HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tdunn@ecst.csuchico.edu (Tim Dunn)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd,rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: rec.games.frp.campaign
Date: 10 Nov 92 09:03:59 GMT
Article-I.D.: charnel.1dnttvINNpu6
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: hairball.ecst.csuchico.edu

cbnorman@cayley.uwaterloo.ca writes:
>                      Revised Proposal (November 6, 1992)
>                            rec.games.frp.campaign
[... snip ... snip ... snip ... snip .... snip ... snip ... snip ... snip ...]
>                         Justification for Uniqueness
>The campaign is one of the most important concepts of role playing.  

Agreed.  

>The newsgroup .campaign will provide a centralized location for fantasy role 
>players to study the campaigns of others, discuss these campaigns, and 
>campaigning in general.  

Here's a very simple question: if these campaigns are going to be in story
format (oops, cut that bit already), then will other players be able to
study them?  As for "campaigning in general", what the blazes do you mean
by that?  Will players post moves in story format (campaign moves, as you
call them?)  The dicussion of said campaigns I'll address later.

>While some of the posts which are described above could be made in 
>.frp newsgroups other than .campaign, .campaign will bring 
>them all together. 

I guess later is now.  Why bring them back together?  Shades of the 
elephantine r.g.f (no .*), no?  I suppose it is unfair to bring up
that you have evidently not seen the trouble and hassles involved 
with having all such posts in one (*huge*) newsgroup.  No?

Well, sorry.  I'm gonna bring it up anyhow.

>send any questions, comments, to cbnorman@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca.
>send any flames to null@null.null.null.null 

What about objections?  Oh, they go to "No.you.don't.understand.read.
my.proposal.again."  I did.  I do understand one thing.  You are the
one who doesn't understand.

>This proposal will continue to be updated. 

Much all you want, we'll make more....


-- 
This is National Non-Dairy Creamer Week.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: dzik@access.digex.com (Joseph Dzikiewicz)
Subject: Re: Advantages
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 16:15:22 GMT

In article <1992Nov4.224531.28236@ugle.unit.no> leifmk@Lise.Unit.NO (Leif Magnar Kj|nn|y) writes:
>
>I agree, however, that GURPS might need a Will stat separate from IQ.  I will,
>maybe, try it in the next "house" campaign I start.

We tried that around these parts.  It didn't seem to add much to the game
except for complications.  We have since abandoned it.
From: CX6L000 <CX6L@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA>
Subject: META: Is it just my reader...?
Organization: McGill University
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 17:18:27 GMT

Hi. Sorry to be the cause of wasted bandwidth, but...
...is it just our news reader here, or is r.g.f.misc
From: kurgan@spock.uucp (Andrew Twyman)
Subject: Re: Test
Organization: Choate Rosemary Hall
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 23:37:32 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.183117.17520@crd.ge.com> (Spike) writes:
>This is a test.

Keep your stupid tests off of this honorable newsgroup, or at least put
something interesting in them.  Obey me or DIE!
						-Ren of Sargas

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow)
Subject: Re: Advantages
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 08:31:08 GMT

jj@alice.att.com (jj, curmudgeon and all) writes:

> I can't understand your "attributes that are not labeled attributes"
> comment at all....
>
> Attributes affect a lot of things.  Advantages have much smaller effect, in
> that they raise or lower certain classes of things relative to the rest of
> the things related to that attribute. Your "attributes that are not
> labeled..." comment seems completely non-responsive in this light.

If you record a bit of detail for a character, it doesn't matter if it's
called an attribute, an advantage, a skill, or a xljf7tkbleck; they represent
the same level of complexity.

If you have a set of attributes and a set of skills, you only have to deal
with two different types of items.  In Legacy, they are often treated the
same way: as percentiles.

