HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From:  (Spike)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Net.rpg: Diff genres, diff skills?
Date: 16 Nov 92 19:24:31 GMT
Followup-To: rec.games.design
Organization: GE Power Generation

Some points have been made in another thread recently
that different genres have different skills, which lend
a different flavor from game world to game world.

While this is, to an extent, obvious (no Computer 
Hacking in a fantasy world, for instance), I don't
agree with (what I perceive as) the intent: different
skill lists for different genres. The greatest thing about
the GURPS system, IMHO, is that, since all genres use the
same mechanic, you don't have to have bogus low-tech
skills for your cyberpunk game. Ever try to build a medievalist
in Shadowrun? No Heraldry, no Medieval History, etc.

Personally, I'd like to see a large, comprehensive skill list,
even if not all skills will be of use in every game, even if
some of them are fluff. (Fluff good. Fluff make interesting
character.)

Spike
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: peter@techbook.com (Peter Sarrett)
Subject: Movement in board games.
Organization: TECHbooks --- Public Access UNIX --- (503) 220-0636
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 07:39:44 GMT



Someone mentioned a recent thread concerning board game movement systems.
It seems I arrived a bit late.  Just last night I brainstormed to come up with
ways for determining movement in a board game.  Could some kind soul mail me a
summary of the methods discussed?

In case you're interested, the methods I came up with (which are mainly
concerned with determining how many spaces a player can move, not necessarily
where they can go) are:

  * Dice
  * Cards (numbered, colored, etc)
  * Fixed rate
  * Movement points which are acquired and spent over the course of the game
  * Trade (ie, each space costs you $100 in game money, or 2 tokens, etc)
  * Current game condition (color/location/other characteristic of current
    space determines how the piece on that space can move)
    - As a subset of above, pieces are restricted by current game condition.
      For example, they can move as far as they want until they hit a wall or
      another player's piece.

 That's about all I came up with.  By the way, I consider other random number
generators like spinners to be in the same class as dice.

 If you can think of other methods, I'd like to hear about them.

===============================================================================
Peter Sarrett          |   "You don't stop playing games when you get old--
peter@techbook.com     |    you get old when you stop playing games."
(503)579-0873          |                                        - O. W. Holmes
===============================================================================
From: tdunn@ecst.csuchico.edu (I Need a Life)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: net.rpg (comments on the faq)
Date: 18 Nov 92 19:45:51 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: grotus.ecst.csuchico.edu


I really do like the FAQ, but a few comments:

1) I'd like to be on the record as the first or one of the first to 
   quote "I am all things to all people" wrt the net.rpg.  I guess I'd
   be one to say that if it's going to be one game, it's going to be
   a biggie, and the coordination should be a potential sore spot.

2) Another matter with multiple authors is the problem of escalation
   and 'favoritism.'  If one author wanted one particular special
   effect (ex: cyber-stuff) to be uber-powerful, then s/he may try
   to 'prove' that point by escalating the level of effectiveness
   of their pet effect.  IMPO (and SOS, please don't take offense)
   GURPS seems rather guilty of this.

3) My personal favorite mechanic is the "roll d(x) per stat point,
   target number = (x) - skill level."  This has the advantage of
   a horrible default for rookies, a great advantage for one point
   of skill (doubles your chances), and a clear delination between
   stat effects and skill effects.

4) I'm thinking of following SOS's path and factionalizing the 
   discussion further so that there are a few choices in the topics.
   Perhaps Rob Hall@boeing was more miffed that it was all one thread
   and no choice but that one thread.

-- 
While anyone can admit to themselves they were wrong, the true test is
admission to someone else.
From: millerl@wharton.upenn.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: net.rpg.freeform: Post 2 of 2
Date: 18 Nov 92 03:28:36 GMT
Organization: Newt World Order

In article <1992Nov17.142938.16737@oz.plymouth.edu>, sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan) writes:
> The easiest mechanic I have come up with that reflects this range is the
> following:
>  
> Take a deck of cards.  Remove all cards except for:
>  
> 1 Ace
> 2 Twos
> 4 Threes
> 4 Fours
> 4 Fives
> 4 Sixes
> 2 Sevens
> 1 Face Card (or joker.  "Hearts" players will choose the Queen of Spades.)

