HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Best Super system
Date: 29 Jul 92 21:55:51 GMT
Reply-To: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Distribution: na
Organization: Columbia University

a_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu writes:
>jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John Kim) writes:
>> 	I don't see how this is relevant. The point costs are just as much a 
>> part of the supplement as the mechanics. One can invent new mechanics just 
>> as easily as one can invent new point costs. 
>
>	I strongly disagree, from personal experience.

	I should clarify. It is not easy to come up with *good* new mechanics, 
but it is not easy to come up with *good* new costs, either. 

>
>> 	Besides which, there are mechanics problems as well - the 'armored 
>> creampuff' syndrome and defense rolls. 
>
>	I'm not sure what you mean by the 'armored creampuff' line, but there
>IS a fix to the defense rolls, and its in the Basic Set, off all places :-)
>I don't remember the page number, but its in a sidebar. Its an optional rule
>that treats combat as a Contest of skills -- the defender has to make his
>defense roll by as much or more than the attacker made his attack roll. Or
>is this not what you want?

	Treating combat as a Contest of Skills means that parry and dodge 
are basically useless, that it is unproductive to try for specific parts 
of the body, that PD and Move are vastly overpriced, and that All-Out 
Attacks will be very common. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
From: cjudd@esk (Craig Thomas Judd)
Subject: Re: Anyone Heard of Rifts
Organization: University of Tasmania at Launceston
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 92 22:23:49 GMT

In article <Bs0Fop.6t9@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu>, cpbeaure@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu (Chris Beauregard) writes:
>
>In article <1992Jul26.041432.5461@cam.compserv.utas.edu.au> cjudd@esk (Craig Thomas Judd) writes:
>>The Palladium system IS related to D&D. Who cares? :-) What us isolated RIFTS
>>players want to know is what people thought of the setting, more than the
>>game system. At least, I do!
>
>I played RIFTS a few times.  My impression:
>	- Awesome background.  They did a really thorough job on that part of
>	things.

I think a friend of mine has something to say to all the people who say it's 
just a mishmash of every other game system... :-)

>	- Usual Pallidium game system.  Yawn.  As usual, it turns into a
>	points war, as players try to extract every bit of skills, armor,
>	weapons, etc, that they possibly can.

I don't worry too much about it, but my character has a fetish for guns, and is
forced to wear hulking body armour to avoid being spread like a thin paste over
the ground. The GM seems annoyed that my character enjoys the concept of staying
alive!! We even wimped out on a 'suicide mission', which put the GM at a bit of
a loose end :-)

>       The sheer destructive
>	capabilities of the hardware in the game didn't help all that much.
>	Full conversion Borgs should not be PCs, IMHO.  Ditto for Glitter
>	Boys.

Well, they could be fun to play from a psychological point of view. And after
all, what better tinned food to throw at that pesky dragon? The world is harshly
divided into MDC-capable and Splatter-Probable people, which at least allows
specialisation :-\ (either you're good or you aint).
 
>In summary, great game, lends itself to munchkinism _really_ well.

You're telling me! I run around in 80 MDC armour, carrying a recoilless
rifle, and I'm just the mechanic!

>Chris Beauregard                                cpbeaure@cayley.waterloo.edu

Yours splatterly;

-- 
   \/\ "Abide by the contract of blood and inherit me!" Grossporina, SM2 /\/
====\/\"Shit, it's that skinhead again!" Kaneda about Col., AKIRA Book 3/\/====
=====\/\      *** WANT ANY MANGA ARTWORK DONE? Just email me! ***      /\/=====
      \/\   cjudd@esk.compserv.utas.edu.au      a.k.a. Kuroto Shiro   /\/
From: a_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Gurps Supers is still broken 
Date: 26 Jul 92 19:36:43 CST
Distribution: na
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

In article <1992Jul23.213337.13734@tronsbox.xei.com>, dfrancis@tronsbox.xei.com (Dennis Heffernan) writes:
> In article <1992Jul22.224042.3352@sco.COM> paul@sco.COM (Paul Jackson) writes:
> |d) too many of the costs are just flat out wrong in comparison with each
> |other (some of the limitations are especially amusing).
> 
> 	A-bloody-men.  I especially like "Reduced Range" at -10% for each
> halving of range, and "Touch Only" for -20%.  Gee, I could have 1/8th range
> for -30%, or no range at all for -10% LESS...bwaahahahaahahaha.

