HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cleggp@aix.rpi.edu (Paul Jason Clegg)
Subject: Re: net.rpg.freeform: Post 2 of 2
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 04:24:54 GMT

I've been watching most of this card-resolution system discussion with some
interest, because I had been thinking about creating a board-game/card-game
combo which used cards in a limited fashion.

One thing I think people may be missing though, is the ease of use factor.
As a GM, you're going to be controlling several people at once; it's going
to be a real mess maintaining that many different hands of cards at once.
IF a card system is employed, there should be a dicing convention added to
speed play, even if it's only for the GM to use.  Otherwise, GMs are going
to end up starting to carry around cartons of decks of cards instead of
just dice bags!

The card idea isn't a bad one; just remember that the GM needs special con-
sideration in the matter because he's not just one person all of the time.

...Paul


-- 
+                +        +    +  + + +  +    +        +                +
  Paul Clegg, cleggp@aix.rpi.edu.   Project Galactic Guide Coordinator.
            System One RPG designer.   But generally unknown.
+                +        +    +  + + +  +    +        +                +
Newsgroups: rec.games.design,rec.games.frp.misc,rec.games.frp
From: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
Subject: Re: net.rpg.slug: Action resolution
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, NH.
	<gs21kn-@rpi.edu>
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 92 22:29:28 GMT

cleggp@aix.rpi.edu (Paul Jason Clegg) writes:
>
>But the range is definitely too limited.  I mean, Joe Schmo might have poor
>strength (just under average), and Arnie Schwarzeneggar might have Superior,
>three over average, in a seven-tier system.  They go to lift something that
>the GM deems as a Superior Task.  Arnie gets it a little over half the time,
>no problem.  But Jo Schmo can get a +4 result, and lift the same thing that
>Arnie does, and that's just not likely.

Not at all likely - he'll be able to do it less than 3% of the time he
tries by this system.  If you really want to make it tough, though, say
it requires a Superb+1 roll to make - it's not something even Arnie can
do 2/3 of the time, but he'll be able to do it about 1/3 of the time,
and Joe Schmo just won't be able to do it until he raises his
Strength.

>stingy in handing out modifiers to hit, because each level is a good portion
>of their chance to hit.  I just don't know.  I guess it could work, but I
>definitely think the range should be expanded to a LOT more than just 7
>tiers if this system is considered "the one to go with".

The only way it would work with more than seven levels is to abandon
words and go with numbers.  If enough of the active people in this
discussion want this, I'll go with it.  I really like the words, though
- it fits a simple system quite well.

I don't really see being stingy with combat modifiers as a problem - if
you have too many, you've lost simplicity, anyway.  I'd say +1 or -1
would be a lot, with a rare +/-2 as a maximum.

The only way SLUG will work as a Universal game, though, is to have two
scales: human-norm range, and superhuman range.  Each would use the
same adjectives, but would have no points in common - even a Terrible
superhuman Strength would be more than a Superb human strength could
achieve on his best roll.  You could also have a sub-human scale, too,
for the Wee Folk and Bunnies & Burrows (any system that can run B&B
isn't Universal - one of my two favorite genres!).

-- 
  - Steffan O'Sullivan		         sos@oz.plymouth.edu
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.games.design,rec.games.frp.misc,rec.games.frp
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 18:58:23 -0500 
From: William Henry Timmins <wt0b+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Stars

I'm interested in star information. Basically, a list of stars
(particularly singular main sequence F G and K stars) in the vicinity,
class/type/mass, and position.

I'd like electronic info, please. I've had enormous difficulties trying
to find something useful in the libraries (most list stars by
brightness, so that FGK stars are rarely indicated)

The population I am interested in, singular F/G/K V stars, should be
obvious (for science fiction stellar systems)


-Me
[Pooh Bear incarnate.]
<B1 c+ f+ w g+ k+ s+ r- e+ p>
From: leet@acsu.buffalo.edu (Brian D. Leet)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: Net.rpg: Attributes
Date: 20 Nov 92 02:57:38 GMT
Organization: UB

In article <dmatiske-191192174952@archmacconsultant.architecture.lab.nd.edu> dmatiske@nd.edu (David Matiskella) writes:
>stats. For example when I fire my gun do I use my  gun skill or do I use
>dexterity?
>When I want to design something do I use engineering or my logic and
>spacial ability
>Deciding how the mechanics work will determine what skills we need. If we 
>use skills
>in the mechanics we don't need the 39 stats some suggested early, while if
>skills play a
>secondary role then we need more stats. 

I feel that stats should definitely play an important role in most skills.  I
tend to see a skill as being a modifier of a stat almost more than the other
way around.  No amount of training and understanding would make me a good
pole vaulter unless I acquired some upper body strength...  I think both 
should be treated relatively equally by the system.

							Brian Leet
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: ketil@ii.uib.no (Ketil M. Malde)
Subject: Re: net.rpg: Character Stats 
Reply-To: ketil@ii.uib.no
Organization: student of numerical analysis at the University of Bergen, Norway
	<1992Nov18.221344.3370@alf.uib.no>
	<1992Nov19.085038.12265@midway.uchicago.edu>
Date: 19 Nov 92 17:34:39

>>>>> On Thu, 19 Nov 1992 08:50:38 GMT, fks1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Scaramouche) said:

In article <1992Nov18.221344.3370@alf.uib.no> magnus@ii.uib.no writes:

	Sc> it.  i.e.  say Joe takes fencing.  If he takes it at a low
	Sc> level he has a low Agility (or whatever), but if he takes
	Sc> it high he has a high agility.  This doesn't make too much
	Sc> sense.  Why can't Joe have a high AGI but be a poor
	Sc> fencer?

I think the point was that if Joe takes a lot of fencing it will
increase his agility, if he takes a lot of badminton instead, that
could be just as good.

In effect, you'd sum up his experiences, and form stats from them.

--
 = Ketil Malde                     In real life:  ketil@ii.uib.no =
 = Nuke the whales!                    Honk if you love unicorns! =
From: jliukkon@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Juha-Matti Liukkonen)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: net.rpg: Character Stats (LONG)
Date: 18 Nov 92 17:28:09 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki

leet@acsu.buffalo.edu (Brian D. Leet) writes:

>Stats:
>  Physical:
>    Strength:
>      Power, Build, Speed
>    Toughness:
>      Endurance, Resistance, Pain-threshold
>    Dexterity:
>      Accuracy, Agility, Flexibility
>  Cognitive:
>    Reasoning:
>      Logic, Comprehension, Faith
>    Wisdom:
>      Intuition, Charisma, Perception
>    Knowledge:
>      Memory, Experience, Studiousness
>  Energy:
>    Magic:
>      Invocation, Alteration, Channeling
>    Psychic:
>      Equilibrium, Synchronicity, Essence
>    Innate:
>      Control, Force, Focus

Hmm, this seems to be the best & complete presentation of the subject as
of now. And quite well in the spirit of the original idea, too. First I
thought that picking Strength up to the primary level was a dumb move,
but I have to admit that in the world of role-playing, strength is a
more often seen characteristic than size, f.ex...

I'd vote this one up to the FAQ - how about it, magnus et al?

>No scores may be < 0.  Scores will fluctuate through life.
>No score may be greater than 1 1/2 * a subscore +1.  Nor may
>a subscore be more than 1 1/2 times +1 over a score.  Always
>round down on the 1/2.

The average of subscores == score? That is, a subscore is x% of the
actual score, perhaps temporarily fluctuating.  If a subscore raises or
lowers permanently, it pumps the above score higher, too, thus perhaps
raising all substats in that category..?
-- 
               Juha Liukkonen, aka jliukkon@cc.helsinki.fi
       University of Helsinki, Dept. of Paranormal Investigations
           "Trust me, I know what I'm doing." - Sledge Hammer
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca (David Lamb)
Subject: Re: Net.rpg: Lifepath
Organization: Computing & Information Science, Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 18:30:37 GMT

We've seen several statements that amount to "it's too hard (or impossible) to
define a lifepath method flexible enough for an open-ended multi-genre RPG".
That *might* turn out to be true - but to find out, we need to decide just
what a life path method is *supposed* to be.

Just what distinguishes a "life path" from something else?  For example, can
you think of the HERO system "package deals" as a degenerate form of life
path?  i.e. a 1-step path (or 2-step, if a dwarf raised by elves takes the
"dwarf racial package" and "elven cultural package"?

What are the elements in a life path?
How does one string those elements together?
What are the "outputs" (i'd guess, changes to the skills/ stats/ equipment/
  contacts/ whatever else is on the character sheet)

For example, here's one approach:

A "life path element" (LPE) is a collection of character-sheet-modification
possibilities including
- permission to change certain skills or stats (by spending points, or
  choosing from some list, or random rolling, or...)
- access to particular physical items (e.g. Chivalric LPE lets you acquire
  chivalric weapons and armour, forbidden to the general populace).
  [which you get for free, or pay points for, or pay money for, or just write
   on your sheet...]
- requirements to meet before you enter the LPE (e.g. get skills to particular
  levels; reach certain age; finish earlier LPE).

The "finish earlier LPE" idea defines direct paths like the ones I think I
remember from Cyberpunk (the R.Talsorian game).  The others define the path
implicitly; from any LPE you could get to any successor for which you met the
prerequisites.

Do these ideas make sense?  The "implicit requirement" part might be the key
to defining a life path system that is flexible enough.
From: millerl@wharton.upenn.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: RFD rec.games.netrpg
Date: 19 Nov 92 19:13:00 GMT
Organization: Newt World Order

Magnus,

I guess you haven't paid attention to the roasting that Bruce Norman has
been getting in news.groups for forcing a vote on an unneccessary
roleplaying newsgroup without gathering a consensus and without defining
his terms well. He proposed rec.games.frp.campaigns as both a moderated
and an unmoderated newsgroup. As a moderated newsgroup it would
duplicate rec.games.frp.archives, which is hardly a massively busy
group. As an unmoderated group it would duplicate rec.games.frp.misc
since campaign is such a non-specific word in roleplaying. Your group
wouldn't actually be as bad as it is if it were called
rec.games.frp.design. At least it would be placed appropriately in the
hierarchy. However, it would have three main effects. First, the
discussion of the net.rpg would be diverted into discussion of a net.rpg
group, wrecking any plans you may have to actually develop something,
and secondly it would empty rec.games.design which has almost no traffic
besides net.rpg, and third it would cause a lot of cross-posting between
.advocacy and .design --- even more than we have now.

-- 
whoah,
+++++++++++++++++++++++23
Loren Miller                           internet: MILLERL@wharton.upenn.edu
Mediocrity is a hand rail.                         -- Baron de Montesquieu
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
Subject: Re: net.rpg.freeform: cardplay
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, NH.
	<17y1#hb@rpi.edu>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 17:15:07 GMT

Re: Paul's thoughts about a hand of cards not allowing the proper mood
of not knowing whether or not to try an action:

I had actually never considered holding a hand.  You don't draw until
you've made the decision to leap, in this case, and return the unused
cards to the deck when the situation is over.

To be honest, though, I'm not sure I'm liking the direction Loren's
system is going - it's getting too complicated for a game with the word
Simple in the title.  More thoughts later - I just wanted to reassure
Paul that his objection would be valid if a hand were to be held, but
that I wouldn't want such a situation.

-- 
  - Steffan O'Sullivan		         sos@oz.plymouth.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: bkoike@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Bryce Koike)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: net.rpg
Date: 17 Nov 92 17:48:32 GMT
Article-I.D.: sdcc12.41129
Organization: University of California, San Diego


	Probem #1 with classes/careers/lifepaths when dealing with a
generic rpg:

	How to do it.

	Imagine it.  You've got to deal with people from the stone
age all the way up to inredibly futuristic worlds.  You need to
include alien races, etc.  You must deal with careers from all these
times.
	(This is a major drawback to generic systems, unfortunately,
unless you take the Palladium route.  Publish the same damn
mechanics with every supplement, write new rules for every game...)
	Sure, you can go for the "generic career" path, but then you
might as well just tell people to use PA however they wish.
Careers, lifepaths, and classes work fine when confined to a single
genre (AD&D, CP2020, etc), but when you need to spread out among
countless others, you're going to run into a pretty serious poblem.
	(Or so I feel after trying to cook one up myself.  I'm no
genius and perhaps there's someone out there who's already generated
one?  Not sure...  The best system I could come up with was horribly
unsatisfying.)

	Problem #2

	How do you deal with various "power levels"?  There's a huge
difference between a super hero and Jack the Lawyer.  Will the
random character creation system take care of this?  Will the
lifepath, careerpath/whatever?  (Another problem I've hit and can't
get around...there's a couple kludges, but they're messy.)
	As in GURPS, how are you going to deal with 25 pt. normals
all the way up to 500pt. "four color" superheroes?  Ignoring this
will limit the random charater generation method, although make the
random method more effective...

	If anyone has some good solutions to these, I'd love to hear
about them!
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: magnus@bark-fddi.ii.uib.no (Magnus Alvestad)
Subject: Re: net.rpg  -Build?
Reply-To: magnus@ii.uib.no
Organization: UVBS -> SFK/T-DSA / SOPS - HOS / RNoN
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 17:42:42 GMT

>>>>> On Mon, 16 Nov 1992 17:58:58 GMT, apace@mta.ca said:

	apace> I think that the idea of splitting build into height
	apace> and weight into two seperate stats is a bad one.  For
	apace> starters, I thought that we were aiming for minimalism.

Well, not really - but true regarding the basic statistics. 

	apace> Why just not use the nice word Size.  We could have it
	apace> positively affect hand-to-hand damage, as well as the
	apace> amount of damage you can absorb, but harm your
	apace> quickness.

I'm not sure. We'll have to find actual height and weight later
anyway, so we might as well make it good at this stage by using both.
There is a substantial difference between Height and Weight. :-)

-Magnus
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: magnus@bark-fddi.ii.uib.no (Magnus Alvestad)
Subject: Re: net.rpg: Character Stats (LONG)
Reply-To: magnus@ii.uib.no
Organization: UVBS -> SFK/T-DSA / SOPS - HOS / RNoN
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 22:13:44 GMT

>>>>> On 17 Nov 92 23:13:55 GMT, leet@acsu.buffalo.edu (Brian D. Leet)
>>>>> said:

	Brian> Well there is some basic interest I guess so here is an
	Brian> excerpt from a system I've been toying with: (I'll try

It looks very elegant. As soon as we have agreed on on something like
this we will be able to start working at different ends. We have to
look carefully at this part, though. If we make mistakes here, and
have to correct them at a later stage, that could have nasty
consequences. Now let's see..

	Brian> will fluctuate through life.  No score may be greater
	Brian> than 1 1/2 * a subscore +1.  Nor may a subscore be more
	Brian> than 1 1/2 times +1 over a score.  Always round down on
	Brian> the 1/2.

Isn't this a bit clumsy? I don't know - I just think it should be
simpler. Also, there should be some connection between the sum of the
subscores for a score and the score. If you have a high physical,
there should be some high physical below to explain that. 

That makes me believe the best way to use this would be to work from
the bottom up. You start with a long list of small stats (or a short
list if you play a KISSer variant). Then you roll/allocate/use the
life path to assign all the stats. Using some smart&easy to use
formula, you work your way up to the top-level stats. Voila.

Or maybe.. (thought) you could start with the skills, choosing which
skills you wanted. Then those would give their points to connected
stats, which would keep pushing the points upward till they hit the
main stats. I think this is a more user-friendly (!!) approach - as
the player chooses what the character is good at, what he can do, what
he has done - and then you determine his stats, instead of determining
stats and then getting skills, maybe some you didn't want, some you
wanted you can't get enough of etc.

It would also make the lifepath system easier to implement, as you
could just tick the skills as they rolled in. 

	Brian> 1> Take the whole thing.  For you number-crunching
	Brian> power gamers, hers your chance to define 39 stats for
	Brian> your characters. 

Oh yes! :-D

	Brian> to be broken :-).  Special campaigns may add new stats
	Brian> etc. and maybe someone will have a score that isn't so
	Brian> close to the one higher on the tree from it, but these
	Brian> are exceptions not the rule.

Hmm.. the tree would be pretty modifiable, you could just push in new
stats and let them inherit values from above. Same goes for skills.
Then of course you could add to those, perhaps you would also have to
adjust upwards to maintain balance - remember to write those stats
with a pencil.. :-)


Ok - I haven't commented the tree itself, but I'm sure others will.
We'll have to tune it so it's natural and has a good flow both ways.
I noticed that some of the parts are obviously not applicable for
"real-life" games like Twilight.

-Magnus

PS Good work! DS
From: millerl@wharton.upenn.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: Net.rpg: Attributes
Date: 19 Nov 92 18:59:24 GMT
Followup-To: rec.games.design
Organization: Newt World Order

In article <1992Nov18.225507.4711@alf.uib.no>, magnus@bark-fddi.ii.uib.no (Magnus Alvestad) writes:
> For example, even though stats like Kinesthetic and Spacial are below
> Intelligence, they would influence Agility (or the other way around).
> When you calculate your stats, you just follow all the lines. 

The reason they seem wrong is that Agility and Dexterity are in the
wrong tree. They are more highly correlated with intelligence than with
physical power or mass. They are not physical stats, they are nervous
stats, and as such belong in the Intelligence tree.

-- 
whoah,
+++++++++++++++++++++++23
Loren Miller                           internet: MILLERL@wharton.upenn.edu
Mediocrity is a hand rail.                         -- Baron de Montesquieu
From: tdunn@ecst.csuchico.edu (Tim Dunn)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: Desinging a mecha game
Date: 16 Nov 92 16:22:02 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: hairball.ecst.csuchico.edu

meierdalepau@bvc.edu writes:
>I have a question maybe someone here could answer.  What do I 
>need to consider when designing my own mecha game in the way of a rules 
>system, equipment, and other materials (i.e. background history, mecha 
>construction, etc.)?

Mecha games are now rather irreconcibly divided between a few camps:

1) 'Kid' Mecha, where the mecha are the stars of the stories, and the
   pilots are incidental, or at best supporting roles.  Battletech with
   out any pretense of roleplaying comes to mind.
2) 'Standard Anime' Mecha, where the characters are the stars, and the
   mecha exist as their larger-than-life way of settling their conflicts
   with one another or an outside foe.  Most mecha shows that made it 
   to the US translated are like this, though some of the ones geared 
   for younger audiences are the 'Kid' mecha variety.
3) 'Modern Anime' Mecha, where the mecha are merely tools, background
   and backdrop.  The stars have thier own lives, their own plots and
   only incidentally do they involve the mecha, or sometimes not at all.

Once you have decided on your game's focus, and how to balance the 
attention on the mecha vs. the character, then you will know what level
of detail to devote to each aspect (in relative terms).  However, this
will be your foundation decision, and once I know your focus, then I
can answer the question in more detail.


-- 
Any small object that is accidentally dropped will hide under a
larger object.
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: picl17@fsphy1.physics.fsu.edu (Jeffrey Johnson)
Subject: Re: Net.rpg: Skills
Followup-To: rec.games.design
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   
Reply-To: picl17@fsphy1.physics.fsu.edu
Organization: F.S.U. Dept of Physics
Distribution:  world
Date: 18 NOV 92 09:41:59    

In article <1992Nov16.185116.24333@crd.ge.com>,  (Spike) writes...
>Someone in the "modularity " thread has mentioned that he
>likes generic skills. (Apologies, I didn't grab it - this group
>is really sucking up the old HD space!) My feelings on skills:
> 
>As much as I am wary of the idea of skill trees, it would work 
>very nicely to satisfy both the generic-approach and the 
>realistic-approach people. (Personally, I am among the latter.)
>We wouldn't have to have actual *trees* to make this work, 
>either - yay! Character sheets wouldn't have to be on 11" x 
>17" paper! Instead, how about setting it up so that characteristics
>are the defaults rolled for skills. Below characteristics are "broad"
>skills (Comp Sci, Thief, Magic, Guns). Below these are sub-skills:
>Programming, Debugging, Hacking; Pickpocket, Lockpicking, Stealth
>and so on. This gives the players a simple way to fine-tune the level of
>detail they want in the game.

A similar idea is already used in a few games; Shadowrun uses concentrations
and specializations of skills, and CORPS allows buying "subskills" (I don't
remember the terminology they use) up cheaper than regular skills.

However, I do like this idea a LOT... most games leave it up to the players
to invent any subskills they want.

>Concerning skills combining with multiple stats: I like this idea, but 
>I don't see a way to make it work without ripping off Ars Magica
>or the Storyteller series.

We wouldn't be "ripping off" Ars Magica or the Storyteller games.  The
first game I know of to use skills with multiple stats was Mercenaries, Spies, 
and Private Eyes, put out by Flying Buffalo.  This was released LONG before 
either of the two you mentioned.

Furthermore, you don't seem to be concerned about "ripping off" the systems
that already use a specific skill + specific attributes system, such as TORG,
GURPS (slightly modified system), Paranoia, and Toon.

>Caveats: If skills are based on stats, costs (in the point-alloc 
>generation system :-) must be very carefully balanced. 
>Otherwise, it is easy to run into trouble as GURPS has, 
>where it is *way* too cost-effective to buy high stats and pump
>a few points into a skill, rather than just buy the skill at high 
>level.
> 
>Spike

True... we'll have to watch this.  The easiest way would be to make attributes
MUCH more expensive than skills... a second way (used by CORPS and by Omniverse,
a game system I'm developing B^), is to have attributes and skills bought from
separate "pools" of points.

P.S.  I believe that if the NET.RPG is ever developed, it should be public
      domain, with the restriction that any modified versions must clearly
      state that they are modified.

Travis Casey
picl17@fsphy1.physics.fsu.edu
"He-who-has-no-.sig"