If in addition to attributes and skills, you have advantages that are treated
in multiple inconsistent ways, I would consider that a more complex system,
since it requires more rules.  Handling 1000 items with one rule is usually
considered ld indication of system complexity.  :)

--

Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow)
Subject: Re: Point Allocation vs Random Generation
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 07:30:54 GMT

dfn@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (David Nalle) writes:

>+ To me, building a character from a concept is like buying a completed
>+ dream house: there's nothing left to do but dust and vacuum in it.  A
>+ randomly-generated character has lots of potential for developing an
>+ interesting personality.  It also has little personality surprises that
>+ turn up during play, since I haven't predetermined what the stats mean.
>
> So what you're saying is that random generation allows you to go back and
> ignore or override the results of the dice and replace them or misinterpret
> or ignore them so you can play the character the way you want?

No, I neither override the results, replace them, misinterpret them, or
ignore them.  More importantly--which you still seem to be unable to
comprehend--I do not have "a way I want to play the character".  The way I
want to play the character is a result of the generation process, not what
what drives the process.

One thing I like about randomly generated characters is that I do not know
their personality.  I don't know how they are going to react to a given
situation until they make the decision.  I may see something in their
attributes, history, or whatever, that forms that part of their
personalities.

With a character developed from a concept, I would find fewer "unknown
aspects" of his personality.  That would in part be due to the mental process
of starting with a concept, rather than interpreting/exploring a personality.

> Your example of building vs. remodeling the house falls a bit short.  You
> have to consider that if you're using random allocation, you are
> essentially signing a contract which says you can't make any modifications
> or additions to the house.  So you can redecorate the house, but if it's
> too small, or has an uneven floor you're not allowed to build an addition
> or level the floor because that's part of the structure of the house when
> you get it.

I assume that you've either never owned a house (or done any renovating) or
else you don't understand how at least some random-generation players think.
It doesn't matter if the attributes and other characteristics are fixed; the
interpretation of them isn't fixed, and there's lots of room for minor
changes that have major effects.  You might be amazed at how adding some
shelves or moulding, or even just changing the paint scheme can change the
appearance of a room.

A coat of paint can make a room look entirely different.  In the same way, an
interpretation of the combination of two attributes and an education choice
can open up a whole new aspect of the character's personality.  That can make
a character appear quite different, without conflicting with the existing
personality.


BTW, I didn't reply to Dave's first of four messages, because Mad Chris
(batemanc@p4.cs.man.ac.uk) posted a reply before I did, and he said it so
well. :)

--

Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca
Xref: sparky rec.games.frp.advocacy:3201 rec.games.frp.marketplace:866 rec.games.frp.misc:8326
From: mr_peanut@triryche.UU.NET
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy,rec.games.frp.marketplace,rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Medieval Pain-in-the-Arse
Date: 14 Nov 1992 05:43:36 GMT
Organization: UUNET Communications
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: triryche.uu.net

Hello.  I am posting for the very first time.

I have a question for all you gamers out there.  I am going to
be playing in a game based in the time of the crusades (1108
A.D., approx).  The GM is being strict on character realism.  
No orientals, no american indians, you can't be a mongol or a 
moor, because then we would be one of the "bad guys."  What I
want is a character which fits right into the realm of 
probability, and matches the setting exactly.  I need the most
creative ideas possible.

What can I be that will irritate the poor GM and still fit
right within all his standards for the game?

Please mail to mr_peanut@uunet.uu.net.

---------------------------------------------------------------
uunet!mr_peanut             Sometimes you feel like a nut,
mr_peanut@uunet.uu.net      sometimes you are one.
From: dfn@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (David Nalle)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Point Allocation vs Random Generation
Date: 5 Nov 92 15:30:05 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

>Second, you have hit on one point that some people seem to have trouble
>understanding: some players don't have a particular character concept they
>want to play.  

Aren't roleplayers supposed to be imaginative?  I would think that something
as simple as thinking up an interesting character from scratch would be
second nature to any decent roleplayer.

>Practically every character has potential to be a great,
>interesting character to role-play.  I usually don't immediately like the
>character that I roll up; I often think, "that's boring".  However, once I've
>filled in some history, and thought about the person behind those statistics,
>I usually find a great character.

And isn't it annoying that you have to do all that work and juggling of ideas
around when you could have started with an interesting character from the
very start?

>In my experience it's rarely necessary to reroll a character.  It is possible
>to get one that you really have an aversion to playing, and in that case the
>GM can let you reroll one or more stats, or start over.  Out of two
>characters, one is likely to be good.

But, with point allocation you NEVER have to get an exception or have the
GM give you a special favor.  You start with the character you want from
the beginning.

>As for you example, that *ox* is extremely rare, and might actually be an
>interesting character to role-play.  Even an *ox* has a personality.  Maybe
>he's a great romantic: his romantic poetry is really awful, but he tries hard
>and is really a warm, caring person.  Furthermore, maybe he rolled high in
>something else, such as Voice.  When he enters a tavern, the patrons look on
>him with fear and/or disgust.  However, when he joins the harper at the
>hearth and sings a love ballad, the patrons weep with joy and sadness.

I don't see an interesting character here...I see an imitation of a character
who's got some funny quirks you found on a table, but is NOT the product of
any kind of imaginative vision.  He's just a patchwork of unrelated ideas,
a common problem with random characters.

>How's that for creativity Dave?  Ththththp to you!   :-)

Got to admit that your rationalizations for an indefensible position ARE
creative.

Dave

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow)
Subject: Re: Advantages
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 08:10:57 GMT

leifmk@Lise.Unit.NO (Leif Magnar Kj|nn|y) writes:

> Umm, a lot of advantages are not all that highly quanticized.  Strong/Weak
> Will, for instance, is bought in levels, costing a number of points per
> level. Each level is a bonus, or penalty, of one on the same scale as the
> basic rolls. A lot of other advantages also work like this; so saying that
> there are only three possibilities for Will is downright wrong.

Oh, I see.  The "simple" GURPS system is even more complicated than I
thought. Not only do you have to check attributes and
advantages/disadvantages, you may have to add numbers in game time...or does
the player write down "WILL = <number calculated from advantage level and IQ
and anything else that applies>"?

Sounds kludgey to me.  :)

--

Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca
From: cassidy@cps.msu.edu (John J Cassidy)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Point Allocation vs Random Generation
Date: 11 Nov 92 16:59:43 GMT
Reply-To: cassidy@cps.msu.edu (John J Cassidy)
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Michigan State University
Originator: cassidy@swallow.cps.msu.edu

In article <loren.199@wmkt.wharton.upenn.edu> loren@wmkt.wharton.upenn.edu (Loren Miller) writes:
>In article <83070@ut-emx.uucp> dfn@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (David Nalle) writes:
>>The point is that point allocation IS a creative process, while random
>>generation is a random process, or at best an interpretive process.
>
>The other side's point is that double column accounting is a creative 
>process too, at least as creative as point balancing a champions character, 
>but I for one don't want to spend my time doing it.

	And the complement to that, on the side of random-generation, is
that random generation has the creative complexity of a game of craps.
"Oh, I didn't get a player I can use?  Roll agian.  Come on 18!" (But I
minimax here, I should have said "Come on 10!" :) -- this way we can be
sure that the character is still quite capable of retaining many
different interpretations, for my continued creative process. ) 
Fact is the "accounting" process is a side-effect of point-gen and 
the crap game a side-effect of random-gen.  They are not the POINT of it.

>>Do you see the difference?
>
>The satisfaction that the player gets from distributing points in a PA 
>system is pretty darn small, IMHO. If you live for that satisfaction then 
>bully for you, but I see no reason to force everyone else to believe like 
>you do.

	The issue here is not "forcing everyone to believe as he does".
Or I could say that you are trying to "force" your views that 
point-generation is boring.  And Nick Janow is trying to "force"
everyone to believe that the two systems are equal.  You could have just
as well told him that he is trying to "force" everyone to believe as he
does.  As I've explained in other newsgroups, nobody walks around
waiting to be persuaded to the opposite opinion.  Oh yeah, and don't
try to "force" me to think I'm wrong on this by writing a rebuttal.


>-- 
>+++++++++++++++++++++++23
>Loren Miller              LOREN@wmkt.wharton.upenn.edu
>Shoes are the most basic prerequisite for liberty


	John J Cassidy		cassidy@cps.msu.edu
	~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
	      "It never hurts to help" -- Eek
From: tdunn@ecst.csuchico.edu (Tim Dunn)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: GURPS Vampire?????????
Keywords: NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Date: 12 Nov 92 00:27:25 GMT
Article-I.D.: charnel.1ds8ddINN1r3
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: hairball.ecst.csuchico.edu

unknown writes:
>White Wolf--how could you do such a horrible thing!

It's rather easy, I'm sure.... =)

>The Storyteller system is a system without an emphasis on mechanics--a 
>godsend to players like me who enjoy the ROLE playing 

Dunno about that.  I like to role play as much as the next person
(and, no I'm not sitting next to a combat machine!) but the mechanics
of the game, really get kinda screwy at times.  We had a perfectly 
good session derailed last week because we ran into problems with
the concept of Chimenistry.  I'd prefer some structure in my games.

>Vampire for rollazoids--say it aint so!

This has been forwarded to r.g.f.advocacy due to the flamable nature
of the contents.  Let's put it this way: the D.O.T definitely won't
allow me to move this across state lines.

>GURPS Vampire is a mutation of all the Storyteller system stands for.

I'm not sure.  There are a whole newsgroup of people who have opinions
different than you.

>If you haven't played Vampire the Masquerade, all you've
>been doing is rolling the dice.
>--Me

However, the many games I've played, all you get to do is either
be hosed by poorly writen rules, see the referee toss what little
system out the window as it doesn't work worth a snit anyhow.

You'd be better off roleplaying without a system.  I've never
seen so many pages of text that did absolutely nothing.

-- 
Paul Revere was a tattle-tale
From: "jeff zeitlin" <jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com>
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: point alloc vs random
Date: 4 Nov 92 02:19:35 EST
Reply-To: "jeff zeitlin" <jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com>
Distribution: rec
Organization: Executive Networks Information

    Subject: Point Allocation vs Random Generation

SC::>i don't know if this has been stated before...but i tend to like PA charact
  ::>ore because i put more interest into making them.  i do not mind taking an

  Y'know, I see a lot of posts on this topic that seem to imply that
  it's a black-or-white issue - i.e. either the character is
  deterministic (points), or the character is random.  I play a system
  which seems to strike a reasonable medium:  Mega/Traveller/: The New
  Era.

  Your character is mostly random, but a sizeable number of skills are
  either "cascade" skills or "inclusion" skills.  Some skills are also
  "Serves-as" skills.

  An inclusion skill indicates that the "secondary" skills are
  automatically granted by having the primary skill, and at the same
  level as the primary skill.  Example: Pistol (includes Revolver)
  means that the character can use a revolver instead of a pistol at
  no penalty.

  A cascade skill is a broad category that allows the player to select
  a specific instance of the skill.  Example: Vehicle (cascade:
  Wheeled Vehicle, Tracked Vehicle, Grav Vehicle, Water Vehicle)
  means that the character must choose ONE of the cascade skills.  In
  this particular example, Water Vehicle is itself a cascade skill,
  entailing another choice.  Note that successive awards of a cascade
  skill do not compel the player to follow the same cascade, i.e. 2
  awards of Vehicle could cascade down to Grav Vehicle-1 and
  Sailboat-1, for example.

  A serves-as skill gives the character a secondary skill at a level
  below that of the primary skill UNLESS the character already has the
  secondary skill at a higher level than awarded by the serves-as.
  Example: Wheeled Vehicle (serves-as Tracked Vehicle -1) means that
  if the character has Wheeled Vehicle-4, he automatically has
  Tracked Vehicle-3, unless he has previously achieved Tracked
  Vehicle-4 or better.  In many cases, serves-as skills are
  reciprocal.

  Seems to me that this has many of the benefits of both systems...

  J/
  jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com

 * OLX 2.2 * The universe is laughing behind your back.
--
Executive Network Information System  (914) 667-4567
International ILink Host
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd,rec.games.frp.misc
From: gdg019@cck.coventry.ac.uk (Ridley McIntyre)
Subject: Re: rec.games.frp.campaign
Organization: Pig Heaven, Coventry, UK
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 11:33:02 GMT

In article <BxBLzo.HDH@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> cbnorman@cayley.uwaterloo.ca () writes:
>                      Revised Proposal (November 6, 1992)
>
>                            rec.games.frp.campaign
>
>Proposed Newsgroup: rec.games.frp.campaign
>

I'm still confused. Is this for stories based on live campaigns (i.e. campaigns
where you and a few mates get together around a table and play) or net campaigns
(where you sit at a terminal and the other players are all in Norway, Canada
and Australia) ? If the former, then I and a hell of a lot of other people
have found it more profitable to post these as serialisations to r.g.f.archives
where I can post new chapters when I'm God Damned good and ready and not be
held to one a month... Which reminds me, another thing I'm confused about:
Is this an interactive storytelling process where others can carry on your
story for you? Or does the GM  of the campaign have full control?

Anyway, this is starting to sound like a mindless flame, which it's not
meant to be, so I'll stop here. Please explain in greater detail so I won't
be confused anymore, as I might even vote for this new group (even if I don't
end up posting anything in it)...

Rid 8*)
-- 
                  Ridley McIntyre - Ronin Ironpig
*On a Flowery	     gdg019@cck.coventry.ac.uk          Space Trip!*
		 ---------------------------------
            "I wonder what Freud would make of THAT?" - Perry Hinton
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow)
Subject: Re: Character Detail
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 04:58:37 GMT

bell@beethoven.cs.unc.edu (Andrew Bell) writes:

>+ I also think that I'd like the PA character less, since so much of it has
>+ already been determined, leaving less to explore--and surprise me--during
>+ role-playing.
>
> But you already said you'ld use dice to make the decision for you, so it
> ISN'T a point allocated character by your definition.  So why would you
> like it less?

I'm sorry I confused you.  I initially said that if I used PA, I'd _probably_
use dice (or some other random process) to make some of the decisions.  The
comment quoted above refers to one built in PA _without_ resorting to random
generation, or at least for only part of it.

Part of my objection is that if it's my decision, I'll optimize the character
in some ways.  I'll avoid characteristics I'd find it easier to not play, and
choose others to improve the "power" of the character or give him "larger
than life" personality quirks.  That's human nature, and part of it will
probably be subconscious.  How many GURPS players build a character with
characteristics that they don't "choose" to have?  :)

> I can see an objection to point allocation systems when they fail at their
> attempts at balance, which they often do, and thus the minimaxers have a
> field day.  But otherwise, every point allocation system "contains" a
> random generation system.  So why do you dislike them, or like them less?

As I stated in a previous message, the two systems are different
psychologically, and for me, the characters are different psychologically,
even if the characters were the same on a character sheet.  Even if, for
example, both characters had the same strength and intelligence, one
character has them by the player's choice for that campaign, and the other
has to develop a personality to fit those random attributes.  It makes a
difference in how I perceive the characters, and the characteristics that
make them up.

Look at it from a PA'ers viewpoint: would you feel the same about the
character that you put hours of effort into creating using PA as you would if
someone gave you exactly the same character that had been generated by a
computer program?  The two character sheets would be the same, but the
player's perception of the two would be different.  The processes of creation
are different, and some gamers prefer characters made with one process, and
other gamers prefer characters made with the other process.

--

Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca