HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dburgdor@cwis.unomaha.edu (Darryl Burgdorf)
Subject: "Munchkins"
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 21:45:23 GMT


Just a quick questin here ....

(And my apologies if it's a FAQ .... )

What, precisely, is meant by the term "munchkin"?

A lot of people use it, and they don't all necessarily seem to be using it
in reference to the same thing.  My guess at this point is that it refers to
someone who's more interested in "taking advantage" of a game system than in
creating a real character and roleplaying.  Is this on target?

Thanks in advance for the answer!

	Darryl


  /----------------------------------------------------\
  |   dburgdor @unmcvm.unmc.edu or @cwis.unomaha.edu   |
  \----------------------------------------------------/
From: millerl@wharton.upenn.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Science Fiction Role Playing
Date: 17 Nov 92 23:11:39 GMT
Organization: Newt World Order

In article <BxvrGr.Ms9@news.iastate.edu>, arakins@iastate.edu (Brother Andrek of the Violet Orchid Brotherhood) writes:
>   I have a simple question...I'm NOT rying to start a thread, so
> please e-mail your replies.

Sorry. Since this is advocacy for a specific system, I'm posting in
.advocacy...

>   I require the following rules:
>     Combat: HTH, Ranged, Vehicle.
>     Psionics.
>     Non-combat interaction.
>   The campaign world is VERY high-tech. Lasers, fusion guns,
> power armour, robots, etcetera.

Get Torg with the Space Gods campaign book. You don't have to set your
campaign in the Near Now. The combat rules are fast, easy, and
cinematic, and they cover those huge swarms of snotlings easily. In
fact, if you are going to use large swarms of opponents Torg will
*always* be your best bet, because of the very natural *one against
many* rules. Space Gods covers psionics. Torg has the best non-combat
interaction rules around. Period. And the Space Gods bioweapons and beam
weapons will cover all your super-blastem requirements. The only thing
they don't have are giant robot rules, but those are *easy* to write in
Torg. Just figure out how much your robot weighs and you have half the
statistics right there. Torg is also one of the most fun *games* around
because of the card play, and if your friends are into WH40K because
it's fun to play then they just might like Torg because of its "fun
first" attitude.

-- 
whoah,
+++++++++++++++++++++++23
Loren Miller                           internet: MILLERL@wharton.upenn.edu
Mediocrity is a hand rail.                         -- Baron de Montesquieu
From: guest@chopin.Physics.McGill.CA (Muhep Guest account)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Medieval Pain-in-the-Arse
Date: 23 Nov 92 22:00:53 GMT
Organization: SOCS, McGill University, Montreal, Canada

J.D. Frazer writes
 
> > From Kromm, who plays murderous necromancers who have no respect for 
> > the laws or people of *any* fantasy world he plays in!
 
> Cool. Come play in mine and we'll have a mob lynching. The local  
> peasantry are dreadfully hateful of witchery. >:-)
> J.D. Frazer, a481@mindlink.bc.ca, (Vancouver, B.C., Canada)
> -----------------------------------------------------------

Hee hee hee. I'm not that obvious. I *love* to play someone
who is truly and unabashedly evil, a horrid undead thing, 
barely recognizable as human. But...I like to use illusions
and deception to make people think I am the kindly lord...
and when weird stuff happens, I'll let the locals burn some
crone for being a witch, show up in church....and then go 
home and continue with my dark sorcery.

-Kromm.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: seurer@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Bill Seurer)
Subject: Re: Character Detail
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 18:22:09 GMT
Reply-To: BillSeurer@vnet.ibm.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM Rochester

In article <17641@borg.cs.unc.edu>, bell@beethoven.cs.unc.edu (Andrew Bell) writes:
|> >Although DX is more useful than ST in *every* genre or campaign
|> >(except maybe some extremely bizarre & limited ones, like GURPS Powerlifting),
|> >they have the same cost, so generally people buy more DX than ST.  Moreover,
|> >the pricing philosophy varies from skills (difficulty) to stats (rarity) to
|> >advantages (utility), so that there really isn't a general rationalization 
|> >for what prices should be.
|> 
|> This is also a problem, and is actually a more difficult one;  exactly
|> how much "better" is dex than strength?

