HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: maillet@tls-cs.cert.fr (Luc Maillet)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: 2nd Edition Handbooks
Date: 17 Dec 92 16:56:01 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: CERT, CS Dpt. Toulouse, France

In article <1992Dec17.141417.26079@bnr.ca>, dclayton@bnr.ca (Don Clayton) writes:
|> Wel met,
|> 
|>   I'm interested in getting some of the 2nd Edition Handbooks (Warrior/Priest/Rouge/
|> Psionics) so I thought I would query for information from the net.  Some of the
|> people I know who play with them say that they make the characters way too powerful
|> (especially the Warrior one).  Is this true?  Any information would be nice (i.e.
|> I don't want to stand in the game store for 2 hours reading them and then walk
|> out having not bought them).  Thanks.
|> 
|> Until swords part.

  IMHO, if you are interested in giving options to your PCs, the fighter's hand-
-book is good. It introduces some style variations, give advice for specific
combat manoeuvers, expands unarmed combat, and more. IMHO a must for fighter PCs
if you don't happen to have house rules for those already. Some of the kits are
interesting ( methinks that the swashbuckler is among them, judging by the last
character classes poll ).
  The Wizard's handbook is... well, I don't play wizard often. Perhaps it gives
good advice, but some of the kits I don't like, and diversity is already assured
with specialty mages ( BTW, I recommend you to get rid of the generic mage alto-
-gether - it makes magic even more diverse and mysterious ). Plus, I positively
HATE the passage on wishes and the way to judge them. Pure bullsh*t IMHO.
  The priest's handbook isn't bad if you plan to make your own gods and specific
priests. As for the mages, I recommend you to get rid of the generic cleric
altogether. If you use Forgotten Realms gods and have the FR adventures hardback,
or the "historic" gods and have Legend&Lore, it is less useful. Note that the
specialty priests given in the various gods' books are often more powerful than
the ones you can create according to the guidelines described in the PHB.
  The thief's handbook I don't like. My opinion is biased, however : I don't like
thieves. Can't say much about it.
  The bard's handbook is strange. Some ideas are good, some are quite funny, some
are useless... IMHO, the whole bard class is flawed. I made my own kind of bard,
with original spells. Less powerful than the arcane-casting one, but I like it
better anyway. Not indispensible.
  The psionics handbook is the source of many discussions. It is undoubtely
absolutely indispensible if you plan to have mind powers in your campaign ( and
for the Dark Sun world especially ). Many ideas, many powers, and a fair share
of errors, incoherent descriptions, imprecise rules... indispensible for psionics
but you're getting into rule-rewriting...
  I won't comment on the various "cultural" handbooks ( Vikings, King Arthur, 
Dwarves, and the soon-to-be Elves and Celts )....

  Hope it has been helpful. 'Til next season ( litterally ! )

								Redwing.
From: millerl@wharton.upenn.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Druid Shapechange
Date: 15 Dec 92 04:18:07 GMT
Organization: Newt World Order

I don't remember my own Druid character ever trying to impersonate
another with the Druid shapechange ability but I don't think that my DM
at the time would have allowed it either. Personally I don't think that
a druid has a good enough feeling for that kind of magic to imitate
another that closely.

On another question about druid shapechangers, in that campaign my druid
was able to shapechange into a cobra, and into a spitting cobra, both
forms which he used to escape from hostiles. After discovering that this
worked he started changing into cobras and other vipers regularly and
milked the venom from his own fangs, and he sold it (to apothecaries
only, nudge nudge, wink wink) for lots of gold and some antivenom.
Later, in a totally different campaign, the DM wouldn't allow this,
since he thought it was somehow unnatural. Poisonous snakes are entirely
natural animals, and people milk their venom sacs all the time, mostly
to make antidotes, or so they claim. Why shouldn't it be possible?

-- 
whoah,
+++++++++++++++++++++++23
Loren Miller                           internet: MILLERL@wharton.upenn.edu
Mediocrity is a hand rail.                         -- Baron de Montesquieu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: scythe@stein.u.washington.edu (The Grim Reaper)
Subject: Re: Psionic Defense modes (Choice?!?!?")
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 19:49:55 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.125936.1@vaxb.acs.unt.edu> wilsonm@vaxb.acs.unt.edu writes:
>I have a question about defense modes in the handbook.  Do you need the 
>pre-requisites to get the defense mode that is listed as a "choice" 
>on page 14.  It says players choice but the modes say prerequisites... What
>is the correct way?  If it is not then a first leveler would have to take
>telepathy so he could have the mindlink required on almost all the defense
>modes.
>
>Email is fine and best if avalible.
>
>wilsonm@vaxb.asc.unt.edu
>

Nope.  It sez in the errata (it would be nice if someone could post it)
that there are no prereq for defense modes.