You're doing this to get a bell curve, but it seems to me that a bell
curve isn't as important as a modal probability distribution. If you're
going to use cards anyway, why not simplify a little more, and get rid
of the bell curve for a more natural (with cards) modal curve?

Mix two decks of cards together. Every player draws a certain number of
cards for their hand. The worst initiative goes first. Pip cards are
counted by the pips on their faces. Face cards are worth ten and allow a
second card to be played on top of them. Aces count as face cards if
desired, or they can be played for one point and allow the player to
discard the rest of the hand and refill. When your hand is empty you
can't play any more cards, but before you start your next action you can
refill it from the deck.

To figure out skills add ability score to the card points. This works
for opposed skills too, no need to subtract. Just add and compare. You
might need to stretch out the 1-7 point scale since this scale is wider,
but it depends on how important you think luck should be.

-- 
whoah,
+++++++++++++++++++++++23
Loren Miller                           internet: MILLERL@wharton.upenn.edu
Mediocrity is a hand rail.                         -- Baron de Montesquieu
From: jliukkon@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Juha-Matti Liukkonen)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: net.rpg -- some thoughts
Date: 15 Nov 92 21:52:28 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki

magnus@bark-fddi.ii.uib.no (Magnus Alvestad) writes:

>If you put the body-type (humanoid, centauroid) within the Build stat,
>you'll have to make all rules that use that stat take every possible
>body type into consideration.

>That's not very pretty. I think we'll hide the body-type
>considerations within the character generations. Should probably be
>part of an optional method dealing with non-humans. That method would
>be used after the generation of the character, before skill
>determination (or something), and would _process_ some stats.

>-Magnus

I thought we might be able to say it simple: build is a relative figure,
and the racial base would be in the form of a description and perhaps
the strength/speed factors (ie.  how much of your build is towards
strength/bone structure, and how much towards speed [there are specific
terms for the things I mean, I just don't know them :( Something like
aerobic and anaerobic muscle]) - humans perhaps 50%-50%, dwarves
80%-20%, and elves 40%-60% etc...

Rude, that's true. Have to think about this...
-- 
               Juha Liukkonen, aka jliukkon@cc.helsinki.fi
       University of Helsinki, Dept. of Paranormal Investigations
           "Trust me, I know what I'm doing." - Sledge Hammer
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: ketil@ii.uib.no (Ketil M. Malde)
Subject: Re: Net.rpg: Skills
Reply-To: ketil@ii.uib.no
Organization: student of numerical analysis at the University of Bergen, Norway
	<1992Nov18.214630.2685@alf.uib.no>
Date: 19 Nov 92 16:59:06

>>>>> On Wed, 18 Nov 92 21:46:30 GMT, magnus@bark-fddi.ii.uib.no (Magnus Alvestad) said:

>>>>> On 17 Nov 92 17:29:26 GMT, jliukkon@klaava.Helsinki.FI
>>>>> (Juha-Matti Liukkonen) said:

	JM> would be 1/4 of max skill?) Then each skill would have a
	JM> racial base (humans swim better'n dwarves etc) and in

	M> Ouch! I don't like the idea of putting race-specific info
	M> into every skill that depends on factors that are
	...

I agree with magnus here, adjust the stats for race, then let the
skill advancement be a function of the stats.

I think it should be fairly simple to add new skills, stats should be
more of an absolute (if we can agree on a set of stats, that is)




--
 = Ketil Malde                     In real life:  ketil@ii.uib.no =
 = Nuke the whales!                    Honk if you love unicorns! =
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: ketil@ii.uib.no (Ketil M. Malde)
Subject: Re: Net.rpg: Attributes
Followup-To: rec.games.design
Reply-To: ketil@ii.uib.no
Organization: student of numerical analysis at the University of Bergen, Norway
	<dmatiske-181192232356@archmacconsultant.architecture.lab.nd.edu>
Date: 19 Nov 92 17:30:54

>>>>> On 19 Nov 92 04:38:58 GMT, dmatiske@nd.edu (David Matiskella) said:

	David> You would still need physical characteristics. I
	David> personally like strenght, speed/agility, and endurance
	David> for physical stats since I feel that they describe
	David> accurately factors need simulate physical tasks.