Lots of people keep saying this.  Yet in my fantasy campaign *ALL* of the
dominating warriors are VERY strong with middling dexterity.  This
has held true ever since GURPS has been around.  Even with both high ST
and high DX characters in the same group it is the high ST ones that
dominate in any combat.

So there's NO WAY that lowering the cost of ST (or raising that of DX
which in effect is the same thing) will work for a low tech campaign
in my opinion.

And no, the high DX sorts don't dominate the game outside of combat either.
When you have a high ST there's lots of things you can do to compensate
for your other lower attributes and skills if you are imaginative.

Probably the most memorable PC ever in my campaign (ask anyone who's 
played) was also the strongest (ST 17 eventually worked to 20).  His
DX is only 12 and his best skill is 14.  He has only a handful of
non-combat skills but that never slowed him down.  Heck, he played his
lack of skills at things as an advantage almost.
-- 

- Bill Seurer     Language and Compiler Development      IBM Rochester, MN
  Internet: BillSeurer@vnet.ibm.com    America On-Line: BillSeurer@aol.com
From: a481@mindlink.bc.ca (J.D. Frazer)
Subject: Re: Medieval Pain-in-the-Arse
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 02:49:57 GMT

> CX6L000 writes:
> To the original poster: try playing a Zoroastrian magician, or an African
> tribal doctor, or something equally weird. It's not a sign that *you* are a
> bad roleplayer! (Contrary to the response above.) If the GM can't deal with
> it, it is a sign *he* is a terrible GM.

I think the chap who flamed the original poster did so because the original
poster seemed to want very badly to "screw up the GM." I don't think it has
anything to do with what sort of character is and isn't allowed.

If a player deliberately attempts to screw me up at the expense of the other
players or the campaign, he or she gets turfed, no ifs, ands or buts. After
all, we're playing because it's fun.

The original poster also gave me the impression that he sees the GM as an
adversary. I've never understood this sort of mentality.

> From Kromm, who plays murderous necromancers who have no respect for the
> laws or people of *any* fantasy world he plays in!

Cool. Come play in mine and we'll have a mob lynching. The local peasantry
are dreadfully hateful of witchery. >:-)

--
J.D. Frazer, a481@mindlink.bc.ca, (Vancouver, B.C., Canada)
-----------------------------------------------------------
*BRRRRAPPAPPAPPAPPAPPAPPAPPAPP!*
"MEIN LEBEN!" <thud>
"You shoulda thought about that when you signed up, buddy." - Valaria
From: gharris@jade.tufts.edu (George W. Harris)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Character Detail
Date: 19 Nov 92 18:09:19 GMT
Organization: Tufts University - Medford, MA

In article <1992Nov18.234110.14722@rchland.ibm.com> BillSeurer@vnet.ibm.com writes:
>
>It is consistant with a philosophy.  Things cost what Steve Jackson thought
>they should cost.  

	That's not a philosophy, that's reliance on authority.  It's true 
because the Bible says so.  It's an easy way to avoid reason.

>Personally, I agree with Steffan.  No matter HOW HARD someone tries, no
>two characters are point balanced UNLESS THEY ARE EXACTLY THE SAME.  So
>stop worrying about it so much, make an interesting character, and have fun.
>If your idea of a fun character is one point optimized to the max and the GM
>oks it, that's fine by me.

	This is a very familiar straw man.  Nobody is saying characters should
be *exactly* balanced.  However, it would be nice if characters with comparable
point costs had something close to comparable levels of ability, expecially
if their abilities are strong in the same fields.  GURPS often fails to 
achieve this.

>- Bill Seurer     Language and Compiler Development      IBM Rochester, MN
>  Internet: BillSeurer@vnet.ibm.com    America On-Line: BillSeurer@aol.com
--
gharris@jade.tufts.edu          
George W. Harris              	"He'd kill us if he had the chance."  
Dept. of Mathematics            
Tufts University              			The Conversation
From: dfn@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (David Nalle)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: GURPS Vampire?????????
Keywords: NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Date: 18 Nov 92 16:35:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: ut-emx.83879
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

In article <BxKL7C.HH2@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> durrant@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (unkno
wn) writes:
>       GURPS Vampire?????????????????????????  White Wolf--how could you do
>such a horrible thing??????????  The Storyteller system is by nature a system
>without an emphasis on mechanics and dice rolling--a godsend to players like
>me who enjoy the ROLE playing much more than the ROLL playing.

Really?  I've always felt the exact opposite.  The so-called 'storyteller' 
system savages the idea of roleplaying in an unforgivable way.  The mechanics
are dictatorial and intrusive, forcing decisions on the players and denying
creativity and imagination.  Plus the system is full of glitches and design
mistakes and heavily burdened with pretentious BS.  Sure, the rules are fairly
simple, but that doesn't make them any good.  My feeling is that if you're
going to have only a few rules, they ought to be DAMNED good rules.  

As for GURPS Vampire, I think it's a GREAT idea.  GURPS is a much better
designed game system than Vampire's original rules, and it's amazingly bold
of White Wolf to take this step and acknowledge the fact that a lot of players
can't stomach their somewhat confused idea of what roleplaying is.

Dave
From: millerl@wharton.upenn.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: RPG's That Belong on Every Gamer's Shelf
Date: 23 Nov 92 16:38:24 GMT
Organization: Newt World Order

My turn!

5 games, in no particular order.

Call of Cthulhu
   Call of Cthulhu is a simple game to play and simple to GM. It is a
   good change of pace from the normal power trip fantasy of most
   roleplaying games. The support materials are some of the best in the
   world, and now that the 5th edition is out, the rules are once again
   well organized.

Over the Edge
   You need an inexpensive example of an innovative game design, with
   nearly diceless/ruleless systems, and an emphasis on impromptu
   adventure design, which is always useful for GMs who hate to sit down
   and flowchart adventures (gag). Over the Edge is certainly
   innovative, and it's also an inexpensive game. If you can't find it
   then CORPS should cover the same bases pretty well, though its
   systems are less fluid than OTE's they are also less likely to cause
   arguments with realism fiends.

RuneQuest 2nd Edition
   This was the first game to tie an excellent game system (the first
   major skill based rpg) to a well thought out heroic setting
   (glorantha). As the 3rd edition removed the focus on Glorantha it
   isn't as usable or interesting. The RQ rules are easy to grasp and
   play rather quickly, though the combat rules may take some time to
   adjust to they expose several fallacies in other games' combat
   systems.

Dungeons & Dragons Rules Compendium
   Lots of people play D&D, AD&D, and xD&D variants. At certain times
   you may want to play with people who refuse to play anything but
   "D&D". This is a single book with all the useful rules for D&D, which
   is the simplest and most internally consistent of the D&D family of
   rules. Character creation is simple, the alignment system is simple
   and usable, unlike AD&D's complex and ridiculous alignments, and they
   got rid of the dross, like multi-class, dual class, assassins, etc,
   that was in AD&D and in the original collector's edition D&D rules.
   If your friends play any D&D game they can understand this one, and
   if you are new to xD&D then this is the version that will make the
   most sense.

GURPS or Hero or Torg
   GURPS and The Hero System are both excellent multi-genre game
   systems, as is Torg. I'd choose either GURPS or Hero over Torg
   because they are more consistent, with better examples for GMs who
   want to design things to add to their campaigns, and because they
   cover "realistic" genres more cleanly than Torg. Torg is more fun to
   play, though.

