HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 12:46:45 -0400 
From: "Joseph E. Beck" <jb8n+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: house-rules
	<1992Oct13.003357.10122@u.washington.edu>
Distribution: usa


From: scythe@byron.u.washington.edu (The Grim Reaper)
>>From: ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge Diaz)
>>>Well, gee, you might as well just say "A cleric can spank a mage.  Let's
>>>switch the mage and cleric attacks and hit dice."
>>Please tell me this is a joke.  A cleric can't spank a mage.  Win?
>>Perhaps.  But certainly not a sure thing (sleep, color spray,
>>fireball, etc. come to mind).
>>
>Command-sleep, cause blindness, cause light wounds.....

The cleric might win, but he wouldn't "spank" a mage (I read "spank"
to mean deal with easily, as one would a child).  Interesting point:
a cleric can 'spank' a thief in combat, is a good match for a mage.
How does a cleric do against a fighter? 

>How many scrolls do you find?
Not that many.  And if we did find them, and our thief was 10th level,
we wouldn't give them to the thief given that he has a 25% chance of
hosing everyone in the area.

>Assuming no surprise, the fighters definitely.  Assuming they aren't
>completely stupid  (I hate people who play dumb fighters), the fighters
>will have at least one with a ready missile-type weapon. 
Ok, they have a bow ready (I'll argue that it's *not* drawn).  Bows
have a weapon speed around 7 (sorry, this is from memory), sleep has a
casting time of *1*.   It's incredibly likely the sleep spell will go
off before your fighter even gets off a shot, of course you could roll
a 2 or 3 on 2d8, but there's only a 3/16 chance of this.  Bye bye
fighters.

>They shouldn't.  I'm sure I said this somewhere.  As long as you
>are using specialty priests, the standard cleric is not th fighting type.
Umm...read the first thing I mentioned in this post.  Clerics are
better than thieves in combat, are about equal to mages (some will
argue one or the other is superior), the only question remaining is
how do they compare to fighters (when you answer that question you'll
see the other reason we switched cleric and thief combat abilities).  

From: rsm58307@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Ron)
>And the worst is those goddamn magic traps. Halve your ability to detect
>'em and heaven help you if you don't.
This is another part of my complaint, thief abilities are weaker than
spells.  Everyone talks about how traps is the area where thieves can
shine, well here this ability is being hosed by magic.  If 95% is max
chance (assuming you've blitzed find/remove traps) you only have a 48%
(go wild, give the thief a break and round up) of finding the trap.

	joe
From: mjjst3+@pitt.edu (Michale J Jovce)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Intelligent opponents (was Re: Lich & Demi-Lich...)
Date: 7 Oct 92 14:47:19 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


   I agree that Dragons should be a bit tougher.  Recently my party was
asked to rid the woods of this Dragon.  The reports said it looked like
a Red Dragon.  This wasn't the case.  It was really a Green with a bunch
of Illusion spells and a Wand of Fire.  It had used a Alter Self spell
to appear Red.  And peppered the party with the wand 3 or so times,  
thumped it's tail against a wall and made an Illusion of the roof caving
in over the party.  It really got them when it breathed for the 4th time,
(confusing enough) and hit them with a clorine gas cloud.  They had a
pretty tough time with him.  
   Just an idea by me.  Not bad for a beginner GM.

				Mike
From: s892341@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Matt=Goodall)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Intelligent Opponents (A summary of some email)
Date: 16 Oct 92 02:01:07 GMT
Organization: RMIT Computer Centre
NNTP-Posting-Host: minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au

parkerma@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (Mark A. Parker) writes:

>	If you take it the spell name as literal (i.e. the caster now has  
>skin as hard as rock), wouldn't regular vorpal and sharpness weapons still  
>cut them? These weapons still decapitate/dismember stone beings on high  
>rolls, so would they still work on the mage?
>	Just an honest question.
>					Mark Parker

No, simply because it says so in the spell description.

