HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Re: Re: SF or FF?
Date: 31 Jul 92 15:05:10 GMT
Reply-To: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Organization: Columbia University

In article <1992Jul31.114224.9762@waikato.ac.nz> mperry@waikato.ac.nz writes:
>Science today states that xyz is impossible - this only means that xyz is
>impossible according to their theory (which only partially models reality)
>at this time. Given time their theory will probably change and xyz may become
>possible. 
>	   Take Flying - how many people thought this was impossible.
>          Take a Submarine - no one thought it was possible.
>          Take landing on the moon ...
>          Take a Hologram ...
>          Take radio ...
>          Take an atom bomb ...
>          Take the Earth - when most people thought it was flat ...

	Times have changed, you know. Scientists today generally have a much 
more enlightened view than the people of previous times. No one in the past 
had any good reason to think that flying was impossible, or the earth was 
flat. Michaelangelo drew plans for all sorts of flying machines, and the 
Greeks knew the Earth was 17 centureis before Columbus. 

	Holograms, radio, the atom bomb - these are all good examples. 
Landing on the moon was only thought impossible before Galileo, by those who 
had naive, primarily religious expectations of the properties of celestial 
matter. Many people thought a moon-shot or a submarine would be impractical, 
but not impossible. 

>
>When some physics law says something is impossible, you must remember that it
>is only another theory, and it may be wrong. - just like the theory of god.
>They are theories modelling reality from one perspective. You can use 
>theories, but you shouldn't take a theory as being absolute and infalable.

	Agreed. If you do invent new science, however, you should have a 
good explanation why no one saw the effects before, and be consistant in 
how you apply your new laws. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.advocacy
From: joshua salter <jsalter@silver.ucs.indiana.edu>
Subject: The last fighting system
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 14:34:07 GMT


	I buy games more on the basis of mood and setting than system anymore, 
are there any pure SYSTEM advocates out there? (I know there are...)

								-jsalter

	"You thought to take my place, boy?" - Death
	"MORT." - Death's Apprentice and almost successor, Mort

		^
		| 
	from Terry Pratchett's book, MORT
From: jacobus@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Bryan J. Maloney)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: CFV: BANNED AT GENCON!!!
Keywords: straw poll Ragnarok TSR
Date: 27 Jul 92 23:15:57 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center

In article <3112@bcstec.ca.boeing.com> gee7759@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Glenn Elliott) writes:
>The final count was 34 pro-Ragnarok, 31 pro-TSR, and 10 don't-care.
>There were a couple of other miscellaneous votes, which are shown
>below.  As you can see, NO ONE was in the majority.  The issue was
>almost evenly split.
>
>Pro TSR
>
>  Bryan J. Maloney








Just how were these votes tabulated????

I don't even remember "voting" one way or another on this issue.  And if
I did post, I certainly would NOT have come out on the side of big business
censorship.  (To be blunt, I was wondering if it would be worthwhile to
inform the FTC of TSR's practice and see if the Feds wanna play too.)


But I would NEVER vote "Pro TSR"--at least not in a situation where they
decide to play Big Brother/Uncle Joe to the rest of the gaming world.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: an intresting but not completely original source of psi
From: a_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Date: 31 Jul 92 09:16:11 CST
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

A friend and I were discussing the psionics idea, and we came up with a very
intresting idea (the mechanics that follow are from GURPS, but can be adapted
to other systems):

Only an insane person has psionics ability. Since it is believed (currently)
that insanity is caused by chemical imbalances in the brain, such chemicals
could cause reactions which create psychic energy (a biological battery, if you
will). The more insane a person is, the more powerful they could potentially
be. Basically, a character in such a system cannot put more points into
psionics (counting power only -- skill is a matter of training and experience,
not natural ability) than he has in disadvantages that, in the GMs opinion,
deal with insanity (usually Delusions, Phobias, Megalomania, Manic Depressive,
perhaps Living on the Edge, Bad Temper, Fanatacism, and a few others). If such
a psi is ever cured of his insanity(s), he loses all of his psionic ability!