-- 
whoah,
+++++++++++++++++++++++23
Loren Miller                           internet: MILLERL@wharton.upenn.edu
Mediocrity is a hand rail.                         -- Baron de Montesquieu
From: jdugger@lust.reed.edu (Jay Dugger)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: RPG's That Belong on Every Gamer's Shelf
Date: 22 Nov 92 00:09:14 GMT
Article-I.D.: reed.1992Nov22.000914.25591
Organization: Reed College, Portland, OR

Well, here are my choices:

1)AD&D -- Great for pick-up games, everbody knows the rules, and with an  
inspired DM, it's as good as anything on the market.  (NOTE: If you dis-  
agree, you have my sympathy.)

2)HERO System -or- GURPS -- HS can be used to simulate anything in a  
half-baked manner and requires only one book.  GURPS can be used to  
simulate anything in a reasonably accurate manner.

3)Bunnies and Burrows -- Either edition, although the GURPS version is  
better.

4)TOON -- Funny, funny, funny!

5)Amber -- The real ROLE-playing system -- NO DICE!

There are also lots of other fun games and useful supplements, but the  
former is a matter of taste and the latter is a matter of needs.

Jay Dugger
jdugger@reed.edu
From: picl17@fsphy1.physics.fsu.edu (Jeffrey Johnson)
Subject: Re:  RPG's that belong on every gamer's shelf
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Reply-To: picl17@fsphy1.physics.fsu.edu
Organization: F.S.U. Dept of Physics
Distribution:  world
Date: 22 NOV 92 13:00:39    

1 )  AD&D, second edition.  MUCH better than the first edition.  Although
this is still not a really good system, almost everyone who games is familiar
with it, and it is possible to run a good AD&D game.... you just have to ignore
the dumber rules.  ;^)

2 )  TORG.  An excellent system, and in my opinion the best "generic" system
on the market.  While it doesn't have the huge number of supplements that GURPS
does, its basic system is much more elegant (IMHO).  I also prefer it over
GURPS because I prefer "cinematic" games.

3 )  CORPS.  The rules are brilliant, simple, and elegant.  It is quite simply
the best "modern" RPG I have ever seen, and one of the best RPG's I've seen.

4 )  Shadowrun, second edition.  One of the most innovative settings I've ever
seen in an RPG.  Shadowrun's magic system makes logical sense (most of the time,
at least) and is mostly true to how "real" magic is supposed to work.

5 )  Toon.  A fantastically silly idea, wonderfully executed.  It's great fun,
and the idea of "falling down" makes perfect sense in a cartoon setting.

And the Bad Examples....

1 )  Bushido.  A very nice system, but written in a completely illogical 
fashion.  Game terms are used before they are explained, systems are presented
in an odd order (character generation isn't explained until half-way through
the book, and things are done in a very odd way.  (For example, all skills are
percentile... but you divide your skill level by 5 and try to roll under this 
number on d20 to do something.  However, percentile dice are used for other 
things in the game.)  It also features some of the most wonderfully confusing
terms ever.  (Quick!  Do you know the difference between Raw BCS, Base BCS, and
adjusted Base BCS?)

2 )  The Arduin Trilogy.  A wonderful "third-party" supplement for D&D/AD&D,
it places great emphasis on using common sense.  However, it's built for 
Munchkins, with 100+ level characters, super-powerful magic, and other such 
things.  Lastly, it suffers from poor organization and editing.

3 )  Traveller's character generation system.  You too can die before the game
even starts!  Works all right if you ignore about 25% of it.

4 )  The original Top Secret's character generation system.  LOTS of attributes
to figure out, coupled with a generation system that's nearly COMPLETELY random.
You're even supposed to roll your skills randomly!

5 )  Shadowrun's Street Samurai catalog.  Fifteen dollars for info that could 
easily fit in 20 pages!

All of these choices are my OPINIONS, and I'm not going to argue with anyone
about them (I'm spending enough time arguing with people I already know...)

Travis
picl17@fsphy1.physics.fsu.edu
"He-who-has-no-.sig"
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
Subject: Re: Medieval Pain-in-the-Arse
Reply-To: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, N.H.
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 16:21:49 GMT

If you want an authentic pain-in-the-ass, be a Fool.  A court jester
whose duke died, and the new duke is tired of your slings and barbs,
and has released you from service.

Now you wander around, saying whatever comes into your head - usually
the unvarnished truth, which is extremely annoying to most people, of
course.  You could either really be a half-wit, or be an actor
pretending to be one.  You'd have some performance skills, too, of
course: juggling, acrobatics, dance, music, poetry, etc.

But the main thing about a Fool is that they ridicule everyone - and
*that's* a pain in the ass!

-- 
  - Steffan O'Sullivan		         sos@oz.plymouth.edu
From: v121mhb5@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (D.O.G. of S.A.R.P.A.)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Vampire System's Merit (NOT!)
Date: 23 Nov 92 15:14:00 GMT
Followup-To: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Nov22.165438@cs.man.ac.uk>, peterw@cs.man.ac.uk (Peter Wake) writes..> 
>As for taking a second edition to invent the index, proper contents and
>meaningful chapter organisations...  Are these people idiots?  I am not
>buying another book from them just because they made a mess of the
>first one.  To me that's a reason *not* to buy again.
> 
>
>Who's seen the Storyteller's Guide?  Was it the lamest piece of self help writing you have ever seen.  I think it has.  "My dad didn't understand roleplaying."  I resent paying money for such s**t, I'm glad I didn't.
> 
>Ars Magica is so good and Vampire so bad because they are written by
>different people (BTW).
>--
>Peter Wake

	[much stuff deleted]
	Actually both systems were designed by Mark Rein*Hagen, though his
co-writers on the two games are different.  There aren't as many differences
between the two systems as you think.  In Ars Magica, the same problem 
exists if you have a DEX of -2 (poor) and a stealth of 5.  According to the
skill, you should be a master, but in fact because of your DEX you're only
pretty good.  Perhaps this makes more sense than you realize.

	Of course, Ars Magica is on its THIRD edition nowadays, and there's
still a bug or two in the rulebook, though the game is actually very comp-
rehensive.

						Jim Scannell
						Killer GM at large
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: dzik@access.digex.com (Joseph Dzikiewicz)
Subject: Re: Advantages
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 02:04:16 GMT

In article <1992Nov19.204703.7796@news.columbia.edu> jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim) writes:
>
>	Excuse me? I just checked this. Absent-mindedness does *not* modify 
>perception. Absent-mindedness means you have -5 to any IQ based roll which 
>you are not concentrating on at the moment. If you concentrate on looking 
>for something, or just looking around, your perception is just fine. 

Well, bad sight, hard of hearing, and such all modify perception with the
appropriate senses.  I would certainly allow someone to buy back perception,
but I've never seen anyone who wanted to bother.

>
>	Hmm. Exceptions of Garion in the Belgeriad, and Thomas Covenant, and 
>just about any mage in the Conan books @-). 

Garion and Covenant both had serious magic items.  Garion also had a prophecy
behind him, the GURPs Rome equivalent of a 15 point destiny.

Besides, if you want to allow great mages without high IQ, just lift the 
maximum on levels of magery.  Nice and easy, no fuss, no muss.

>
>	Yes, but the system discourages the taking of these 'sub-attributes' 
>(like Will, Perception, etc.) because the basic attributes are so much more 
>cost-effective (at least in the usual range of attributes: 7-15). Anyone 
>who wants to be Strong-willed and Alert without being very smart will 
>quickly discover that his character will probably cost *less* if he were 
>smarter (assuming he has some reasonable number of mental skills) while 
>keeping the same Will and Perception rolls. 
>

True enough.  No system is perfect.  That applies to real life as well
as to any game I have seen.

But, short of stat explosion on a scale that would put even Hero to shame,
how would one have general abilities defaulting to attributes without
grouping at least some abilities that do not, in some cases, coexist?

I'll admit that GURPS may over-simplify in the attribute category,
but it works for me.  If I want something that perfectly simulates the
myriad possibilities of real life, I'll go out and play myself for a
while.


Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy