HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: lib1p@rosie.uh.edu (Tammy Stark Blandino)
Subject: Re: Clarification (was Apology..)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 13:03:00 GMT

In article <1992Aug24.163944.58365@cc.usu.edu>, sl9b4@cc.usu.edu (Deep Six) writes...
>In article <24AUG199214211215@rosie.uh.edu>,
>  lib1p@rosie.uh.edu (Tammy Stark Blandino) writes:
>> In article <1992Aug19.151300.58258@cc.usu.edu>,
>  sl9b4@cc.usu.edu (Deep Six) writes...
>>>In article <Bt8Dpp.F9C@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>, 
>>> burdickd@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (Dakin Burdick) writes:
> 
>[Burdick's apology moved]
> 
>>>Everyone looks like an ass hole to someone, but what does your holy 
>>>cannon of netiquette say about apologizing for someone else?
>> 
>> Sounds to me like someone apologizing for themselves and 
>> mentioning you're name because you are involved.  It takes
>> a real ego-centric person to think he is apologizing for
>> you. {...delete...}
> 
>How else am I to interprut this:
How else?  Let the man apologize for himself.  He didn't include
you in the apology, just mentioned your name to identify what it
was in reference to.  Here you are trying to flame that up also.
:-|

>>>> Sorry folks, about the recent flame war between Chris L. VanZenten
>>>> and myself.  
> 
>He mentioned me (well, sort of -- that's not my name) first, for crying 
>out loud. And if I may add, if it takes a ``real ego-centric person''
>(wooo) to misinterprut an apology, then it takes an arrogant, clueless
>peon to hop into the middle of something you know nothing about. 

I don't really care about your flame war.  What came across to 
me was an image of an asshole who wants to flame with this person
about everything, even if it mean interpreting something one
way while everyone else interprets it differently.

Quite frankly, I don't know what the original flame was about, I
don't know you two, and I don't really care.  I was just speak
-ing on what it appeared to me.
> 
>>>> Again, I am REALLY sorry I started this whole thing.
>>> 
>>>Apology accepted.
>> 
>> I don't think that was directed at you either asshole, but
>> I guess vanity thinks everything is for them.
> 
>I don't think any of this even CONCERNS you, asshole, so why don't you
>take your Carly Simon LP's and butt the hell out? How can you be so self-
>important that you think you know anything about this? Maybe you need 
>some remedial reading comprehension or something, but if you'll re-read 
>the post you yourself followed up, you'll find that Burdick apologized to
>the entire net and I don't remember him excluding anybody.
> 
Beings as this is on the net I will not butt out.  That's what
an OPEN FORUM is all about.  If you want to continue about this
e-mail me.

As for knowing about this see above.

As for who it concerns, that is everybody, since it is on the net!
If you don't like people making comments on your comments then
comment via e-mail.
> 
Tammy
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: spzkny@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (JAMES ZAKANY)
Subject: Re: test
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Date:  3 Sep 1992 15:07 EST  

In article <7F1HqB2w164w@phsbbs.princeton.nj.us>,
 tony@phsbbs.princeton.nj.us (Anthony Foglia) writes...

>> CUTE??!?  They're 'bout as cute as breaded, bearded dwarfin women!

>NOT CUTE? Drunken sailors used to think manatees were meremaids 
>(non-bearded fish-women).

That's only 'cause they like swimming through muck-beds (manatees, not 
drunken sailors).  And manatees DO have whiskers!

I wonder if they prefer WINGS to CHILI...
                                                  James S. Zakany
From: slp66@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Time mechanics
Date: 4 Sep 92 09:36:59 MDT
Distribution: world
Organization: Utah State University

> 
>> The other day, my GURPS group was attacked.  The party was asleep in a
>> building when the attack hit.  Now, they have to wake up, grab their stuff,
>> put on their armor, grab a weapon and run to the battle.  According to GURPS
>> mechanics, this is going to take at least 15 to 25 seconds and that being
>> very generous.  By that time (TL 7 weapons...guns and gernades and stuff) the
>> fight is over.
> 
> Yes, that sounds about right.  If the baddies toss a couple of grenades in the
> room you are sleeping in, or spray the room with a high rate of fire weapon,
> you don't get much opportunity to realize what's happening, don your
> bulletproof vest, find your weapon in the dark, take the safety off and chamber
> a round, then aim and fire.  That's realistic.