	Did you notice that there isn't an enhancement Increased Range?
Methinks this was just an oversight rather than intentional. I have it as +10%,
doubles range each time it is bought. Another (variant) enhancement is to
recreate the No Range Modifier (ala Champions) [this came up in converting a
Champs character to GURPS]. The best way to handle this is buy Accuracy at high
enought a level to hit at maximum range (1/2 damage range only drops damage
for such an attack), but that it *only* cancels out the range modifer (ie, it
won't give you a bonus to-hit, just negate the penalty). Cost is the same as
normal accuracy. I'd make Touch Only a -50% limitation.

>
> |As written (using no optional rules), GURPS Supers is only going to work in
> |a VERY gritty street level campaign where death is a very common occurence.
> |Either that, or all of the heros are going to use some of the loop holes
> |(ablative focus defenses springing to mind). I found that, as a GM, I just
> |COULDN'T have my villains fight to the best of their abilities unless I was
> |willing to kill half of the characters each night.

	This is bad? :-)

	As written, without optional rules, GURPS Supers *is* geared for a
gritty street-level campaign. Are you complaining because they were successful
at what they were trying to do? :-)

Brandon Cope

"But, but,...it's not our fault!" -- Kei and/or Yuri
From: oroboros@acca.nmsu.edu (The Wyrm Ouroboros)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: SR: Blood 'n guts games
Date: 24 Jul 92 03:51:07 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: The Clearing House, Ltd.

>Here's a question for Mage/shaman players. Do you find spell locks at all
>useful for keeping spells on yourself? I thought about having a spell
>(Oxygenate) locked on my latest character, but I couldn't think of a
>reasonable way to protect myself against spell grounding. I mean, as
>near as I can tell from the  rules, anyone with a spell lock is a
>sitting duck for astral mages/shamans.
>
>Jerry Stratton

Well, I look at it like this --
  A) Is your concept of the corps such that they'll be targetting the tool
	of corporate espionage -- the Runners -- or the users, other corps?
  B) Is your concept of the corps such that they'll have their mages out
	hunting Runners when they might be better used in, say, research
	or direct corporate espionage?
  C) Is your concept of the corps such that they'll have dossiers on each
	Runner that they've ever had contact with?  Their usual hangouts,
	list of runs done, preferances in stuffers (and maybe in bedmates)?

	(All of the above apply to the GM.)

If A) is true, then the rest probably are as well -- in which case, don't.
The corporation wizbanger is going to totter along after you in Astral Space,
and nail you when you aren't looking.  (Or maybe when you are.)  Being able
to lie facedown in the gutter and still breathe isn't worth getting flash-
fried by the chap from Aztechnology.

B) Kind of goes hand-in-hand with A); there may not .be. a difference.  How-
ever, A) and B) (or just B)) without C) means that they'll be searching for
you through a couple million (or more) people -- something difficult to do
in six hours.  Ever try tracking down some prick whose real name you don't
know, whose address is 'transient', and who might look just like all the
other jerks in the Barrens?  "Kinda like tryin' to find a smooth spot on a
troll."

If C) is true, though, not all is lost -- as long as A) or B) aren't.  The
Mega-Corps may just keep tabs on Runners so that they can contact them for
jobs -- runs -- against other corps.  I don't know of many corps who will
go on hunts for Runners; it's not cost-effective.  Better to go and hire
those Runners (who a) have the exerience necessary (they ripped us off) for
the job, b) they're not directly traceable to our corp, and c) there are
always more of them if these get killed (read: they're expendible)) to do
a little counter-espionage.  The data received should be more than worth the
paltry sum the Runners are getting paid.

So, unless your GM's corporations are Runner-hunters, get it.  Me, I'd try
to find yourself an Initiate, to get a quickening.

Ouroboros
The Wyrm of the .Net
From: wwallace@ucrengr.ucr.edu (wayne wallace)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Champions
Date: 24 Jul 92 07:46:44 GMT
Organization: University of California, Riverside

In article <RATINOX.92Jul23103035@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu> ratinox@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Richard Pieri/Stainless Steel Rat) writes:
>>>>>> On 23 Jul 92 13:48:09 GMT, jsalter@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (joshua
>>>>>> salter) said:
>
>Yes, a good investment if you enjoy cinematic, heroic gaming. If you're
>looking for "reality," go someplace else.

Excuse me? HERO can't do "reality" ? Try this simple experiment:

Play fantasy or star hero, or something in a 75+75 or lower game,
(for the original poster, 150 total points, which is the top end of
heros, because anything more is usually superheroic) and....

FORBID RESISTANT DEFENSE. If no one has any defense against killing attacks,
which all swords and guns are, the average 2d6 killing attack does 7
body, and for an avg. 10 body character (body is hit points for bleeding.
another characteristic, stun, takes care of consciousness), he's looking
bad. A second hit puts him bleeding to death, and with average stun, the
character is now definitely unconscious and dying. Is that "realistic"
enough for you? Heck, if you roll a 10 or higher on those two damage dice,
the average character is BLEEDING to DEATH and STUNNED!!! (Loss of one combat
round, the current one if he hasn't acted, the next one if he has.)
Superheros tend to be harder to kill... Oh yeah, if you think falling
damage isn't strong enough, consider concrete to be a killing attack when
you hit, so broken bones and such will abound. (IE divide damage dice by 3
or look at the damage class chart)

HERO does realism just fine. And if your characters have fantasy or science
fiction armor, of course, the damage will be lessened a bit. Of course,
due to encumbrance, the armor usually won't cover ALL of the body so it
could be ignored if someone has enough plusses to hit to call a shot to
an unarmored area. 

>--Rat

Rat, read before you speak.

Wayne

-- 
*    // Only /\      |Lord Zar,Commander Of All He Surveys|Stay Alert! Trust  *
*\\ //      /--\MIGA |(and hater of spaces near commas.)  |No One! Keep--AHHHH*
* \X/ Internet: atra@ucru1.ucr.edu wwallace@ucrmath.ucr.edu GEnie:W.WALLACE9  *
* I'm a Purple Hearts & Yellow Moons kinda guy; I'm vay-teeng for you, dahlink*
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: goodwin@orionsci.uucp (Ben Goodwin)
Subject: SRun (deckers without guns)
Organization: Orion Scientific, Inc.
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 12:30:10 GMT

Hoi, my last post on this deckers with guns thread, I promise.

Axly, you are being a little close minded on this issue.

If I lived in a world where the crime rate was high, where half of
the people I pass on the street have guns, and society is crumbling,
you can damn well bet I would go out and buy a .38 or whatever and
carry it with me.

All your psychological bs about "having a gun will make me think I
can stand up to the guy and that will get me killed", and "I have
street sams to do that for me" is foolish.

Also, you state you don't want to waste the 4 karma points necessary
to get a Predator II at skill level 3, and that it won't help you much
anyway.  Hum, sounds like roll playing to me.  How you can imagine
people who walk the streets every day, break into multinational
corporations with their own private armies, and generally piss off
people as much as Srunners do and say to themselves, "Gee, I don't need
a gun" is beyond me.

I think this is a case of "refusing to back down in public!"

I'm surprised your GM hasn't gotten you in a situation where you need
to protect yourself.  You can run away, but what happens if you end
up in an alley?  Not everyone that attacks you is going to be cybered
with Reaction +50?  As a matter of fact, if you read the modules, most
normal guards have a skill of 3 or so, and you could beat them in a
fight.  I'd leave the Heavy Weapons Reactionary team alone though. :)

Can you give me your GM's number.  I'd like to suggest a few scenarios
to him, ones in which some punk with a 22 corners you and you don't
have a measly gun and the measly skill to use it. :)
-- 

-Ben
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: macgyver@pike.cis.ohio-state.edu (MacGyver)
Subject: Re: Need info for 2nd.Ed. SRUN
Organization: The Ohio State University, Department of Computer and Information Science
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 12:44:35 GMT

In article <1992Jul30.211735.21723@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> bz978@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Charles E Gibbs) writes:
>Forgive me being asleep for a little while, but can anyone tell me
>when the above product will be released and its estimated cost.

At GenCon, for $26 or $28, I think.

-- 
Wilson MacGyver                      |"I do like a road, because you can be 
Internet:macgyver@cis.ohio-state.edu | always wondering what is at the end
=====================================| of it."
Disclaimer:All opinions are mine only|=======================================
Xref: sparky rec.games.frp.misc:3111 rec.games.frp:24346
From: appel@xcf.Berkeley.EDU (Shannon D. Appel)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc,rec.games.frp
Subject: Re: Looking for Ars Magica FTP site
Date: 29 Jul 92 23:29:06 GMT
Organization: csua
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: adray@Chaos.mcs.kent.edu's message of 29 Jul 92 18:45:58 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.184558.17692@mcs.kent.edu> adray@Chaos.mcs.kent.edu (Adam Dray) writes:
>If you know the address of an anoymous FTP site that holds
>Ars Magica RPG stuff, please send it to me.

For anyone interested, it's soda.berkeley.edu in the directory /pub/ars-magica

There's also a mailing list, which you can get added to by dropping a line
to ars-magica-request@soda.berkeley.edu

Shannon
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 17:26:52 -0400 
From: William Henry Timmins <wt0b+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Huge Robots as weapons, are they valid? Does it matter?
	<RATINOX.92Jul28081429@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu>

Excerpts from netnews.rec.games.frp.misc: 28-Jul-92 Re: Huge Robots as
weapons,.. Stainless Steel Rat@spli (2365)

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?

----

Well, I don't know about you, but a 'crab' tank (ie- has treads and six
legs) made by high tech would scare the piss out of me, as a military
person.

Can roll close to the ground, with well protected underside and topside,
or pop up on legs to cross chasms or to have a high vantage point.

Anything thrown at it tends to either miss as it scuttles over our
tanks, or bounce off the armor which we have a hard time seeing.

A battlefield 'crawling' with these is something I would avoid, as a mech.

A man-mech? Wouldn't scare me much. I'm used to humans.

-Me
From: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Anyone Heard of Rifts
Date: 24 Jul 92 17:39:36 GMT
Reply-To: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Organization: Department of Chemistry, UCLA

Yeah, I played RIFTS once.  ONCE.  If I didn't know better, I'd think
the Palladium system was an evolutionary predecessor of *D&D.  I think
that about sums it up....

-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: a_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Genres
Date: 21 Jul 92 18:25:47 CST
Distribution: world
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

In article <13595@mindlink.bc.ca>, a481@mindlink.bc.ca (J.D. Frazer) writes:
>> 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?
> 
> Yeesh. Make BT more realistic? Tough to do, considering the whole idea of
> lumbering robotic behemoths as weapons makes absolutely no sense, militarily,
> economically, or scientifically.
> 
> There is a place you could fine tune, though. Check out the ranges for weapons
> in the game -- if they haven't changed from the very first edition (which I
> played and enjoyed as beer & pretzels fare), you'll notice that the 'mech
> weapons have truly cruddy effective ranges. Pit a company of vintage German
> Panthers or Tigers against a mech and it'd be shredded in no time -- their guns
> outdistance the 'mech weapons drastically.

	A while back, I posted a few suggested changes to GMAST-L for BT (such
as, energy weapons should (gasp) use energy, there is no reason why mechs
should be able to use fusion engines as-is, but other vehicles have to devote
1.5x mass for shielding [stupid, stupid rule], etc.). Most of them are simple
common sense alterations, dealing more with design than actual combat. I can
post the file if I can find it.
	I used the comparision of a half-dozen Leopard II's meeting an equal
tonnage of 'mechs for showing how anemic gun ranges are in BT (of course, all I
got was 'yeah, but today's tanks need a lot more maintainence than 'mechs ...
blablabla...'; this point does not matter in actual combat, and since the tanks
would waste the 'mechs, it wouldn't matter afterwards either :-)

Brandon Cope
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Best Super system
From: a_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Date: 28 Jul 92 19:19:59 CST
 <1992Jul26.192455.245@ccsvax.sfasu.edu> <1992Jul27.160114.14399@news.columbia.edu>
Distribution: na
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

In article <1992Jul27.160114.14399@news.columbia.edu>, jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim) writes:
> a_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu writes:
>>>>jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim) writes:
>>>>>	The other thing to be careful of is cost ratios. For example, 
>>>>>damage generally costs 6pts per d6, whereas defense is 3pts per 1DR. This 
>>>>>means that attacks will tend to overwhelm defenses. 
>>
>>	I agree with Laird here -- you're arguing about point costs, not game
>>mechanics. If you want DR to be bought at a 1:1 ratio, go for it. SJG won't
>>show up at your gaming session, look over the character sheets, and tear up 
>>any that are even slightly unofficial :-)
> 
> 	I don't see how this is relevant. The point costs are just as much a 
> part of the supplement as the mechanics. One can invent new mechanics just as 
> easily as one can invent new point costs. 

	I strongly disagree, from personal experience.

> 	Besides which, there are mechanics problems as well - the 'armored 
> creampuff' syndrome and defense rolls. 

	I'm not sure what you mean by the 'armored creampuff' line, but there
IS a fix to the defense rolls, and its in the Basic Set, off all places :-)
I don't remember the page number, but its in a sidebar. Its an optional rule
that treats combat as a Contest of skills -- the defender has to make his
defense roll by as much or more than the attacker made his attack roll. Or
is this not what you want?

Brandon Cope
From: gt9405b@prism.gatech.EDU (Lord Goodgulf the Ma-a-a-agical Wizard)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: SR: Blood 'n guts games
Date: 22 Jul 92 03:54:41 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <seP=DYe00Uh7M7D4tp@andrew.cmu.edu> mb8p+@andrew.cmu.edu (Mark A. Baxter) writes:
>    One of the difficulties I have with SR is that it's a very heavily
>combat oriented game but that the characters are forced to
>super-specialize to such an extent that only street sam's and mages
>(shamanic or hermetic) have any real use in combat.  (I don't think
>riggers have a place as player characters, more about that later)  The
>discussion about deckers and guns has sort of covered this to some
>extent.  For the record, deckers *will* die if they look armed, the
>enemy will target and waste them with boosted reflexes and firearms 6 or
>a manabolt, while if they don't show threat they will be ignored in
>favor of those who do. The same goes for anyone else without heavy
>combat emphasis, the boosted reflexes, dermal plating, etc. are all that
>keeps the sams alive. 
     I don't buy the arguement that deckers and such will become prime targets
if they have guns.  If two or three people in the group I encounter have whipped
out their smgs or whatever and layed down a burst or two while another two or
three are ducking and still fumbling for their guns, I'm damn well going to
shoot at the ones who're already moving.  The rest (unless they start doing
something that looks like it might be spell) can wait.  And if the group you're
up against has enough spare fire-power to divert some to the people who play
a smaller role, you're hosed anyway unless they're not very good.  At which
point your decker/rigger/other-non-combat-character isn't an assured blood
spot.
                         Lord Goodgulf the Wizard


-- 
Lynn Richard Akers
"Justice is lost, justice is raped, justice is gone.
 Pulling your strings, justice is done."   - Metallica, And Justice For All
uucp:	  ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!gt9405b          Internet: gt9405b@prism.gatech.edu