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: tfpayn01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu
Subject: Re: invisibility
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 16:48:28 GMT
Organization: University of Louisville

In article <24316@galaxy.ucr.edu>, rogue@ucrengr.ucr.edu (ed zeamba) writes:
> In article <1992Dec6.212517.16823@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> laruedm@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (David Larue) writes:
>>
>> -=> I was always told (by at least four DMs, and I think it was even in
>> -=> one of the handbooks) that Invisibility was classified as a "special"
>> -=> illusion, one that could NOT be saved against.  But that the caster
>> -=> could indeed  see himself and his items.  
>>
>>In my DMG, p120, it says:
>>
>>INVISIBILITY
>>Invisibility is...etc.
>>
>>First, an invisible creatrue is invisible to everyone, *INCLUDING ITSELF*.
>>											 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>>So if you're invisible, you can't see your items, foe
>>feet, or anything!
>>
>>-= Justin =-
> 
> The PHB was corrected by the Wizard's HB, in which it says you DO
> see yourself...  Thats their policy: all latter publications
> take precedence over older ones.  But, unfortunately, they
> dont edit them as well as the hard-backs, thus only those
> of us with near-photo-graphic memory, can remeber TSR's
> correct rules.
> For instance: the PHB is vague on weapon specialization as to
> the number of weapons.  The Fighters HB, says you can specialize
> in any number, then a newer book say that the fighter's HB
> is wrong and the origianl PHB is supposed to mean Only One Weapon.
> 
> <sigh>

	That's how our DM's doing it also.  Which makes a bit of sense.  You
may be proficient in the use of several weapons, but can only have one weapon
specialized enough to get bonuses.

	In Dark Sun, though, Gladiators are proficient with ALL weapons.  So
there's no need to specialize in one.  In that society, though, that's a
definite plus, 'cos if you roll a 1, your weapon BREAKS! Pretty rough luck if
you're in a fight with a sand worm and your bone sword snaps in two!

	It happens a LOT in our campaign.  In fact, our Thri-kreen have a
tendency to break their jaws/claws every two or three sessions! OUCH!
-- 

/  / // / / /  / /  / / // / / // / //  / /   /  // /  / / / / // // / / / // /
// // /  / // /// // / / /// /// // /// /// // // /// / ///// // /   / // // /
/  /  ________|\_______________________________________________   /  /  // / /
/ // |\_\_\_\_| |_____________________________________________/   / / / / / / /
// / / /      |/  / / //  // /  / / / //  /  /  / /  /  /  / /  /  / / / /// /
/  / /  /  ///  / /  /  Tom Payne *** Louisville, KY	 / //  /  /  /  / / / /
 /  //TFPAYN01@ULKYVX.LOUISVILLE.EDU   /  / INFTECR1@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU /// /
/ // / /  /   / / / /  ///  // (502) 635-2473 / / // // // / /////  / / // // / 
<><><><><> ARE <><><><> YOU <><><><> READY <><><><> TO <><><><> DIE? <><><><><>
From: dcgonyie@eos.ncsu.edu (Lord Stingray)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Silver Piece Standard
Date: 11 Dec 92 19:31:27 GMT
Reply-To: dcgonyie@eos.ncsu.edu (Dwaine Gonyier)
Organization: North Carolina State University--Environment for Impoverished Engineers...
Originator: dcgonyie@c00561-1403br.eos.ncsu.edu


In article <Bz3wvG.Dx4@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca>, alongley@cape.UWaterloo.ca
(Allan Longley) writes:

<>
<>In article (Ted Zuvich) writes:
<>>   One of the gripes I've always had with the normal AD&D rules is that
<>>at a ratio of 10 coins per pound, each coin weighs about 1.6 oz, which
<>>is about $640 @ $400 per ounce.  Assuming that a circulating coin is
<>>alloyed for toughness and hence is about 80% pure, the "old" gp would
<>>still be worth about $512.  This seems to be a bit much for a
<>>circulating coin in common use.
<>
<>The present price of gold is artifically inflated -- a lot!.  As a
<>commerical
<>commodity gold is by no-means worth $400/oz.  Back in ancient times gold
<>had
<>far less value. A price tag of about $40/oz is not unbelievable.  This
<>would
<>place a gold coin of about %50 gold at around a $25 value.  This value for
<>a
<>gold coin makes the equipment charts believable (but they do have BIG
<>problems).


I read a caption in a non-T$R (please don't let them strike me with lightning
:) treasure book (from "Role Aids," I think) that was published circa 1980,
and it placed the equivalent US exchange for 1 AD&D(tm) gp(tm) at $20. 
Adjusted for inflation, it would probably be about $30 now (approx figure,
please correct if you know better).  This was based on the 1st edition
10 gp(tm)/lb idea I guess, so I'm not sure if it would be affected by the 2nd
Ed(tm) 50gp(tm)/lb idea (i.e. lower weight & size of each coin = lower value
of each coin).  (okay, I'll stop with the "tm"s now :)

According to these books, an average shopkeep took in 20-30 gp per day, about
40gp on a good day. This comes out to about $1000/day for a small retail
store, which is about right.   

What bothers me is the fact that the rulebooks (both 1st & 2nd Ed, I believe)
insist that the average urban laborer takes home 1gp per month. Think about
it. 1gp to feed himself, his family, buy life's essentials, and pay taxes.
Could you live like this for 20 bucks a month?

I agree with the idea that a gp or sp standard should be based around the
equivalent buying power of $20, but as was stated earlier the incomes of
various workers need to be reconsidered.

-- 
    ___  ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 / /__   + Dwaine Gonyier         + "Intelligence is just an  +
/____/   + dcgonyie@eos.ncsu.edu  +  excuse for human error." +
         ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Organization: Junior, Math/Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 20:02:39 -0500 
From: "Joseph E. Beck" <jb8n+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: how to imprison a psionicist ?
	<833@blue.cis.pitt.edu>


>      If metal close up interferes, can you stop psi at a distance by
>surrounding yourself with metal?
No.  Surrounding yourself with metal is not the same as the psi
wearing a helmet.  If it were the same, you could could drown all of
the psionics by putting people in metal rooms (it's tough to swim
wearing a metal helmet!)  

> If you wear a metal helm, can you block telepathy? 
No.  Again, if this were the same as the psi wearing a helmet all of
the psionics would drown upon entering water...

>Can a psi escape from a metal room? 
Yes.  Rooms are not treated as helmets for combat purposes.  

>Will an aluminum foil coating inside a hat do?
Only if your DM treats this as a helmet for combat purposes.

> How thick does the metal have to be? 
at least .1 inches, but preferably the thickness of a standard helmet.

>What KIND of metal?
> Will gold work? 
Yes.  Helmets can be made of gold (see CF I think)

>Lead? Titanium? Mithril? Iron?
Yes.  Yes.  Yes.  Yes.

What's wrong?  I don't see any consistency problems :-)

You did ask.

	joe
From: adair@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Jonathan Edward Adair)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Forging a Glass Sword
Date: 14 Dec 1992 16:08:38 GMT
Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
NNTP-Posting-Host: hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu

In article <92346.155538CC100PG@GITVM1.GATECH.EDU> Paul Goodwin <CC100PG@GITVM1.GATECH.EDU> writes:
>In article <1gahhtINNpel@life.ai.mit.edu>, adair@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Jonathan
>Edward Adair) says:
>>
>>But if it's a decent DM (please send him my way--please!) the sword
>>should be relatively inexpensive and you should be able to hang
>>onto it somewhere for a while.  The problem is whether you ever
>>find the spell.  Only the most generous DM would plop the spell
>>out there for you to find just because you wanted it.
>
>Relatively inexpensive?  Compared to what?  Remember, you're dealing with
>a time period where glass was so expensive that virtually no-one put it in
>something as mundane as a window, much less make a specialty item like a
>sword.
>
>If you can even find a competent glassmith, it'd cost a fortune to get
>that made.
>

Maybe my "relatively inexpensive" isn't a good term.  I meant
that the sword should be well within the price range of a mage 
who has made it high enough (16th) to cast "Glassteel."  

Well, I'd think that a decent glass sword would not be that much more
expensive than a good metal one, maybe 100x as much.  I'd think that
any world (granted, the original poster plays in a DarkSun game) that
has the capacity for magic and alchemy like the "stock" AD&D style
worlds seem to would have at least several hundred people on it capable
of this kind of work.  Spells such as "Read Magic" require similar
fabrication, and there are likely hundreds, if not thousands of 
mages and apprentices around.  

Looking in the 2nd Ed. Player's Handbook shows a "glass bottle" 
for 10 gp.  I would think any world capable of producing a glass
bottle as cheaply as 10 gp could produce a glass sword for under
1,000 gp.  

Of course, this assumes a "stock" world with a Greyhawk or 
Forgotten Realms flavor.  Darksun is a different matter, though,
I bet.  If magic is as rare as I think it is, and there are limited
weapons, etc., it might be really hard to find things like glass
rods, bottles, etc., much less a competent glass-maker.

If this is the case, but the mage has access to the spell,
"Glassteel," I'd just ask the DM: "Why did someone spend
all that time and money to research a spell that they had
no use for?  Or even the material components for?  How did
they get it to work without glass?"

--
Jonathan E. Adair  -  Programmer at Large                          /\
adair@gnu.ai.mit.edu             <-  Best choice                  /<>\
adair@eggo.csee.usf.edu          <-  Almost as good              /    \
adair@cfrrisc1.cfr.usf.edu       <-  Works for now              /______\
adair@psycho.fidonet.org         <-  Read yearly             The Illuminati
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: msawyer@mael.soest.hawaii.edu (Michael Sawyer)
Subject: Re: Fighter/Priest of God of War | was: Re: Clerics vs. Specialty Priests?
Organization: School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 07:30:05 GMT

In article <7909@news.duke.edu> dks@acpub.duke.edu writes:
>
 [...]
>	I haven't read the Comp Priest HB (looked thru, yes, but didn't
>deem it worth buying) -- am I getting this right? Specialty priests of
>War Gods may specialize?

Actually _have_to_ specialize.

>	Let's see:  specialty priest gets formerly-only-fighter bonus,
>can use the same armor, gets spells too.  [Minor] Drawbacks:  THACO lags
>behind by 1/3 lvls, and the priest gets fewer WP's.  Yet the priest
>advances faster.
>	BTW, how many spheres does the CPHB say the priest gets?  I myself
>would say about three -- in order to keep all of the world's fighters from
>signing on with the church!
>						-Abdiel

The spheres of Priests of war are: Combat, Healing (Note that "all" is
NOT listed!  Whether this is an error or not, I have never been able
to decide; it is in every other I have looked at) with minor access to
Necromantic and Protection.  Also requires that you spend 1 NWP slot
on blind-fighting (not that this is a bad idea anyway), and the
specialization must be from a select list (which contains most of what
you would want to use anyway).  There are also one or two "special"
abilities which may seem unbalancing, but in actual play can sometimes
get the priest into more trouble than help him.  I have played a
fighter/priest of war and don't think it was at all unbalancing.
(Actually, it may have been more unbalancing had I just played a
priest of war; the advancement would have been MUCH faster; perhaps
require priests of war to multiclass fighter?)
-- 
Michael Sawyer		msawyer@mael.soest.hawaii.edu
University of Hawaii Physical Oceanography/Satellite Remote Sensing
From: gupw@uniwa.uwa.edu.au (Paul Wagland)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: invisibility
Date: 16 Dec 1992 00:15:06 +0800
Organization: The University of Western Australia
NNTP-Posting-Host: uniwa.uwa.edu.au

"Joseph E. Beck" <jb8n+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>We tend to run invisibility as more of an alteration spell, it
>actually bends light rays.  So it works against undead, you can see
>yourself, friends can't see you, and you can't disbelieve it, the
>person actually *is* invisibile.   Mindless zombie hordes chanting, "but
>the PHB 2nd edition says on page xxx", please don't respond to this.
>I *know* what the rules say.

We tend to use the same system in our game with one exception, undead
can still 'see' you, as in our game the undead go after life forces, not
sight.  Anyone seen a skeleton with eyes?  This is where the first lvl
inv.to undead priest spell comes in useful.....  Of course the high
level creatures which actually have a chance to see you do so because
they might notice a slight shimmer, or oddity in the light...though not
all that often unless they are supra-genius :)

Paul
-- 
Paul Wagland            | These opinions are mine and no-one elses
gupw@uniwa.uwa.edu.au   | Bingy Bingy Bingy Frogs Go round and round
------------------------+     -- Another silly quote from me  :-)
From: seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: how to imprison a psionicist ?
Date: 17 Dec 92 18:16:19 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
Originator: seawasp@unixd3.cis.pitt.edu

In article <78493@hydra.gatech.EDU> ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge A. Diaz) writes:
>your players have no reason to complain.  There's nothing worse than a
>DM who rules something one way today, and then another way next week, though.
>Actually, there's one thing worse:  A DM who rules *against* you on a specific
>call, and then a week later, changes his ruling on that same thing:  for
>*another* player. :-)

	I agree completely.  Or, and this is my pet peeve, a GM who makes a
ruling, and then refuses to recognize the ramifications of the ruling.
For example, ruling that mages can't wear metal armor because metal 
interferes with magic, and then refusing to acknowledge the defensive
advantage that my armored fighter must enjoy against mystic attack...


					Sea Wasp
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee)
Subject: Re: Level limits
Keywords: four-way balance
Organization: Johns Hopkins University CS Dept.
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 03:42:35 GMT

In article <1gtoocINN5g5@morrow.stanford.edu> markf@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Mark Fenoglio) writes:
>Two to four generations of elves means 50 or so human generations.  Right
>away, over the course of only three elven generations, there are 
>multitudes of humans.  *Most* are 0-level, yes, and have a distinct
>disadvantage against the "basic" elven person with his/her bonuses.
>However, even with only a tiny percentage of humans becoming of the type
>which advance, they will vastly outnumber their elven counterparts.

The length of time between generations depends on the length of time from birth
to maturity, not the total lifespan length.

If elves take longer to become reproductively mature, then elves do indeed
reproduce more slowly than people, but that's not implicit in the existence
of a long elven lifespan.
--
"the bogosity in a field equals the bogosity imported from related areas, plus
the bogosity generated internally, minus the bogosity expelled or otherwise
disposed of."  -- K. Eric Drexler

Ken Arromdee (arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu, arromdee@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: brunborg@alkymi.unit.no (]dne Brunborg)
Subject: Re: How many gp's = 1 pound?
Organization: Norwegian Institute of Technology
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 14:50:06 GMT

In article <19308.2b29f98b@ecs.umass.edu>, daly@ecs.umass.edu (Bryon Daly, ECE dept, UMass, Amherst) writes:
> Well, like the title said, how many gold pieces are there to the pound?
> I know in the original rules, it was 10 gp's/lb.  But then in my newly
> acquired 2nd ed. DM's guide, it clearly states on p. 134 that all coins
> weigh 50 to the pound (a better number IMHO).  OK, fine, but then the Psionics
> Handbook totally contradicts this in the Molecular Rearrangement science:
> 
> It states that the psionicist can affect 1 ounce/hour.  Then it states that
> converting 10 copper pieces to 10 gold pieces would take 16 hours, which
> clearly assumes the 10gp/lb weight.  If it used the 50gp/lb weight, it would
> be more like 3.5 hours.  (The author also seems to assume that 10 copper 
> pieces equals 1 gold piece...so I think he's all screwed up).
> 
> So which is it?  10gp/lb or 50gp/lb?  My question isn't so much about what's
> "official", but which version is used in the books for spells, etc.  i.e.:
> if a spell or psionic power states that it affects x gp's weight of 
> material/level or something, which figure are they using?
> 
> -Bryon

Only to add to the confusion, I think I read someplace that it's 20 gp/lb. Sorry
I don't remember, but it might be in UA (MH).


 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 +                            +                                               +
 + ++brunborg@alkymi.unit.no+ +  "Yeah, alright! I've got something to say:   +
 +                            +   It's better to burn out, than fade away!"   +
 + ++brunborg@solan.unit.no++ +                                               +
 +                            + (Def Leppard: "Rock of Ages", Pyromania 1983) +
 +     - Aadne Brunborg -     +                                               +
 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: cmeadows@nyx.cs.du.edu (Chris Meadows)
Subject: Re: AD&D Class Survey - FINAL STAND!!
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 92 02:24:15 GMT


I always kinda thought that the best character class to play would
be an elderly halfling, because "old hobbits are hard to break..."
:-)

--
Chris Meadows  | Editor of Robotech: The Misfold; author of other               
CHM173S@SMSVMA | Robotech/Rifts stories; DEFENDER of PALLADIUM BOOKS!!!         
CHM173S@VMA.SMSU.EDU   | NOTE: I will be on vacation 12/17 to 1/10; if          
CMEADOWS@NYX.CS.DU.EDU | important, please email; posts tend to expire.