The fight was 100 yards away at the outer perimeter.  The point is that there
is no way the PC's could have been involved in the fight.  GURPS fights go too
fast for characters to be involved unless they are right there.


> 

> In AD&D, the GM would
> regularly surprise the PCs with ambushes from a dozen orcs or whatever is
> appropriate, knowing that the PCs can survive it.  The same tactic in
> Harnmaster would simply kill all the PCs unless they were very lucky and were
> very fast runners.  :)    Of course, in Harnmaster, or other games that stress
> realism, there are other interesting activities to replace ambushes and similar
> AD&D fare.
> 
Ok, in Harn you can run away.  Not in Gurps.  Hey you better stay where you are
and hope you can fight it out.  Manuevering in GURPS is suicidal.  It's very
bad.  Don't try it.  You'll get killed.  Now, in AD&D you can manuever and have
a chance of surviving.  you can move and engage and if you do it right, you've
got it made.  Now, which system is move realistic?  AD&D.  In real life you can
maneuver and shift positions.  GURPS won't let you do that to save the farm.




       **********************************************************
       ******          Stranger In A Strange Land          ******
       **********************************************************
From: dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Axly)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: marvel
Date: 28 Aug 92 16:02:44 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

Brian Panulla, MooCow <BJP108@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:

>>Another problem with MuSH is enforced morality: "kill a man, lose your
>>Karma; it's the Law."  Then there is the whole idea of spending Karma
>>(permanantly) to boost a dice roll.  Bleah.

>I'm not too crazy about this either, but it keeps my players from being
>unheroic.

Again, this is fine if that's the type of campaign you want to play. Champions
has the ability to operate in either the no killing modern day comics, or in
the more violent world of some of the graphic novels. 

Axly
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: lib1p@rosie.uh.edu (Tammy Stark Blandino)
Subject: Manatees (was Re: test)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 12:32:00 GMT

In article <7F1HqB2w164w@phsbbs.princeton.nj.us>, tony@phsbbs.princeton.nj.us (Anthony Foglia) writes...
>spzkny@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (JAMES ZAKANY) writes:
>> In article <warnold.715361417@nomad.urich.edu>,
>>  warnold@gossip.urich.edu (William W. Arnold) writes...
>> 
>> >>>>the manatee
>> 
>> >>>Aren't manatees gawd-awful UGLY things that lurk in swamps?  Yuck!
>> 
>> >No, they're the CUTE things that make boat-infested,
>> >water-skier-diseased coastal waterways, rivers and other such places
>> >nice.
>> 
>> CUTE??!?  They're 'bout as cute as breaded, bearded dwarfin women!
>> 
>NOT CUTE? Drunken sailors used to think manatees were meremaids 
>(non-bearded fish-women).
> 
Tells you alot about drunken sailors doesn't it? ;^)

Tammy

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: dzik@access.digex.com (Joseph Dzikiewicz)
Subject: Re: marvel
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 12:22:10 GMT

In article <1992Aug22.214949.3250@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> pmw2c@csissun12.ee.Virginia.EDU (Paul Michael Wayner) writes:
>In article <1992Aug22.033404.4975@access.digex.com>,
>dzik@access.digex.com (Joseph Dzikiewicz) writes:
>|> In article <57268@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> jacobus@mentor.cc.purdue.edu
>(Bryan J. Maloney) writes:
>|> >I:  There are no good games published by "tsr" (hey, anyone notice a
>similarity
>|> >between that and "tsar"?  Might explain their tyrannic, paranoid,
>greedy
>|> >behaviour, no?
>|> > 
>|> I must disagree.  The original D&D was excellent for its time.  Also,
>I
>|> have seen good board games published by TSR recently.  I would
>include
>|> "Buck Rogers" in this list.
>|> 
>|> Joe Dzikiewicz
>|> "Down with categorical imperatives!"
>
>
>Gosh mister, you must be REALLY old to have played the original D&D.
>
>				Paul Wayner

That's the problem with the networks these days.  All these young
whipper snappers showing disrespect to their elders.  

Back in the old days we played D&D and were happy to have it.  These
kids are spoiled.

Grump.
Joe Dzikiewicz
From: Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Time mechanics
Date: 4 Sep 92 06:47:43 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

slp66@cc.usu.edu writes:

> The other day, my GURPS group was attacked.  The party was asleep in a
> building when the attack hit.  Now, they have to wake up, grab their stuff,
> put on their armor, grab a weapon and run to the battle.  According to GURPS
> mechanics, this is going to take at least 15 to 25 seconds and that being
> very generous.  By that time (TL 7 weapons...guns and gernades and stuff) the
> fight is over.

Yes, that sounds about right.  If the baddies toss a couple of grenades in the
room you are sleeping in, or spray the room with a high rate of fire weapon,
you don't get much opportunity to realize what's happening, don your
bulletproof vest, find your weapon in the dark, take the safety off and chamber
a round, then aim and fire.  That's realistic.

> D&D is more forgiving and a more playable system.  Your players can afford to
> be more realistic...

D&D more _realistic_??????  Hahahahahaha!  <rolling on ground laughing guts
out>  "You can only shoot two arrows per minute."  What is a realistic figure
for a skilled archer?  Ten?  Twenty?  Getting hit by several arrows, spears and
blows from a giant's club--and surviving--is _realistic_?

I'd agree that AD&D, with its slow rounds and combat/damage system, is a more
playable system _for_heroic_gaming_, where realism is ignored in favour of
monster mashing (while not being in any real danger of dying).  Games with more
realistic speeds and more realistic combat/damage are more playable for games
that stress realism (as far as it goes).  The two gaming styles are quite
different, and the players and GM act accordingly.  In AD&D, the GM would
regularly surprise the PCs with ambushes from a dozen orcs or whatever is
appropriate, knowing that the PCs can survive it.  The same tactic in
Harnmaster would simply kill all the PCs unless they were very lucky and were
very fast runners.  :)    Of course, in Harnmaster, or other games that stress
realism, there are other interesting activities to replace ambushes and similar
AD&D fare.

My advice is to choose a game system that suits your gaming style.


--

Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca
From: lnorton@acsu.buffalo.edu (Me)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: test
Date: 25 Aug 92 16:58:53 GMT
Organization: UB
Originator: lnorton@hydrogen.chem.buffalo.edu



	This is only a test. there is no need to read this post nor to relate
it to chili. However this will probably capture someone's interest and start
a HUGE thread.

Me
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: bcd@fang.att.com (Brendan Dwyer)
Subject: Re: Dangerous Journeys
Organization: AT&T Tax Systems Development, Maitland FL
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 19:40:31 GMT

From article <Rsk4PB1w164w@cellar.org>, by arioch@cellar.org (Arioch):
> I just purchased Dangerous Journeys Mythus fantasy role playing game. So far 
> I am fairly impressed. I am having a little trouble figuring out the magic 
> system. If anyone has purchased the game, what is your impression and/or 
> comments?
> 
> ------
> arioch@cellar.org (Arioch)
> The Cellar BBS - (215) 654-9184
I was very unimpressed, which may have resulted from high expectations.
I never got as far as the combat system (a friend did and he claimed it
was a bit on the abstract side, but this is heresay) but the character 
generation rules alone were enough to turn me off.  The three attributes 
were broken down into eighteen subattributes, the meaning of which were
sometimes vague.  It seemed to me that generality of the skills left them
open for varying interpretations and may cause problems between GM and
players.  The characters I made up seemed flavorless like cardboard.
My major point of disappointment was that this new system really didn't 
offer anything to make me throw my GURPS or D&D books away and embrace
this new system.  I'm glad I got my money back.

Brendan Dwyer (aka Blackwolf)

"Sometimes the odd number wins, when the big wheel spins."  N. Peart
From: rnmg1200@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (A Lady and her Walrus)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Time mechanics
Date: 4 Sep 92 19:36:55 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.Bu2JtK.HyK
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

In article <1992Sep4.093659.58625@cc.usu.edu> slp66@cc.usu.edu writes:
>got it made.  Now, which system is move realistic?  AD&D.  In real life you can
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

BWAH-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!
From: seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: marvel
Date: 27 Aug 92 01:57:25 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
Originator: seawasp@pmax1.cis.pitt.edu

In article <oeb2ml_00VogM3419A@andrew.cmu.edu> af2e+@andrew.cmu.edu (Alex Feely) writes:
>      Look, it's obvious i touched a _champions_ nerve.  To tell the
>truth I had never heard of champions in any great deatail before. Does
>someone want to tell me the gist of it?

	Don't let the Champions junkies get to you, man. Champions is
no better than most of the games out there, and in my completely arrogant
opinion is much WORSE than a lot. I've played Chumpions quite a few times,
and not once have I gotten the feeling that it had a SINGLE advantage over
the other games in the world, except one: compared to games like Marvel or
V&V, it has a better system for DESIGNING a character. In both Marvel and
V&V, you have to just create the concept without a system, which for those
worried about the eternal bugaboo of Game Balance is very upsetting.

	Champions is a point-based system. It has the nominal advantages of,
at least theoretically, allowing you to construct a large number of very
widely varying characters who are actually exactly comparable to each other
in power if the points are the same.

	In practice, IF you have a GM who has a brain, this works pretty 
well. The characters tend to be balanced as are the points. The problem
is that Champions tends to attract pointmongers who are VERY upset over
a slight variation in points. 

	Its combat system annoys me, but that's just the way it goes; all
combat systems please someone and annoy someone else. I don't like the 
way it describes powers in a rather mechanical, no-life way. I prefer
a more visceral, less mathematical description of my powers.

	My own preference for systems is Marvel (for simplicity) and
V&V for more detailed approaches.


                                 Sea Wasp
                                   /^\
                                   ;;;
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: akuma@netcom.com (Steven E Barnes)
Subject: Re: marvel
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 20:34:11 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

In article <92241.091652BJP108@psuvm.psu.edu>, Brian Panulla, MooCow <BJP108@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
> In article <1992Aug27.161030.708@ccsvax.sfasu.edu>, z_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
> >
> >players always refering to their abilities in game terms rather than real
> >world terms (well, this has been *my* experience with Champs players).
> >Champions players will rattle off the stats of an ability, but not what the
> >ability actually is.

Lets not generalize, please.  We are talking about style, not rules.

Yep.  In HERO, we say: "I have a strength of 50", whereas in Marvel,
they say "My strength is AMAZING".  (Translation, AMAZING == 50,
or is it INCREDIBLE == 50?).  I think those cheezy code words get
really stale, really quickly.

> >
> EXACTLY. When we play MSH, we talk as though we are super heroes, not
> scientists (unless that is more appropriate). It is much harder for a Champs
> player to maintain a character during the game; too often you switch into
> technical discussion of what a power can and can't do. In MSH, the GM either
> allows a power stunt (if the player is attempting something new) or doesn't
> allow the action unless it's already a part of the hero's bag of tricks.

Well, those of us who know the rules don't have to discus what our
powers can do, unless the GM is running a campaign where the players
knowledge of their abilities is kept vague.  Also, the old version
of the rules had advice for handling the equivalent of power stunts in
Marvel.  I don't know if it is in the new edition.

> I think Superheroing is much more of a beer-and-pretzels genre than dark grit,
> unless you are running a cyberpunk hero campaign or some such.
> 
> Myself and my players derive great pleasure from saying cheezy things like:
> "Don't worry...I'LL SAVE YOU!" :)

To repeat myself:  THIS IS NOT A FEATURE OF THE GAME SYSTEM.  Some HERO
campaigns do this all the time.  Other campaigns are wargame oriented.
It all depends on the players.

-steve
From: swaim@owlnet.rice.edu (Michael Parks Swaim)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: test
Date: 3 Sep 1992 16:22:21 GMT
Organization: Rice University

In article <7F1HqB2w164w@phsbbs.princeton.nj.us> tony@phsbbs.princeton.nj.us (Anthony Foglia) writes:
>spzkny@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (JAMES ZAKANY) writes:
>> In article <warnold.715361417@nomad.urich.edu>,
>>  warnold@gossip.urich.edu (William W. Arnold) writes...
>> 
>> >>>>the manatee
>> 
>> >>>Aren't manatees gawd-awful UGLY things that lurk in swamps?  Yuck!
>> 
>> >No, they're the CUTE things that make boat-infested,
>> >water-skier-diseased coastal waterways, rivers and other such places
>> >nice.
>> 
>> CUTE??!?  They're 'bout as cute as breaded, bearded dwarfin women!
>> 
>>                                                   James S. Zakany
>
>NOT CUTE? Drunken sailors used to think manatees were meremaids 
>(non-bearded fish-women).

  And one of the foundations for Naval Law is that sailors are idiots
and should be considered wards of the court. 
  Anybody know the manatee song from the Sam & Max Color Special?


-- 
Mike Swaim            | I can see clearly now my brain is gone.
swaim@owlnet.rice.edu | I can see all the bicycles in my way.
Rupp doesn't even know who I am,
 much less care what I think
From: laird@think.com (Laird Popkin)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dangerous Journeys
Date: 26 Aug 92 17:32:24 GMT
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: django.think.com

In article <Rsk4PB1w164w@cellar.org> arioch@cellar.org (Arioch) writes:
>I just purchased Dangerous Journeys Mythus fantasy role playing game. So far 
>I am fairly impressed. I am having a little trouble figuring out the magic 
>system. If anyone has purchased the game, what is your impression and/or 
>comments?

At GenCon, rumor had it that GDW brought 1500 copies to the show, sold
roughly 100 (!) copies, gave away another couple hundred, and ended up
shipping the remaining 1000 copies back.  If this wasn't a fluke, I'd say
that Dangerous Journies is in trouble, and will cost GDW a lot of money.

From flipping through the book, I'd say that it pretty much combines
everything I dislike in gaming into a single collection, which is certainly
a handy reference, but isn't worth nearly $80 ($26 each for three books).
That is, unless it becomes a collectable item, which isn't unlikely.  The
Dune toys produced as tie-ins for the movie are worth something to
collectors, for example...

>------
>arioch@cellar.org (Arioch)
>The Cellar BBS - (215) 654-9184


-- 
- Laird Popkin, Thinking Machines

Connection Machine: Massively parallel supercomputer.  Also a cool black
cube with more blinking lights than you can shake a stick at.
From: tony@phsbbs.princeton.nj.us (Anthony Foglia)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: test
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 19:58:29 EDT
Organization: Princeton High School, Princeton, New Jersey

spzkny@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (JAMES ZAKANY) writes:
> In article <warnold.715361417@nomad.urich.edu>,
>  warnold@gossip.urich.edu (William W. Arnold) writes...
> 
> >>>>the manatee
> 
> >>>Aren't manatees gawd-awful UGLY things that lurk in swamps?  Yuck!
> 
> >No, they're the CUTE things that make boat-infested,
> >water-skier-diseased coastal waterways, rivers and other such places
> >nice.
> 
> CUTE??!?  They're 'bout as cute as breaded, bearded dwarfin women!
> 
>                                                   James S. Zakany

NOT CUTE? Drunken sailors used to think manatees were meremaids 
(non-bearded fish-women).


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: The above views may be mine but may be those of the guy       
            behind me.  You decide.
There are two types of people in the world:
The first type always, no matter what, finishes what they start;
From: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Time mechanics
Date: 4 Sep 92 17:38:44 GMT
Reply-To: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Organization: Columbia University

Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow) writes:
>slp66@cc.usu.edu writes:
>Yes, that sounds about right.  If the baddies toss a couple of grenades in the
>room you are sleeping in, or spray the room with a high rate of fire weapon,
>you don't get much opportunity to realize what's happening, don your
>bulletproof vest, find your weapon in the dark, take the safety off and 
>chamber a round, then aim and fire.  That's realistic.
...
>Games with more
>realistic speeds and more realistic combat/damage are more playable for games
>that stress realism (as far as it goes).  The two gaming styles are quite
>different, and the players and GM act accordingly. 

	I disagree strongly here. GURPS combat speeds (in the games I have 
been in, anyhow) have been strongly *unrealistic*. GURPS has characters act 
to their *physical* limits all the time. As a result, in combat, everyone 
tends to turn into cool-headed, cold-blooded killing machines who don't 
stop for a second, and who throw off all pain near instantly. A character 
who has his left arm chopped off can fight at no penalty after a second. 
This is mildly acceptable if you are playing a bunch of special ops commandos, 
but is preposterous for almost anyone else. 
	People act differently in swordfights with real blades against an 
opponent who wants to kill you than in SCA combats. Shooting a person is 
more difficult than target practice. Statistics will back me up here - in 
police encounters, shots fired at close range, even arms length, still have 
a high chance of missing. I would recommend the movie 'Unforgiven' to those 
who find this hard to believe. 

	I think that Twilight 2000 has a much more realistic time scale, 
as well as a mechanic (Coolness under Fire) to represent how people *really* 
react to combat situations. The damage values are low compared to people, but 
that is an obvious concession to playability. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Kim                    | "Deserving's got nothin to do with it."
jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu |
Columbia University         |                        - Unforgiven
From: gt7219a@prism.gatech.EDU (Christopher Michael Lawyer)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: test
Date: 4 Sep 92 16:43:37 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

Good Golly!  Who would have thought my .sig would start a thread....

the manatee

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy