Peltonen) writes:
>>>  Why does everybody always forget the extra effort?
>>
>>Why don't you work it out, and figure out what ST *would* be required to
>>bench 600 lbs? It may not be 40, but it's over 20 and I think it's also over
>>30.
>
>Bzzzzzt. Wrong. Check out GURPS Supers (2nd ed.), on page 83, where
>there is a handy table of maximum reliable Extra Effort Lift: it
>gives (and you can verify this) that a ST 19 character can reliably
>lift 616 pounds without really worrying. He could lift more than
>this if he's willing to take a risk (ie - 16 or less). A ST 18
>character could lift 630 pounds on 14 or less, a ST 17 637 on 12
>or less, etc, etc, etc
>     Face it: people totally ignore these Extra Effort rules,
>while the system assumes that you are using them. *That* is why
>high ST is so grim.
>-Kromm.

"...a ST 19 character can reliably _lift_ 616 pounds..."  What does "lift"
mean?  Does that mean dead lift (pick up off the ground)?

The point is that someone with average strength can bench press 150 lbs. or
so, in real life, and there are people who can bench four times that.  I
don't have 2nd. ed. Supers, so can you tell how much you can lift with ST 10
using extra effort?  I would suspect that it's about half of what you can
lift with ST 19 (and it should be!).  If it's not, strength isn't linear in
GURPS, as they claim.

To clarify, the point is _not_ that you can't make a character who can lift
600 pounds; the point is that you can't make a character who is four times
as strong as average.

>_______________________________________________________________________
>|    "It's true! When you load    |   This reality has experienced    |
>|     WordPerfect into memory     |          . . . failure.           |
>|     backwards, you see a GIF    |      Please try again later.      |
>|      of the face of Satan!"     |___________________________________|
>|               -=-               |Dr Manfred Kromm can be reached at:|
>|     -Secrets of the Masons-     |-----> CX6L@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA <-----|
>|               -=-               |McGill University, Montreal, Canada|
>|_________________________________|___________________________________|

Matt Madsen
mmadsen@ics.uci.edu
From: seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: ShadowRun HEROIC??? (was Re: Burn, GURPS...)
Date: 28 Jan 93 11:15:31 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
Originator: seawasp@unixd1.cis.pitt.edu

In article <009673F5.2B0618C0@abby.chem.ucla.edu> doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu writes:
>In article <1judavINN4u2@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu>, cwagner@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Christian Wagner) writes:
>>In article <wilder.727877466@mik.uky.edu> wilder@nx02.mik.uky.edu (jeff wilder) writes:
>>>In <1jt6g1INNomv@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu> cwagner@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Christian Wagner) writes:
>>>|In article <2425@blue.cis.pitt.edu> seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp) writes:
>>I don't play SR anymore. I stopped because the game system bites and it tends 

	YO! Watch your attributions, dude. I did NOT write the above, or the
stuff that follows it. I BELIEVE that was the eminent Christian Wagner.


>thrown in.  The magic system is innovative, and would be just great in the
>standard pseudomedieval fantasy game, but I really didn't like the "magic and
>technology simply don't mix.  Period," bit.  One of these days I'm going to try
>to integrate them under GURPS and see what I can do.  Probably not a whole lot
>better, but who knows?

	I don't mind their keeping magic and ORDINARY technology separate; my
opinion is that it would take EXTRAORDINARILY HIGH technology to integrate 
successfully with magic. And chopping your bod to pieces to get the cyber-
implants... well, at least their mystical explanation makes SOME sense (i.e.,
why you can't use magic as well with cyber implants).

	That said, I personally don't have trouble mixing the two, if the
logic behind the character works....


                                 Sea Wasp
                                   /^\
                                   ;;;
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: phardie@nastar.uucp (Pete Hardie)
Subject: Re: ShadowRun HEROIC??? (was Re: Burn, GURPS...)
Organization: Digital Transmission Systems, Duluth, GA.
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 17:26:38 GMT

In article <2715@cix.cict.fr> maillet@tls-cs.cert.fr (Luc Maillet) writes:
>  Strange. Here, the munchkins play CP2020 and RQ. Non-munchkins play AD&D,

Munchkins playing RQ???

Man, you get a higher class of munchkin that I run into...

-- 
Pete Hardie:  phardie@nastar  (voice) (404) 497-0101
Digital Transmission Systems, Inc., Duluth GA
Member, DTS Dart Team           |  cat * | egrep -v "signature virus|infection" 
Position:  Goalie               |
From: peters@physics.ubc.ca (Dan Peters)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Burn, GURPS, BURN!
Date: 22 Jan 1993 10:24:32 GMT
Organization: The University of British Columbia
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: physics.ubc.ca

Whoa, Kromm, wait a minute. The stuff that the Sea Wasp says about balance in
GURPS actually makes sense, if you stop for a moment to look at it more
closely. Strength is used merely as an example, as follows:

1. High strength is always useful, but it is more useful in some genres than
in others. (In particular, more useful in a low-tech genre than in a high-tech
one.) ("More useful" includes the idea of being useful in a greater number of
circumstances.)

2. In GURPS, played "by the book", Strength has the same point cost in every
genre.

3. Therefore GURPS does not "balance" characters well in every genre.

If we expand upon the same argument a bit, we can see that the "balance" of
GURPS and its "generic" nature limit each other - sort of like an uncertainty
principle. :-)      (I sure say silly things when I'm sleep-deprived.)

The argument assumes, of course, that by "balancing" we mean that the point
values are intended to reflect usefulness. Of course GURPS isn't quite like
that - the point values of various stats/ads/disads/skills reflect an arbitrary
(and inconsistent) mixture of usefulness, rarity, and the-effort-it-took-to-
get-that-way. One has to be quite forgiving to pretend that GURPS is truly
balanced in any meaningful way. (This is not a flame! I _like_ GURPS!)

Peace.

Drin
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I think I think, therefore I think I am." 
- Descartes' failed attempt to discard the notion of objective reality.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------