I agree, but feel that they should be used for modifying success,
while....oh, see my earlier posting, OK?

	David> In the mental stats I put social/charisma,
	David> tenacity/willpower, Logic/IQ The problem with stats
	David> like Aesthetic are what use are they? Sure it might
	David> tell you how good of trumpet player the character is
	David> but I feel that could be handled just as well by a
	David> skill.

Aestethic could tell you how quickly you could learn playing trumpet,
hey if you and I practice the same amount, we won't automatically be
equally good trumpet players, eh?

--
 = Ketil Malde                     In real life:  ketil@ii.uib.no =
 = Nuke the whales!                    Honk if you love unicorns! =
From: leet@acsu.buffalo.edu (Brian D. Leet)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: net.rpg: admin
Date: 18 Nov 92 21:29:24 GMT
Article-I.D.: acsu.BxxL11.BBK
Organization: UB

In article <1992Nov18.191606.14419@crd.ge.com> (Spike) writes:
>In article <92322.161114RDT111@psuvm.psu.edu>, <RDT111@psuvm.psu.edu>
>wrote:
>>      I'm going to try to get a group started to start putting down solid
>> rules for a net.rpg.  I am looking for volunteers to join a commitee
>Sorry, Robert, but I am committed to completing the *real* net.rpg -
>you know, the one being developed by the net?
>
>Really, you're welcome to design any old game you want, but
>don't invite people to help you cut Magnus' legs out from under
>him and expect not to get flamed.

I'll be a bit more generous than Spike and assume that you don't realize
the true potential and advantages of developing on the net rather than in
private.  Still what you propose would undermine the whole idea of what's
going on here.  It may take some patience and hard work before we start 
getting any solid rules but it should be worth the wait.  (and the discussions
are damn interesting in the mean time :-)).
					Brian
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: apace@mta.ca
Subject: Re: net.rpg: musing on the stat tree
Reply-To: apace@mta.ca
Organization: Mount Allison U, Sackville, N.B. Canada 
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 23:57:15 GMT

Hi again,
	Just a few thoughts that have entered my mind since my last post.

1.  I like the stat tree, (duh) and it actually seems to be less unweildy 
than I at first feared.  All I can say is that if we ever get past the 
basic design phase :), we had better make one stunning index.  I definitely
like the idea of minimizing the number of layers. Hopefully, we can come up
with a simple and easy method of coding the position of a statistic on the
skill tree. For example, Firearms, rank 4, spec. automatic, single shot,
& semi-auto; 4P10. The final code would indicate rank, broad group (Physical
in this case) and it's number at that rank in that broad group.

2. What about the basic concept of having your ability drop by a fixed amount
at each rank?  I haven't heard any comment since I first posted this [sniff..]
and I'm not sure whether this is because nobody noticed it, everybody assumed
that this is how it would work, or everybody thought that it was so stupid as
to be beneath comment. :)

3. This is for magnus more than anybody else. Somebody posted with a general
subject, saying that maybe it would be a good idea to seperate stats into 
active and passive components.  Any thoughts?

						- Tony Pace
From: tdunn@ecst.csuchico.edu (Tim Dunn)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: net.rpg
Date: 16 Nov 92 16:08:47 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: hairball.ecst.csuchico.edu

One interesting facet of the Shadowrun style (count each die separately)
is that it accurately models McLaurian Series's from by basic Statistics
class.  More so, if it's roll each die, and if it is the highest number
possible (a 6 on a d6, an 8 on a d8, etc) then roll one more die, then
it models McLaurin Sums (or somesuch, where the expression is:

      1   2   3   4   5               (infi)    n
     1   1   1   1   1                 ____  1
     - + - + - + - + - .... etc        \     -
     x   x   x   x   x                 /___  x
                                       n = 1

It's rather easy to calculate: it all sums to 1/(1 - (1/x)) or 1/(x-1).
This is precluding any special mechanic, such as 1's negating successes
or what not.  The name of such trial is Bernoulli trials, I believe.

Just wanted to add that bit, and to say that it's not really a kludge,
seeing as it has as many (if not more) colorful names (though I in my
sleep-dreprived state take no responsibility should I mistake one for
another name) as percentile or bell-curve systems.

-- 
Any small object that is accidentally dropped will hide under a
larger object.
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: bshsiung@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Bernard Hsiung)
Subject: net.rpg.slug: Action resolution
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor, MI
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 21:51:46 GMT

>While cards have interesting possibilities, the system does create headaches,
>and it is getting into too much complexity.  I really want SLUG to be simple.

Sure; I'm flexible.

>The only reason I had first wanted to use cards ... is because there are no
>dice that will easily produce a bell curve for a 1-7 range, with an extra
>result as automatic failure - or so I thought.  I have since thought of one,
>and I'm now proposing it.

Aha!  So _that's_ why you wanted cards.  I was wondering...  [reasonable method
for turning a d12 into a 1-7 bell curve removed for brevity]

You know, we could go with 3d6, which with appropriate numbers looks an awful
lot like the curve that you want.  Except that both Hero and GURPS use 3d6 and
people might accuse us of being "quantized Hero/GURPS-with-impossible-to-
remember-numbers".  Too bad that there's no number to roll <= for 2d6 which
equates to a 50% chance of success.  6d6, anybody?  *grin*

You just have to ensure that people understand that you don't want to use +/- 1
(linear) roll modifiers, but modifiers by named levels instead, right?

>First, keeping to the seven-tiered, named quality-levels is very intuitive, and
>it will be a snap for the GM to assess any NPC instantly.  Just run your eye
>down the list of words, and you'll see what I mean - it's not hard to decide if
>someone is Average or Good in a skill, but what does it mean to have a skill of
>6 or 7?

Yeah.  I might recommend something even grainer--is there an intuitive
difference between Average and Good as opposed to Average and Superior?
Average and Excellent?  Superior and Excellent?
Five steps (say, Terrible, Poor, Average, Good, and Excellent) are about what
I'd feel most comfortable with on an intuitive level...

>Second, it combines the best of a bell curve with a flat increase system:  you
>can still have a +1 modifier, which moves an attribute from, say, Average to a
>little above Average, but not quite good.  I like this idea.

Hmm.  But then, if you want anyone else to use this system, you'll have to
write essays about "when to use a linear modifier" and "when to use a bell
curve modifier".

>Comments on this?  Once we resolve this issue, I'll rewrite up SLUG as it
>stands, and post it again.  We can then move on from there.

The overall mechanism is fine by me.  Where is there to go from here?

Bernie Hsiung (bshsiung@eecs.umich.edu)
"I don't know.  I'm making this up as I go." -- Indiana Jones
Newsgroups: rec.games.design,rec.games.frp.misc,rec.games.frp
From: csh019@cch.coventry.ac.uk (Faust)
Subject: Re: Stars
Organization: Coventry University
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 18:51:57 GMT

In article <Bxw8qy.7E7@nic.umass.edu> dunkelza@titan.ucc.umass.edu (KEITH C MCCORMIC) writes:
>In article <BxvEHu.BFA@cck.coventry.ac.uk> gdg019@cch.coventry.ac.uk (Ridley McIntyre) writes:
>>The best one I have seen (I asked a similar question here and on sci.space)
>>is a map and catalogue that comes with the 2300AD RPG. It gives you a map
>>of stars near and around Sol and the catalogue lists their types and locations.
>>
>>Hope this helps,
>
>  The 2300AD maps are faked.  Several of the stars are renamed or ficticious.
>Don't bother.
>
>Dunkelzahn
>

   Unless you're playing with a bunch of professional or serious amateur
   astronomers I don't see why it should matter.  All the famous stars
   in the vicinity of Sol are in their rightful places.  Who cares about
   the minor ones?  Is a player actually going to whip out the correct map
   and say, stridently, "What IS this G-type star doing here?  Don't you
   KNOW that it doesn't REALLY exist?"  Somehow I don't foresee this
   happening.
  
    ********    ***      **    **   *******   ********  "Quantum Mechanics:
    **         ** **     **    **  **            **      even I don't fully
    ******    *******    **    **  *******       **      understand it."
    **       **     **   **    **        **      **              - Ian Sales
    **      **       **   ******   ********      **    csh019@cch.cov.ac.uk
Newsgroups: rec.games.design,rec.games.frp.misc,rec.games.frp
From: tgt33358@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Thanatos)
Subject: Vamp:  New Flaw
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 01:59:25 GMT

In the interest of creating more signal than noise on this net, I submit
the following, based on FFC _Dracula._  Enjoy.  Comments are appreciated.

Somebody asked, and I took up the challenge.  Dinner calls, so
this will be simple.

Supernatural Flaw:  Errant Shadow (-1)
There are those Kindred whose connectedness to the Shadow is strong, 
yet their will prevents their utter seduction unto the night.  To 
them, however, those who dwell in darkness read his innermost thoughts,
and compell his shadow (that which flees from the Light) to enact his
basest desires.  
        Put simply, his shadow is the reflection of the Beast within.  It 
closely follows the body most of the time, and 3 successes on perception+
auspex is needed to notice the variance (this can be done unskilled).
However, when a moment of crisis arrives (has to make a humanity or frenzy
check) the beast within is activated, and performs the deed in question.
(Mimicking, and not actually doing any damage). 
Still, this strange occurence is very hard to believe, and most 
laugh it off as a delusion.  When at a moment of crisis, the shadow can
be seen with one success on a per+3 roll (diff 6).  Those in the area 
subconsciously register the shadow in the corner of their eyes, and
feel great unease around the kindred, regardless if it is friend or 
foe.
        Another disadvantage is that regardless of the level of obfuscate
(except 1, of course), the shadow is always visible, and can be noticed
as above (this allows _two_ check to spot an obfuscated creature).


-- 
I don't mind being the smartest	    / Thanatos, DeathUrge, Master of Unknown
man in the world...I just wish it   \ Time and Space tgt33358@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu 
wasn't this one...	       	    / It's a Zen thing... 
	-Ozymandias 		    \	 you wouldn't understand...  
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
Subject: Re: net.rpg.slug: Terminology
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, NH.
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 92 04:55:13 GMT

bshsiung@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Bernard Hsiung) writes:
>
>It suddenly occurs to me that my prior difficulty with the seven levels was
>that the words you used weren't intuitively clear to me.  

Yes, this needs work.  Let's hammer it out.  A few of us looking at a
thesaurus ought to be able to choose some good words.

You rightly point out that Average is a counterproductive word, because,
yes, these values mean the same thing for everyone in a given situation.
It might take an Adequate amount of Strength to bust down a door, or it
might take a Goodly amount of Strength, but an Average amount doesn't
make sense.

I think we should avoid words of absolute limits, though: no Best or
Worst.  I also have trouble with Competant - it sounds too close to Good
to me.

How about:

Terrible
Poor
Mediocre
Adequate  (or Passable?)
Good
Great
Super (or Awesome?)

?

>The biggest problem with treating qualities in this way is that, while it works
>well for human beings (who have abilities that we all have a general feel for),
>it tends to fall apart if we want to do things with creatures that have mostly
>superhuman or subhuman abilities since we start pushing the result envelope.

True, true - any suggestions on how to get around this?

>If you can get better than "Best" (or "Super"), you might want to consider
>being able to do worse than "Worst"/"Terrible" just for symmetry...

Okay.

>>I like the concept of relating things to words.
>
>I like it too, but you have to be a little careful about what the words say,
>what the mechanics say, and what you want to say...

Yep.  That's why I want to hammer out terminology at this point.

>I'll try to get the "Hurt"/"Very Hurt" guidelines written, but again, I warn
>that they're not going to appear anytime soon.  Can you give me an idea of how
>I'm not getting across what I was trying to say in my previous attempts?
>
Let me reread it and think on it.  Maybe it just needs a minor tweak,
something as easy as changing the word Average above . . .

-- 
  - Steffan O'Sullivan		         sos@oz.plymouth.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.design