This effectively limits the use of psi in the game world. It also makes it
fairly probable that no one would ever believe that psionics exists. If only
insane people have psionic ability, who's going to believe them if they claim to
have these powers? They're insane, remember? And if they are in a mental
institution, their abilities will be slim to nil: the drugs they are given that
sedate them oh-by-the-way dampen their psionic abilities (it stops or slows
down the chemical reactiosn that cause the insanity, remember?).

Just a warped idea. The kind you get after reading the Lobo Paramilitary
Christmas Special...

Brandon Cope
From: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Hero System for anything but supers
Date: 21 Jul 92 20:17:03 GMT
Reply-To: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Organization: Department of Chemistry, UCLA

Hold it, 15 is hardly an "average" weapon skill in GURPS.  I suspect you've
seen some real power-gamers at it with GURPS, since I've RARELY seen a
starting character with even ONE stat of 15, and never played one with a
stat of 15... and I've been playing GURPS for about four years.

IMHO, a starting skill of 12 is perfectly reasonable for a starting fighter,
especially if you've got a weapon/shield combo or a defensive weapon (staff,
rapier, and the like).  People pay for those 15 DX's... they either can't
penetrate heavy armor, or they can't take much damage before keeling over.
Or, alternatively, they're VERY vulnerable to anything requiring an IQ roll.
At any rate, IMHO it just isn't worth it to get the 15 DX.  Of course, I don't
like to play characters with an IQ of less than 12, so I suppose that colors
my choice of point expenditures quite a bit.


-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.

This is a properly spelled version of the mimetic signature virus.  Copy it
into your .signature file and join in the fun today!
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: gil@smtc21.engr.scarolina.edu (Gil Young)
Subject: Re: CHAMPS: Marksman....
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 03:16:42 GMT

PCHEM14@Zeus.unomaha.edu (FALL88) writes:

>gil@smtc21.engr.scarolina.edu writes:
>> and me, a martial artist with a 1d6 autofire penetrating
>> x3 0 END knife (among other things) named Ginsu.

>Just wondering: Any reason for penetrating x3 on a *knife*?  I'm
>not aware of too many martial arts that let you stick knives through
>steel girders.  By the way, since your attack is so easy to cancel
>(quad harden bottom 2 PD/dam resist for 3 pts) don't expect it to
>effect mechanon again.  He does that, you know.  Hope you've got a
>real attack in that character somewhere...  :)

>-james
Ginsu is a martial artist in style only, a highly trained and 
disciplined warrior from another dimension where there is no
learning 'curve,' but rather a straight line.  Her triple pene
is a function of superb training and equipment, of an unearthly
level.  And though one could quadruple harden a couple using 3
points, I'm pretty sure no such thing exists even in the Champions
universe.  And yes, I do have a 'real' attack in Ginsu's multipower.
A 4d6 punch.  Or was that a 4 1/2d6 HKA?  I forget....  :)

Gil
From: Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is it real, or is it SF?
Date: 29 Jul 92 16:41:45 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

mar@physics.su.OZ.AU (David Mar) writes:

> Can you tell me what this explanation (taken directly from the campaign
> background I hand out to my players) qualifies as:
> 
> [description deleted]

Well, at first glance, I'd qualify it as "bafflegab".  Whether it qualifies as
SF or not depends on how it fits in with your universe.  If, for instance, you
don't have any consistent rules to determine how it is or isn't affected by
gravitational fields, what the velocity vector in realspace is before and after
the transition, what the failure modes might be, etc, I probably wouldn't
consider it a SF element.

> Psionics would "merely" require the highly creative use of laws we have - it
> would not _necessarily_ violate laws currently believed to be true.

That would depend on the capabilities of psionics.  Traveller's teleportation
to orbit is probably just as bad as FTL, and what form of energy would support
telepathy over distances of hundreds of km (or more)?

> It would be a pain to do, but do you think it is possible for a "soft" SF
> explanation to evolve into a "hard" one by this method? Or do you _need_ the
> core rules graven in stone before you begin?

It's probably possible to "harden up" the SF in your game.

--

Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca
From: canders@isr.harvard.edu (Carl E. Anderson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: The late, lamented Iron Crown...
Date: 22 Jul 92 15:09:04 GMT
Organization: Harvard University, Cambridge, MA

In article <RANNOU.92Jul21223546@zuse.info.polymtl.ca> Rannou@info.polymtl.ca (Patrick Rannou) writes:
>In article <1992Jul20.161835.25017@burrhus.harvard.edu> canders@isr.harvard.edu (Carl E. Anderson) writes:
>	   My God!  Should TSR get the Middle-earth license truly, the world
>   would end.  I would be forced to take up guerilla warfare against them!
>	   Surely Chris Tolkien would not allow TSR to get it!  Of course, he
>   probably doesn't know how much TSR sucks.
>	   Perhaps I should go get some of the key MERP stuff now before it's
>   too late ...
>
>Well, the fact isn't that TSR sucks or not... It is that ME licensing going
>to TSR would mean that all those D&D players would suddenly have access to
>yet another book(s) to buy, and thus Tolkien would make far more money that
>way...
>Simple, isn't it?

	Yeah, but Chris Tolkien is hardly very hard up for cash.  And he is
a pretty decent guy who has been trying is best to get his dad's notes and
such published for the admittedly small number of truly rabid Tolkien fans
out there, and has especially worked to ensure linguistic material was
included in the History of Middle-earth series books.
	He wants the ME stuff that come out to be good, is my point, and
ICE has done a respectable job with it (most of them _being_ rabid Tolkien
fans!).  I think if he knew what T$R would do with it, he wouldn't let them
have it.  Of course this may all be being done through horrible lawyers,
and Chris Tolkien never even hears about it ...

Carl
canders@isr.harvard.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: cassidy@indian.cps.msu.edu (John J Cassidy)
Subject: Re: Psionics
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Michigan State University
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 21:43:51 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.134214.23791@nic.unh.edu> dqk412@kepler.unh.edu (David Q Kennard) writes:
>In article <1992Jul22.170929.1436@ultb.isc.rit.edu> sjm8118@ritvax.isc.rit.edu writes:
>>      Does anyone else out there think that psionics is the copout of a SF 
>>world designer that cannot work within the framework of his own SF world's
>>technology to provide a good story/adventure?
>>
>>                                  Scott McDonough
>
>Does anyone else out there think that SF technology is a copout of a
>world designer who cannot work within the framework of his own world's
>base principles to provide a good story/adventure/characterization?
>
>Dave Kennard

	Depends on what you want.  "Realistic" Science Fiction has recently
become an interest to me.  That last phrase is really hard to say, because as 
the second person points out, there is nothing garaunteeing our reaching space
exploration technology.  So to the ones who like their science fiction hard,
must realize that ALL SF is fantastic to a degree.  This argument of soft vs.	hard SF is pretty old and will continue to go on for awhile, in my estimation.	But IMO, it depends on what you want.  Right now I want as near to star-roving	culture, and as close to realistic as I can get.  E.g.  Space travel is not easyit uses up alot of resources, things break down after long trips and some ships,especially the older ones on the line, have to be overhauled between every trip.I also make it so that the only thi





ngs traveling FTL are ships, so information 	travels as fast as people do.  Basically, try to stay away from Star Trek ( one	of my all-time favorite shows, nonetheless ).  The Trek universe was always to 	squeaky-clean for me.

	Anyway, are psionics a cop-out?  they are in a hard SF campaign.  The 	one place that I think that they are a sort of cop-out, is in thier ubiquitousness in most SF campaigns.  That they appear in almost every SF game I've played, is I think, unfortunate.  When psionics play a big role in the campaign, it is	more like fantasy.  That's not bad, it's just SF CAN be interesting, and some 	gamers SHOULD try it, once.	