Matt

-- 
Matt Goodall
s892341@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au
Famous last words: "Who's the bitch with the spiders?"
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: stephen@ibmpa.awdpa.ibm.com
Subject: Re: Spell Points in DND
Organization: IBM PS Programming, Palo Alto
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 19:44:27 GMT

tao@potato.princeton.edu (Terry Tao) writes:
>And yes, 20th level mages should be tough, but NOT INVINCIBLE, for gods
>sake! I mean, a permanently invisible flying 20th level with some sort of
>magic shield casting 400 missiles at a, say, 24th level fighter will kill
>the fighter with no real chance of counterattack.  Or put an entire army to
>sleep with 400 sleep spells.  Or clog up an entire county with web spells.
>Surely NOBODY can handle extreme amounts of magic like this? the mage would
>get the thaumaturgical equivalent of RSI.

<smirk>

As if the mage could keep himself from being hit for the 7 hours it would
take to cast all those spells!

I was doubtful about some of this myself for quite some time, but now I
am a strong proponent of spell point systems.

The biggest problem with them is that you have to tune them to your own
game, and hence no single system seems to work for everyone!

In my games, the gods limit characters to 20th level (after that you are on
to dietyship and get "retired"), so characters above 15th are EXTREMELY rare
and incredibly powerful.  I like them to be powerful.  The problem is making
the middle levels (say 6 to 10) not be overly powerful.

My scheme (which has playtested very well) is to give mages spell points
based on stats and some randomness (details available if desired), were
spells cost the spell level in points to cast (straightforward).
The big disadvantage is that spell points are only earned back at the
character's level per day!

A first level mage may cast (if lucky) 4 spells on a day, but only has
one spell point the next day... it'll take 4 to get to full strength.
Players ration their spell points, but have them in a fix.
At the middle levels (around 5th), players have 30 or so spell points
and can indeed pour out magic-missile spells, but anything over 5 spell
points will take more than a day to recover.  You better believe that
a mage in trouble thinks twice about wasting spell points when a fighter's
sword could do the task.

Basically, I opt to give out power but to give a disadvantage of time to
recharge.  I also do initiative in such a way that spell casting can
be interrupted.

I'll be happy to post or email more details if people are interested.
I say that spell point systems are great, but they have to be made to
fit for a given campaign.

Happy Gaming!

Stephen.
----
Stephen D'Angelo  
stephen@ibmpa.awdpa.ibm.com -- IBM Multimedia Development
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: "Shawn M. Witzki" <switzki@raisin.ucs.indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: The TSR Trap
Reply-To: switzki@cs.indiana.edu
Organization: Working on it. . .
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 09:23:01 -0500

alvalent@husc10.harvard.edu (Alvin Valentine) writes:

>Scott@Stanford writes:
>But to continue on, buying countless $$$ of TSR stuff (outlined with
>pretty pictures from Elmore/Parkinson/Easly/Cadwell/etc) will only
>result in more dependence and in the long run (my theory) will lead
>to a vegetative state of plot-seeking, monster-finding, new spell-
>seeking, and fantasy burnout- if you let you money purchase away your
>imagination.

I think that this is definitely a danger, but I don't think that EVERYONE
will succumb to it anymore than I believe that everyone who buys a lot of guns
will become a mass-murderer.  It's up to the individual to make sure that the
products don't constrain his/er creativity.  If it does, you have no one to
blame but yourself.

>Please!!!  I run a Ravenloft campaign, which, although it has its flaws, is
>the finest campaign set I've ever seen put out.  It is inherently a game
>unto itself.  Gothic-fantasy is a genre created by the boys at TSR in this
>industry.  It's neat.  Am I on a road to vegetative plots, et. al.

Clearly, you're on the road to simple-minded slack-jawed ruin, Lee.  I've
seen some of your work.  ;-)

>someone who cares about their game.  In the long run you say?  I've played
>RPGs since 4th grade and now I'm a senior in college.  I've played 2nd ed.
>AD&D since it hit the shelves.  I do not feel that TSR has crippled my
>creativity.  It's a nice controversy you're trying to start up, but you
>may be playing to the wrong crowd.  We all have our problems with AD&D, but
>if you expect much support you probably won't find tons of it save for
>anti-TSR activists going out of their way to subscribe to this news forum.
>This is rec.games.frp.dnd, after all, and that implies we all play D&D or
>AD&D*.  We may not be fond of everything about them, but...

Agreed.  We all have our problems with the ?D&D? system, but the question I
think you should ask yourself is:  what's more important, the rule system or
the game?  Personally, I game to have fun -- the rules are merely a formalism
to provide direction.

>Moreso, friend, the mere fact that this forum exists should prove to you
>that TSR has not stifled our collective imagination. 

Excellent point.

-- 
============================================================================
I don't procrastinate.  I just spontaneously     \\          Shawn M. Witzki 
reorganize my time.                 -- Unknown    \\  switzki@cs.indiana.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: thealien@unlv.edu (Sean McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Killing Liches with Staves of the Magi, HA!!!
Organization: UNLV
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 92 18:09:00 GMT

	I don't know how the work it in AD&D2, but in the real game,
you can't break anything in a retributive strike unless it
specifically says so in the item's description.  It does not say this
for a wand of fireballs.  I'm not flaming you, but I want to make sure
no one thinks that's an official rule.
____________________________________________________________________________
Sean McCarthy IS             {  }"I'm told it's my duty to fight against
thealien@cs.unlv.edu          }{   the Law, that there's freedom in my blade
thealien@redrock.nevada.edu  {  }  and that wizardry's my trade.."
"Chaotic is NOT Evil!"- Me    }{    -Black Blade by Blue Oyster Cult
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: marrou@cs.ucf.edu (Lance R. Marrou)
Subject: Re: Intelligent opponents (was Re: Lich & Demi-Lich...)
Organization: University of Central Florida
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 14:23:33 GMT

d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se (Bertil Jonell) writes:

>In article <BvqE10.K0@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>, slip@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Doolie) writes:
>> All this talk about liches started me wondering. Does a Lich have to LOOK
>> like a lich?  I mean, couldnt they simply put a permanent change self on
>> themselves to look alive?.  This way, they could look like a livng human,
>> smell like a human, feel like a human, but still be a lich.
> 
>  This will of course lead to the pc's suspecting every strangely longlived
>wizard to be a lich:)
> 
>DM: The bearded person says:'Some people call me Elminster'
>Players: "Yikes! Turn him! Break out the holy water! Turn him!"

Well, there's nothing wrong with a bunch of paranoid players!!  I am
certainly used to them.  ;> *evil grin*

>> * Gordon Emore	          *   <Place nifty quote here>      *
> 
>-bertil-
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Lance R. Marrou
   Work   - Marrou@IST.UCF.edu
   School - Marrou@Eola.cs.UCF.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: LRPR000 <LRPR@UNB.CA>
Subject: RE: "human-level" evil
Organization: The University of New Brunswick
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 16:05:47 GMT

In article <2323@cix.cict.fr> dutech@reseau.Berkeley.EDU (Groupe ELEVES) writes:
>
>  Another post concerning alignments...
>
>  I mean, when a priest casts a "detect evil" spell, will he detect ALL
>evil-aligned beings in the area of effect (including the small-time
>thief, the ambitious and somwhat ruthless officer, the ninja waiting
>in disguise nearby, the illusion-cloaked vampire, etc...) or will he
>only points to REAL unnatural evil, the sort of which is achieved only
>by supernatural beings and truly infamous human beings?
>
>       Redwing.
>.
>.
     I heartily agree that only the vampire in your example should be
shown up (maybe the ninja, if he's an infamous assassin, comtemplating
his next cruel kill...)
     After all, your other examples are arguably not EVIL at
all. And the problems really start with a paladin in the party, who
can do this on a regular basis.  If the third level evil thief
hiding behind a curtain can be discovered, you can *never* sneak up
on a paladin.  Note that the PHB says that extra-planar creatures,
and powerful NPC's (or PC's!) intent on DOING evil or good can be
detected.  Thus it's very useful for detecting a disguised fantastic
evil creature, hiding behind a spell or ability
(polymorph, change-self, alter-self, etc.) It's also useful for
tracking down that evil high priest hiding in the mazelike temple,
about to sacrifice the princess.  My players tried to argue that the
paladin, by stopping every 60 feet to concentrate, would show up
ogres lying in ambush, etc. I disallowed it for game balance, but I
feel free to make it more powerful (like seeing evil through walls and
when invisible) when they really need it.

                                    JubbaBones
From: dutech@reseau.Berkeley.EDU (Groupe ELEVES)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Swords of Sharpness and Incredible Constitution
Keywords: Trolls, regeneration, sword, sharpness, constitution
Date: 7 Oct 92 08:24:02 GMT
Reply-To: dutech@reseau.Berkeley.EDU (Groupe ELEVES)


  [... about the damage a sword of sharpness does ...]

  I'll use a variant of what John Boelter says : the wounded PC makes
a system shock roll. Failure means he drops to -1 HP (sooo, he now has
9 rounds to be tended to. Consider that first aid doesn't help in this
matter. Only healing proficiency, backed by natural or magical means of
healing, can prevent death). Success means that the PC can still stand,
and act for the round. The procedure is repeted each round, with a
cumulative -1 to CON for system shock %, AND a cumulative -1 to hit
points if the PC falls. Of course, if he makes the die roll, he still
loses as much hit points as he lost during the initial attack.

  Example ? Suppose Ragnar is hit by the Sword and has his arm severed.
He also loses 9 hit points. Having a 15 CON, making his 90% system shock
is quite easy. So he can act this round (perhaps with a malus, and cer-
-tainly not with his lost arm). On the second round, he rolls for ano-
-ther Syst. Sh. at 14 CON. Success => 9 hp lost / failure => drops to
-2 hp and is unconscious. etc...

  If you want to make this tougher, impose a system shock at half normal
chances...

							Redwing.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: Rannou@info.polymtl.ca (Patrick Rannou)
Subject: Re: Killing Liches with Staves of the Magi, HA!!!
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal, Canada
	<1992Oct7.132008.2170@bnr.ca>
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 22:54:30 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.132008.2170@bnr.ca> dclayton@bnr.ca (Don Clayton) writes:


   In article <oeoa8tq00Uh7A8RNJD@andrew.cmu.edu>, "Jordan M. Wolbrum" <jw67+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
   |> Seriously, I was just joking around about the staff thing!

   I broke a Wand of Fireballs one time.  It involved a large dragon, a character with
   very few hit points, an evil alignment, and a teleport spell.  96 Charges left!  I
   lived, but the rest of my party and the dragon were scattered all over the astral
   plane.  Nothing a few resurection spells couldn't help :):)

   That's evil for ya!

That's also a very stupid GM. You could never have dropped the teleport
spell in time: The moment you break the want, BOOOOM!

And who's a point-zero? YOU, the evil (and stupid, unless he's sure his
friends will succeed at resurrecting his charred remains, but I find that
doubtful...) mage. ASnd know also that although som,e special display can
exist from a magic item if it's broken, wether there is 1 or 96 charges in
them won't make a KABOOM unless it's a retributive strike (and to last
account such strikes are found ONLY on wands of the magi and w. of force).
Now, this r.strike MUST be magically activated. i.e.: by hand.

You can't just teleport the wand over the dragon, let it break when it
falls to the ground, and kaboom at long range. You must "activate": this
special power yourself. You'll die for sure.

And IF an item could do such damage by being broken, then I'm sure the
first time you fell into one of these common 10'feet deep traps, you'd have
remembered it for a looong time.

BOOOM! "Huh, where am I... it looks like fire everywhere, and people
screaming... Oh, I'm in Hell... YAY!"

End of PC.

--
/---------------------------\
| Patrick "Paradak" Rannou. |
| Rannou@info.polymtl.ca    |
\---------------------------/
From: aaron@juliet.caltech.edu (Packman, Aaron I.)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Lich / Holy Swords
Date: 9 Oct 1992 23:01 PST
Organization: California Institute of Technology
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: juliet.caltech.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

In article <1992Oct8.094007.3142@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, abistak@nyx.cs.du.edu (Andrew Bistak) writes...
> 
>Here's another question though : When (What level) or should a Paladin get
>a Holy Sword?
> 

IMO, probably never.  I think Holy Avengers should be as rare as artifacts;
in fact I think that "Holy Sword" should not be a general magic item, but
should instead refer to a specific class of artifacts--the (few) swords
of the utmost power and goodness.  But I prefer relatively low-magic 
campaigns anyway.

Aaron
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: brunborg@solan.unit.no (]dne Brunborg)
Subject: Re: A Viable spell point system.
Organization: Norwegian Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 12:27:55 GMT


slgmj@cc.usu.edu writes:	

<	Syndactyly Sabertooth is a Mage of 9th level.  He has an INT of 18
<	   and is a straight class mage.  He has been very lucky with his 
<	   d10 rolls (aren't PC's always???)  and has scored: 9,7,5,8,10,9,6,4,
<	   and 10.  His spell points at 9th level = 32.0
< 
<		INT/10   1.8 X 9 = 16.2
<	 	(D10 rolls)      =  6.8
<		1pt / level      =  9.0
<        =====================================
<		total at 9th     = 32.0
<
<	At 9th level he can cast 5th level spells. His profficient 5th level 
<		spell costs 5 spell points to cast. However, his NONPROFFICIEN
<		5th level spells cost 10 points to cast! 
<	Since he can only gain 2.9-3.8 points per level, he won't be 
<		all-powerful by the time he hits tenth or so. Make no mistake
<		though... a ninth level MU is nothing to mess with!

I like the idea about spell points, as it balances out the difference between the
wizard, priest and psionicist. But do you really mean that any wizaed can cast
any spell that he's ever heard about? Or just those spells that he's got in his
spellbook?
While I'm on the subject, why doesn't the wizard get bonus spells for high
wisdom? It's not logical that a wizard with 5 wis can store as much spell energy
as a 18 wis wizard, I think?

So long!

		Aadne Brunborg
		Norwegian Institute of Thechnology
		University of Trondheim
		NORWAY

	"If ye can't see it, it's right behind ye..."
From: ecrjbruce@economics.adelaide.edu.au
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Level draining seems sadistic, doesn't it?
Date: 16 Oct 92 05:17:18 GMT
Organization: Economics, University of Adelaide
NNTP-Posting-Host: eco.economics.adelaide.edu.au

In article <MeqpR1W00iUxM5h8Vd@andrew.cmu.edu>, jw67+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jordan M. Wolbrum) writes:
> Thought it was time for a new topic!

Didn't we just go through this....

> 
> I think the current rule for level draining are sadistic.  With each
> successful hit, a vampire can destroy several long game sessions of play
> for the victim.  And, although this rarely bothers me in AD&D, it makes
> no sense!

Several long sessions of play....

Hmmmm, I've been playing one character for nearly 2 years averaging 8 hours per
weekof pretty intensive adventuring and I've only gained 1 (yes one) level. 
This was from level 7 to level 8 mage admittedly but even so to have all that
go in about 1 combat round would really piss me off.  Hence our DM (in fact the
Bastard DM From Hell) has undead do a semipermanent chill touch on us, draining
points of con, str and dex.  Still makes undead nasty creatures but not
ridiculously damaging in terms of experience.

> 
> My solution:
> 
> When a level-draining creature hits, temporary level draining occurs. 
> HP's do not drop from the draining, nor are proficiencies lost, but the
> fighting of spellcasting effectiveness is lowered as a standard level
> drain.
> 
> The levels will return at a rate of 1/day, and a restoration will return
> them all right away.

Personally I think this is not enough, undead are supposed to be loathsome fear
inducing monsters.  Losing a level temporarily for a day or two doesn't really
hurt me that badly (unless you encounter lots of draining undead) unless my
party and I are foolish enough to press on and on until we are 1st level PC's
taking on vampires for instance.

I am not sure how long Phil requires us to heal before we get our points back
because we have yet to meet a serious number of draining undead.  What I can
say is that we are  sh*t scared of them (as we should be) and have a temple
full of them to overcome to recover some objects for the emperor of a continent
in return for our spelljamming ship back.
> 
> The only exception would be energy drain, it's a ninth level spell, and
> should be on par with wish, so it's still just as nasty!

I still don't like the idea of zapping levels away.  In a munchkin campaign
when it ios only 2 sessions or whatever then it doesn't matter, but in a decent
campaign where it represents a large time investment it is still too much.

regs

Rob
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: cs202144@umbc8.umbc.edu (cs202144)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Kobolds (Re: Intelligent opponents)
Date: 11 Oct 92 03:49:18 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, Baltimore County Campus

I actually let Kobolds be low-level NPC Thieves. They are quick, sneaky,
and are generally born thieves in my eyes. Then they can backstab the PC's
for extra damage. 
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd