HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cb317@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Stephanie J. Kessler)
Subject: Re: Do U customize games 4 players?
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 92 19:17:29 GMT


This is a difficult question.  What I would try to do is start
with the basic storyline I wish to use, and then add small parts
where the special skills MIGHT come in useful.  I tend to put
in things for my party, because they like that a lot.  For
example, one of my characters like elven works of art.. so when
they found a tapestry, it was elven.  A relatively minor thing,
but for the character, it was very important.  As long as the
storyline is not affected, personalizing your campaign will often
be appreciated by your players, I would guess from my experiences.
-- 
The United States is a nation of laws:  badly written and
randomly enforced.     Frank Zappa

cb317 @ cleveland.Freenet.Edu
From: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: >>Put Up or Shut UP (Dice[less])
Date: 17 Aug 92 21:48:18 GMT
Reply-To: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Organization: Department of Chemistry, UCLA

In article <uc-chan.713682753@mcl>, uc-chan@mcl.ucsb.edu (Christina Callihan) writes:
[reasonable article deleted]
>
>The AMBER player who actually has a life,
>

Hey!  If that's true, you're not allowed to read or post to this group!  I'm
gonna call the Net.Police!  MOM!!!!!!

B^) B^) B^)


-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.

"We have to tear you to shreds because we care." - EAC
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Subject: Re: marvel vs. Champions
Reply-To: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 14:25:58 GMT

arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee) writes:
>jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim) writes:
>>	Well - yes and no. Iron Man's armor is clearly an "Only in Hero ID" 
>>limitation, ...
>
>Here I think there _is_ a hole.  If the armor is Only In Hero ID, it's
>impossible for someone else to put on the armor and use it even once without
>ugly kludges like Usable By Others with the limitation "Not used by others 
>very often, in fact no more often than people use someone else's focus".

	It's not that it's impossible - it's just that it doesn't generally 
happen. Someone can use Iron Man's armor the same way someone can use a 
gun which they haven't paid for - GM's decision. 

	I admit I have never read an Iron Man comic, but I thought that his 
armor is virtually impossible to get off of him even if he's knocked out, and 
that almost no one else ever uses it. This strikes me as "Only in Hero ID". 
If, at some point during one adventure, Iron Man decides to give his armor 
to someone else (who won't know how to use it, among other things), then he 
can. If he wants to do this regularly, and still have it be virtually 
impossible to get his armor off without his permission - then he should 
take "Usable by Others" on all his armor powers with "Linked" on that 
advantage only. 

	Advantages or powers that are never or almost never used need not be 
bought - they go under the category of Special Effects. 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Kim                    | "Remember: a running man may slit a thousand
jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu | throats in a single night."
Columbia University         |                           - Klingon proverb
From: seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Chili Wars
Date: 12 Aug 92 12:52:10 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
Originator: seawasp@pmax1.cis.pitt.edu

In article <12AUG199208165058@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov> spzkny@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (JAMES ZAKANY) writes:
>In article <1992Aug11.191927.12824@menudo.uh.edu>,
> white@tree.egr.uh.edu writes...
>>Who said anything about limp noodles and meat sauce? 
>>That's not chili anywhere.  
>It is in Cincinnati.  I don't miss a chance to put that place down! ;+)

	Even in Cincinnati they know the difference between chili and 
spaghetti. Even if there aren't any true CHILI devotees, there are some
people of Italian descent.... :)

>>we DO have "hot", "spicy" buffalo wings down here.
>No you don't.  What you have is a cautious approximation of WINGS.  The 
>Basic Set, if it were.  Here, we eat Advanced WINGS only.

	Ha. Having been across this country and through several others,
I can tell you straight out: there is no such THING as a REALLY spicy
buffalo wing. They can't hold enough of the spices. All those fancy
spice mechanics get in the way; what you end up with is a nice surface
appearance, but once you get past the skin there's nothing there but
pale meat. I've tried WINGS many times in dozens of cities, and everywhere
from Buffalo itself to the midwest to Pittsburgh it's the same: the so-
called "atomic" or "suicide" wing isn't hot enough to impress anyone with
REAL hot taste.

	TACOs, on the other hand, CAN be hot enough, as can a good strong
bowl of chili. I prefer the convenience of TACOs, although you need special
house rule -- er, you need soft fried tortillas in order to properly 
experience them. 

	Some Oriental foods, of course, are strong enough to merit note, but
the much-touted mustard is too variable. In some places it's barely as
strong as black pepper.

	If you want REAL hot, eat peppers straight, drink Tabasco sauce, 
and so on.

	Remember: it isn't HOT unless it makes you hiccup uncontrollably for
at least thirty minutes.


                                 Sea Wasp
                                   /^\
                                   ;;;
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: paul@sco.COM (Paul Jackson)
Subject: Re: Put Up or Shut Up (Dice[less])
Organization: SCO Canada, Inc.
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 16:55:45 GMT

In article <RATINOX.92Aug10202851@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu> ratinox@meceng.coe.northeastern.edu writes:
>Alright; it's time to put up or shut up.
>
>Everyone who likes dice, raise your hands. Ok, how many of you say that you
>will never go without dice because you don't want to give up the
>"randomness of the Universe" they represent. And how many of you have ever
>played RPGs without dice?
>
>Thank you. You can shut up now, because you probably don't know what you're
>talking about.
>
>Thank you.

Why thank you too oh pompous, arrogant one. Are you really stupid enough to
believe that everyone who disagrees with you about dice can't possibly have
played diceless games?

For the record, I prefer games with dice. I've played Amber with a good GM
and a good group of players. With that group I enjoy it enough that I'll
continue to play as the (occasional) sessions are scheduled. I even see the
advantages of diceless games. However, there are clearly ALSO disadvantages
to having no dice. Personally, I believe the disadvantages outweigh the
advantages but I recognize that others would weigh the advantages and
disadvantages differently.

Really, ALL that I'd like is for the proponents of diceless games to
recognize that they're advocating a different (NOT better, NOT worse, just
different) style of gaming, one that many people think is less fun than the
"traditional" approach.
Organization: Central Michigan University
Date: Thursday, 20 Aug 1992 07:43:30 EDT
From: <34ZBTXQ@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU>
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: RE:marvel

 "...the best comic book game..."; you meant to say Champions, I beleive?
   ( a joke, of course, but Champions is the best!)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Pomposity
From: tdunn@ecst.csuchico.edu (Tim Dunn)
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 06:35:26 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico

Me? I'm so pompous that I demand my own category, a 7!
=)

-- 
We've sent a man to the moon, and that's 29,000 miles away.  The center
of the Earth is only 4,000 miles away.  You could drive that in a week,
but for some reason nobody's ever done it.
		-- Andy Rooney
From: seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Chili Wars
Date: 14 Aug 92 12:53:08 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
Originator: seawasp@pmax1.cis.pitt.edu

In article <14AUG199208165296@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov> spzkny@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (JAMES ZAKANY) writes:
>There's a HUGE difference between Cleveland and the other Ohio cities.

	Only to a Clevelander. No one outside of the wasteland called
Ohio can tell the difference. Heck, it's almost as bad as New Jersey.
No one LIVES there, they just drive through on the way to other places.

>Shows what YOU know.  Anyway, real WINGS are had in Buffalo, not Ohio.

	I know where WINGS come from; their real name, after all, is
BUFFALO WINGS (Probably originally produced by Flying Buffalo). 

>Beverage of the peasants!  Beer, when done proper, is a cacophony mixture 

	"Beer, when done proper" is one of those self-contradictory
statements like "Military Intelligence", "Congressional Ethics" and so on.


>There are more rules to eating TACOs and, in general, it's a more 
>complicated food.  Just because it's harder to eat doesn't mean that it's 
>superior to WINGS.  WINGS are a more elegant food!  And, quite frankly, the 
>spiciness of a food depends on the cook, not the food itself.  A good cook 
>can make ANY food enjoyable.  WINGS, being simpler, gives the cook more 
>latitude to create a truly memorable meal.

	That's ridiculous. The small amount of additional complexity inherent
in TACOs makes for a far more intricate and satisfying game -- er, eating
experience. The plain fact is that WINGS boils down to just a small spicy
coating but little else on top of pale white meat. You just don't have the
CAPACITY in WINGS to add any elements that weren't in the original design.
On the other hand, TACOs were designed to support any number of supplementary
rules... er, toppings and to enable anyone to play... EAT. Cheese, lettuce,
tomatoes, salsa, olives, onions... these things just don't WORK with WINGS,
but are perfectly integrated with TACOs.


                                 Sea Wasp
                                   /^\
                                   ;;;
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: trip@cco.caltech.edu (Trip)
Subject: Re: marvel vs. Champions
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 22:46:38 GMT

jlb@engin.umich.edu (Jeffrey Lawrence Bailey) writes:

>But has anybody noticed the amount of discussion necessary to define Iron Man's
>armor?  In virtually _every_ system but Champions, Iron Man's armor is quite
>a simple device, just something you carry that adds to attributes and gives
>flight, senses, and ranged attack.  In Champs, you have to debate for a _LONG_
>time what mechanics and what ads/disads relate to the game.  This is exactly
>the kind of problem that makes Champs not only a bad system for newbies, but
>a lesser system for middling players as well.  Marvel retains the simplicity
>and freedom that lie in defining powers separately.

IE, in Hero you argue about how things work at character creation time.
In MSH, you have to take ten minutes out of the middle of the fight to
argue about exactly how the powers work. Yes, this clearly makes Hero an
inferior system.

Trip				|   Never be the first to believe
President, ECNG			|   Never be the last to deceive
(trip@cobalt.cco.caltech.edu)	|   Nobody's on nobody's side
				|			-_Chess_
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: PCHEM14@Zeus.unomaha.edu (FALL88)
Subject: Re: sprinters revisited (was Re: GURPS Total Rewrite)
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 09:12:55 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.11

In <1992Aug14.144713.16846@rchland.ibm.com> seurer@rchland.vnet.ibm.com writes:

> Don't forget that someone who is smart will train better, take advantage of
> the terrain and prevailing winds, and thus run faster.
> 
> Also, you can run faster downhill (really fast straight down) and much slower
> uphill (not at all straight up) so we need to account for the slope.  And the
> wind speed of course.
> 
> So, we have all four attributes contributing to move and some other stuff.
> 
> Move = Sqrt(ST^e * HT/DX + IQ^3) / pi * (g * Tan(slope)) * Cos(windspeed)
> 
> That looks about right.  :-)
> 
> I think that (HT+DX)/4 is an ok approximation.
> -- 
> 
> - Bill Seurer     Language and Compiler Development      IBM Rochester, MN
>   Internet: BillSeurer@vnet.ibm.com    America On-Line: BillSeurer@aol.com

Because some thought has to be put into it, you propose that we not do so?
Although as many ideas as possible should be entertained at first, I think
we all know a *usable* formula seems to be the point.

And, finally, most posters seem to agree that DX is a little out of place,
os (DX+HT)/4 is not an ok approximation.

But I don't think we should just throw in the towel becase a little thought
is necessary, Bill.  That would lead to empty newsgroup.

-james
From: seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Roleplaying vs. gaming, was Re: Diceless or Senseless?
Date: 14 Aug 92 11:45:21 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
Originator: seawasp@pmax1.cis.pitt.edu

In article <86157@netnews.upenn.edu> millerl@jeremiah.wharton.upenn.edu (Loren J. Miller) writes:
>I know, I know. I was thinking of Risk, which is a dice lover's wet
>dream, and mentally contrasting it to Diplomacy, which is to Risk what
>Amber (no dice) is to Champions (many dice), and I mixed them up.

	Not really. Diplomacy and Risk both are sort of rough war emulations,
but in Diplomacy you're pretending that you don't want the WHOLE world and
trying to convince some other poor sucker that you actually MEAN it. In
Risk no one's bullshitting. You're all out to rule the world and may Gog
help anyone in your way.

>Anyway, I think Diplomacy is a far better game than Risk. Anybody want
>to argue about that?

	I loathe Diplomacy. I love Risk. Although after winning my last
straight 43 games I got bored with it. The nuclear variant makes it
somewhat interesting, though.


                                 Sea Wasp
                                   /^\
                                   ;;;
From: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Put Up or Shut Up (Dice[less])
Date: 13 Aug 92 17:46:05 GMT
Reply-To: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Organization: Department of Chemistry, UCLA

In article <RATINOX.92Aug11104012@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu>, ratinox@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Richard Pieri/Stainless Steel Rat) writes:
>>>>>> "JS" == Jeff Stehman <stehman@hubcap.clemson.edu> writes:
>
>>Thank you. You can shut up now, because you probably don't know what you're
>>talking about.
>
>JS> Oops.  Missed the logic on that one.  Care to explain?
>
>Simple. You've never played an RPG without dice. If you've been yammering
>about how dice are better than not, you can shut up about it.
>
>--Rat
>

Wow, what an arrogant, self-righteous jerk!  If you could read, Rat, you would
have seen in the text you deleted from Jeff's post that he HAS played diceless,
and more than once.  Jeff then went on to say that he had learned his lesson,
and wouldn't do it again.  You've obviously made up your mind, though, that
anyone who doesn't like diceless RPGs hasn't played one, and any evidence to 
the contrary will be suppressed and ignored.








-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.

"We have to tear you to shreds because we care." - EAC
From: sl9b4@cc.usu.edu (Deep Six)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: VOTE NOW!
Date: 18 Aug 92 00:21:07 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

In article <Bt5xBB.Mu4@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>,
 burdickd@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (Dakin Burdick) writes:
> In article <1992Aug17.095842.58201@cc.usu.edu>
 sl9b4@cc.usu.edu (Deep Six) writes:

> Another breach of netiquette, bringing private squabbles onto the net
> and distributing them across the world.

Well, you know where I stand on netiquette, so don't try to scold me for
doing something I don't regret doing. And besides that, this wasn't a 
private squabble, it was a mousy little whine that you sent me, and it
was unprovoked besides.

> I'm sure you'll be much happier with the one I just sent.

Go ahead and continue to befuddle yourself by breaking the the very
etiquitte you espouse.

>>I think the practice of ``Netiquette'' (being polite, not flaming, 
>>respecting the feelings and opinions of others) is okay, but it's too 
>>often boring and unproductive, especially on discussion groups. Stirring
>>someone up, stepping on toes, slaying sacred cows, etc., is sometimes
>>the best way to prompt coherrant and meaningful conversation. Restrictions,
>>even self-imposed ones, can be stifling.
> 
> Hmm.  Anger brings rational discussion?  

In your case, no. You sent me something about how terrible my posts 
are, I told you I didn't give a shit about what you say, and you 
shot back something about having dingleberries in your computer or
something. But meanwhile..

> An interesting concept, but I think you ought to take a look at 
> soc.history or some of the other groups dedicated to flame wars.  
> A lot of wheel-spinning takes place, but nothing ever gets done.  

I disagree. I learn a lot from ``flameful'' groups. I didn't say anything
about anger bringing anything, but if that is the way you want to put it,
fine. When people get keyed up, they get thinking. When they're keyed up 
in a public forum, they really get thinking (they've got to come up with 
something good or they play the fool). Sometimes someone under pressure
like that will come up with information which is really insightful. Some
times they don't. But even then, you can learn, can't you? You can learn
about how people think, about how they defend (or fail to defend) them
selves. I find it educational, even if no one else does.

But apart from that, what is there to ``get done'' on the net (especially
in news)? Are we striving toward some goal here? Are we assigned to come
up with answers to all lifes questions and those who flame are fouling 
up our work? If they're not flaming you, what difference should it make
to you? If you can't stomach it, you don't have to read it.

Okay,
+  Chadd  L.  VanZanten   SL9B4@CC.USU.EDU  +
+  ``You know,  I thought this was a good   +
+  idea but this is one weird mama-jama.''  +
+                    -- TV's Frank, MST3K   +
From: loydb@fnordbox.UUCP (Loyd Blankenship)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Chili Wars
Distribution: world
X-NewsSoftware: GRn 1.16e (7/4/92) by Mike Schwartz & Michael B. Smith
Date: 15 Aug 92 02:26:45 CST
Organization: Texas Net Illuminati

<sigh> Ever do something you really regret? I regret this thread. I regret
the wasted bandwidth. I shall go flog myself now, head hung in shame. :-)

Loyd

***************************************************************************
* loydb@fnordbox.UUCP	     Once you pull the pin,  *	Loyd Blankenship  *
* GEnie: SJGAMES	    Mr. Grenade is no longer *	PO Box 18957	  *
* Compu$erve: [73407,515]	 your friend!	     *	Austin, TX 78760  *
* cs.utexas.edu!dogface!fnordbox!loydb		     *	512/447-7866	  *
***************************************************************************
From: batemanc@p4.cs.man.ac.uk (Mad Chris)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Do U customize games 4 players?
Date: 14 Aug 92 15:15:05 GMT

millerl@jeremiah.wharton.upenn.edu (Loren J. Miller) screw up again:

>in fact, a large part of the reason for the
>diceless or senseless thread being so nasty was that it was initially
>misposted on misc just to get a rise out of people.

It wasn't really misposted because I didn't expect/intend/want it to become
the raging sea of hormones it became. I just wanted to know if anyone else
thought that the reviewers were being unrelealistic in thier evaluations.

Justice for all

Mad Chris.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: PCHEM14@Zeus.unomaha.edu (FALL88)
Subject: Re: sprinters revisited (was Re: GURPS Total Rewrite)
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 21:14:47 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.11

In <1992Aug18.192421.2142@jade.tufts.edu> gharris@jade.tufts.edu writes:

> In article <1992Aug18.070632.3146@news.unomaha.edu> PCHEM14@Zeus.unomaha.edu (FALL88) writes:
> >
> >Running seems to be a contest of ST and height overcoming weight, with HT
> >preventing you from getting worn out too quickly.  I'd not include DX since
> >you don't prove that these people have high DX, rather than that the maxima
> >of (ST+height)/weight expression occurrs below the ST of a good linesman.
> 
> 	Hmm.. you could probably simplify this a good bit.  Looking at Major
> League Baseball, you see that most of the speedsters (people who steal lots
> of bases, have good defensive range, hit plenty of triples) tend to not be
> tall.  This tends to suggest that height is *not* a positive in running.  It
> may be that these people are also less massive than their taller brethren, but
> I'd bet that a 6'6" guy who weighs the same as a fast 5'6" guy wouldn't have
> anywhere near the strength.

No, it helps to be tall.  However, being tall has to, by definition, add to
your weight.  Just like the maxima for the expression (ST+height)/weight falls
below the ST of a good linesman, the height is likewise effected.  If you go
ahead and increase height too much, you add to the denomator and it becomes
counter-productive.

> 	Of course, all of these measures of running ability involve a high
> degree of acceleration.  For accelerating, I'd look at power/mass, which could
> probably be approximated by ST/weight, but for peak speed stride length would
> also be important.  The guy who is fastest for 30 meters probably isn't the 
> same guy wh is fastest for 400 meters, and neither of those would win the 
> 10,000m race.

As to race length, I am looking at HT checks to avoid fatigue.  Therefore,
having a high HT doesn't increase you actual speed as in the current version
of GURPS, but it does help postpone fatigue, making you a better runner in
the long-haul.  And, if your running skill is higher than your HT, allow it
to be used instead of HT to show your trained skill.  If you are sprinting,
the check should be at a penalty to show the extra exertion.

-james
From: thornley@giga.cs.umn.edu (David H. Thornley)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Put Up or Shut Up (Dice[less])
Date: 12 Aug 92 16:34:12 GMT
Organization: University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, CSci dept.

In article <1992Aug11.214904.58074@cc.usu.edu> sl9b4@cc.usu.edu (Deep Six) writes:
>Sheesh am I tired of this insipid thread (and all it's tedious
>branches). Compared to this, a new SPLIT thread would be 
>FASCINATING.
>
>Please can we have a new thread?
>
>Okay,

you asked for it....


RFD:  rec.games.fantasy.dice

Coming soon to a newsgroup near you.

DHT
From: millerl@jeremiah.wharton.upenn.edu (Loren J. Miller)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Do U customize games 4 players?
Summary: wrong group, Chadd
Date: 14 Aug 92 02:13:25 GMT
Organization: wcit

Hey Chadd,

Thanks for posting the new thread but you missed the point of this
group. You're supposed to post advice type threads on .misc. This
group is for advocacy. You're supposed to advocate some game system or
method or some other obnoxious opinion that immediately polarizes 90%
of the readers and offends everybody. Stop asking for advice here, we
don't want the advocacy to spill over into misc or the constructive
discussions to spill into advocacy. And I don't care what the shlubs
say about "oh, that group's too busy! i want to talk here where it
isn't so busy." if you lost your contact lenses would you look in the
room where the lenses were or in another room that was quiet and well
lit?  (yeah, old joke) in fact, a large part of the reason for the
diceless or senseless thread being so nasty was that it was initially
misposted on misc just to get a rise out of people.
-- 
-- 
Loren Miller     <MILLERL@scrolls.wharton.upenn.edu>
All our patients here are suffering from severe over-acting. When
they're brought in they're all really over the top.