	John J Cassidy		Cassidy@indian.cps.msu.edu
	~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: jacobus@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Bryan J. Maloney)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: The BEST Superhero game
Date: 22 Jul 92 01:42:28 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center

In article <1992Jul21.194510.26489@uwm.edu> buzzsaw@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Michael Elias Campbell) writes:
> There are two characters in a room  10 AP across. One can move at 2 AP
> a turn, the other can move at 3 AP. How many ap of time does it take for
> them to meet??
>



Okay, firstoff, that is one HUGE room, my friend.  In DC, every +1 AP 
DOUBLES the real-world measurement.  (This is not all that wierd, after
all, Hero games uses the same thing, except that it is every 5 active points
that doubles the real-world measurement--usually applied to strength more
than anything.)  Therefore, assuming that 1 AP of distance is 6 feet (I'm
guessing--my copy of DC Heroes is buried with the rest of my game collection
in the post-apartment-change pile of detritus), then 10 AP is 6 feet doubled
nine times, or 1,024 yards across (that's around 900 meters).  Now, a 
movement rate of X AP is the distance (in AP) that a character can cover
in 1 AP of time.  Remember that X+1 AP is equal to twice the distance of
X AP, so a character who moves at 3 AP is moving twice as fast as one
moving at 2 AP.  Assume that one turn is two seconds (another guess,
since I don't have the rules in front of me.  Therefore, a character
moving at 2 moves at one yard every second (in other words, two yards
per two seconds), and a character moving at 3 AP moves at two yards per
second (double the rate of 2 AP).

Therefore, the two close upon each other at three yards per second, dividing
1024 by three gives us 341.333 or 171 2-second turns.  If DC turns are
longer or shorter, adjust accordingly.



> If you can explain this to me without going into higher mathematics, I'll
> buy the system.

See, all done by simple mathematics.  I didn't even invoke logarithms,
or the basics of algebra.  So, you going to pick up any of the supplements?
I recommend the Book of Magic highly.
From: Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Is it real, or is it SF?
Date: 28 Jul 92 07:00:14 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

te FTL travel? If you have done this, then please write up your work so that we
can award you your Nobel Prize. :-)

I said nothing about _rigorous_ scientific extrapolation.  If the FTL drive is
essentially a "black box" added to give characters access to other star
systems, then it is fantasy.  If you give an explanation for the drive that is
not directly contradicted by anything in the known laws of your gaming
universe, extrapolate the effects of that science for the parts of the universe
the players will encounter, and nothing in the game contradicts the science you
have proposed, then it could be considered SF.

If your players are all world-class theoretical physicists, then you have to be
more rigorous in your proposed science.  Also, the more you deviate from the
known laws of this universe, the more difficult it is to provide
self-consistent detail.  GM's hate it when players point out why something in
the game universe won't work, or something the GM hadn't considered (and hadn't
planned for) would work (ruining hours of GM's labour).

> Under our current understanding of physics, neither psionics nor FTL travel
> are likely to be possible. In fact, I would argue that psionics are more
> likely to be possible than FTL travel.

Oh, I'd love to read your arguments in favour of the possibility of psionics!
Please post them.  >:-)


> But underlying the theme of my game is the idea that it _is_ possible for
> these things to be understood. _I_ don't necessarily know how to do it, but a
> character in the game with a skill level of 18 in Psionic Engineering _will_
> know what he is talking about. That character will know whether or not she
> can make that psionic bomb.

The problem is that if the GM doesn't know if it is possible (in the gaming
universe), he has to make a random decision about it.  Later, a similar
situation comes up, and another random decision about what is or isn't possible
in that universe is made.  Still further on, the players try something else,
and it turns out that it is possible according to the first decision, and
impossible according to the second; the two decisions were mutually
incompatible.  The GM then has to backtrack and say that something that
happened didn't happen, or else come up with a third decision about the
universe which allows the two previous decisions to be compatible.  This
usually involves a nonsense explanation, and the game moves into the realm of
fantasy.

Without some rules for how the game universe works, how can you extrapolate for
a set of unexpected situations?  If you keep changing the laws of the universe,
as is done in ST:TNG, it is not SF.  It could be fun for some gamers, but
gamers wanting real science fiction would likely be disappointed.

--

Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca
From: Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Psionics
Date: 25 Jul 92 19:24:35 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp) writes:

> For example, let's say that you issue Legacy, I look over it and say, "Gee!
> THIS is the kind of SF game I've been looking for! I like the mechanics and
> background..."
>         Where am I going to get those PSI rules, eh?

Which set of PSI rules are you talking about?  High level psionics or low
level?  Psionics as defined by "Bloodhype", or as by the human psionics in
"Startide Rising"?

>         In short, if you like a system but it is missing certain rules you
> want, you either have to
>         1) Drop the system and find one with all the rules you want, even if
> the new system itself is not really what you wanted mechanically
>         2) Try to patch incompatible systems together (I actually had SOME
> success with this, patching Space Opera psionics into AD&D)
>         3) Invent your own rules.

How do you satisfy gamers' desires for psionics rules, when there are so many
different varieties of psionics?  In response to your example, what if Legacy
did have a detailed and comprehensive psionics rules, but the abilities were
very rare and very limited (short-range, low data-rate psychic Morse code,
telekinesis with a force of micrograms) while you wanted PC's to be able to
teleport to ships in orbit and crisp NPC's with a thought?  What if you wanted
the limited style of psionics, and the rules and background had high-level
psionics as integral parts of everyday life?  In either case, you would still
have to choose one of your three options above.

The perfect SF rpg for everyone doesn't exist, nor will it ever.  I don't think
you could have a detailed, comprehensive rule system and background that offers
both high-level psionics and no psionics as equally playable options.  Choosing
one possibility or the other is the price of having a detailed background/rules
system.

Since you did mention "those PSI rules", could you give us some idea what
constitutes "those" rules that will satisfy all gamers if added to a SF rpg?

--

Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: tdunn@ecst.csuchico.edu (Tim Dunn)
Subject: Mopheus (was Re: Reviews: Dangerous Journeys, Dreampark)
Organization: California State University, Chico
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 16:11:07 GMT

Jim Ogle (Ks. Jim) writes:
>It was done before a couple of years ago in a game called Morpheus,
>which was put out by, um, some really small company whose name I don't
>quite remember (Stellar Games?  Rapport Games?).  

It was Stellar, I believe. Good looking packaging, but according to a
friend who had the misfortune to buy it, not worth even trying to read.
Same goes for nightlife.

-- 
Lubarsky's Law of Cybernetic Entomology:
	There's always one more bug.
From: mephron@tronsbox.xei.com (Mephron)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: CHAMPS: Marksman....
Date: 28 Jul 92 03:41:53 GMT
Organization: Xanadu Enterprises Inc.

In article <1992Jul27.190350.26969@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> bz978@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Charles E Gibbs) writes:
>
>In a previous article, gil@smtc21.engr.scarolina.edu (Gil Young) says:
>
>>I've heard about this Markaman fellow a couple of times from you
>>all, and I remember seeing him in those goofy comic strips in the
>>old Champions I, II, and III.  Just who the hell is he?
>
>  The Marksman was the leader of one of the first campaign group known
>as the Guardsmen.  Many of the people who played in that campaign went
>on to write the first rules and supplements for that game, which is why
>you see'em plastered in CHamps I, II, and III.  IF you want stats and
>stuff, try to find the CHAMPIONS limited series by Eclipse or CHAMPIONS
>comic book by HERO comics at a nearby comic book store.  That can explain
>a little bit more.

And rumors keep popping up about the GUARDIANS book, that has that orginial
group in it.  (I want to see how they do Gargoyle.)  I keep hearing October
from a local source...but I remember hearing about this a LOOOOOONG time ago.
Anybody from HERO around to confirm/deny?