HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jalkanen@lesti.hut.fi (Janne P R Jalkanen)
Subject: Re: shadowrun and Death.
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: 30 Sep 92 14:02:42


>   I have only played SR on and off.  I don't know if this is covered in 2nd  
>   edition rules, but the game system seems to be bad when it comes to dieing
>   (Yes the whole 1st edition combat had problems...)  It looks like a mage,  
>   with a treat deadly can save any char. after any hit.  One could get torn  
>   apart by a heavy MG and still be treatable.  Am I missing something or is  
>   this a game design flaw?
>   Brehob

Yes, it is a game design flaw. Within the Shadowrun system it is impossible
to kill anyone with a single blow so that he will not be resurrected again.
This is quite unrealistic since you can take a direct hit from a ballistic
missile and still be healed by a mage, since all you got was a Deadly 
Wound. SR II partly covers this, because according to it's rules, you can
take damage 10 boxes + your Body attribute. Although, since the maximum
damage still possible with one blow is a Deadly Wound, you still cannot
be killed permanently w/ one blow. 

This is why a made overkill rules:

Whenever you take a Deadly wound, you must make a Body Roll with a Target
number of 1/2 Power level of the attack. 1 success means that you survived,
but lost an organ/limb/eye/whatever and 2 successes means that you survived
the hit. 0 successes means that you are _dead_ with no hope of a mage 
or anyone saving you. Survival means here that you can be healed with a spell
or by first aid.

Add the overkill (damage over 10 boxes) to the target number.

Example:

	Picker is hit with an assault rifle and he gets a Serious Wound
	(6 boxes). Then he is hit again, and he must resist a 8M2 wound. He
	fails and takes a D wound (10 boxes) + 2 boxes of Overkill.
	Now he must make a Body roll with a target of 6 ( 8/2 + 2) or die.

This may be a little hard on the characters, so you may use Power/3 or
something similar as a target. Now the players may start to be a little
more careful when the opponent carries an assault gun...
--
Janne Jalkanen           !
jalkanen@vipunen.hut.fi  !        Life is about making the right moves.
-'Good Die!'             !
From: cm182s182@pdrome.UUCP (Clayton Miner)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Character Development
Date: 29 Sep 92 11:00:14 GMT
Organization: The PowerDrome BBS [(716)825-3614 Excelsior]
X-BBS-Software: EXCELSIOR! v0.960

For various reasons, I have been off the NET for awhile (about a week) and do 
not know how much of this discussion I have missed, so if I repeat anything 
please bear with me.  As much as I enjoy refereeing, and as much as my players 
seem o enjoy having me referee for them, the part of the game I hate the most 
is awarding experience points.  To me, no matter how I look at it, it always 
seems arbitrary and I am never sure that I am awarding the right number of 
points for the right reasons.  I am looking for way around this problem and 
any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.  BTW, at this point in time we 
are still playing Star Wars, but an expedition into a slightly modified Dream 
Park is begining to become a possibility (I like the system for Dream Park, I 
just don't like the idea that the GameMAster should be the mortal enemy of the 
players and that I should be trying to create and run a stable of NPC 
referees...I am messed up enough, thank you...)
 
Skeksis
From: maxxon@swob.nullnet.fi (Mikko Kurki-Suonio)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: game vs reality simulation
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 92 22:39:51 EDZ
Distribution: world
Organization: Sweet Oblivion

mmadsen@bonnie.ics.uci.edu (Matt Madsen) writes:

> While we're on the subject of modeling reality (particularly weapon
> damage), does anyone know any good sources on _real_ trauma caused
> by bullets, knives, baseball bats, etc.

Try Evan Marshall's Handgun Stopping Power

Marshall has collected data from several hundred (1500?) actual police
shootings and probably is the best source on this controversial issue.

> Also, what would be a good newsgroup to ask about this.

Try rec.guns




--------
maxxon@swob.nullnet.fi (Mikko Kurki-Suonio)
Sweet Oblivion (+358 0 8092678, V.32bis 8N1) Official SRP Headquarters


Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: mfterman@dae.Princeton.EDU (Mutant for Hire)
Subject: Character Development in Point Systems
Reply-To: mfterman@phoenix.princeton.edu (Mutant for Hire)
Organization: Mutant for Hire, Inc.
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 20:48:10 GMT

This debate came up a long time ago, so I'll put down the conclusions
that I had last time. Point balance is all fine and well when a
character is being created, but after the character has been created,
point balance should be tossed out the window. Character development
after that should be set by what happens in the game, irregardless of
points.

As an example, reputations, contacts, allies and enemies in GURPS and
Hero both cost and give points. These features often change after a
gaming session by actions of the characters. Requiring points spent
for new allies and contacts earned through roleplaying is as silly as
giving out excess points for new enemies. (granted, disadvantages
earned in roleplay are often recommended not to have any balancing
points in the books, but this argues my point)

A character uses lots of swordplay will probably get somewhat better
with a sword. A character who uses a lot of DEX skills will probably
be a bit more agile and coordinated over time. Likewise for mental
skills. If you really want to be unpleasant to characters, make sure
that unused skills start to fade over time. Exercising strength will
make one stronger. In superhero systems you can do the same for power.

As for rewarding players at the end of a session. Many systems have
karma points or hero points or whatever, that can be spent to aid die
rolls or in some cases to get new skills out of the blue. (though I'd
prefer to see roleplay to justify getting the new skill)

The thing about this concept is that it can be immediately applied to
any game where points are normally handed out as a reward. Instead of
generic points being handed out commonly, hand out specific points for
specific effects. (negative points can be handed out for new enemies
and other new problems, you win some you lose some...) and
occasionally hand out generic points as a reward for some really
special behavior.
-- 
    Martin Terman, Mutant for Hire, Mad Scientist, Priest of Shub-Internet
    Disclaimer: Nobody else takes me seriously, why should you be the first?
mfterman@phoenix.princeton.edu mfterman@pucc.bitnet terman@pupgga.princeton.edu
"Sig quotes are like bumper stickers, only without the same sense of relevance"
From: cm182s182@pdrome.UUCP (Clayton Miner)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Character Development
Date: 5 Oct 92 11:30:04 GMT
Organization: The PowerDrome BBS [(716)825-3614 Excelsior]
X-BBS-Software: EXCELSIOR! v0.960

I should have specified things just a little more...the diusruptive behaviour 
I was refering to was a player 'cooking stats' through 'creative experience 
manipulation' to 'enhance their character'.....
 
Other than that, the player was a pest and enjoyed playing anti-social 
criminals....
 
Skeksis
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy,rec.games.frp
From: wilder@mik.uky.edu (jeff wilder)
Subject: Re: shadowrun and Death.
    <JALKANEN.92Sep30140242@lesti.hut.fi> <BvEB4v.CI0@acsu.buffalo.edu> 
    <JALKANEN.92Sep30184343@lesti.hut.fi>
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 18:38:54 GMT

Keep in mind:  if a 6 BODY character has taken a serious wound, and takes
another *deadly* wound, that character is dead, dead, dead, regardless of
"overflow."

The Troll in my game *died* from one Uzi III burst.  Not a called shot.
No special ammo.  He had 11 BODY and a lined coat.  Now he's dead.  SRII
is *deadly*.

--
==============================================================================
| Jeff W  uk06666@ukpr.uky.edu | Meddle not in the affairs of cats, for they |
| Wilder  & wilder@mik.uky.edu | are subtle, and will piss on your cyberdeck.|
==============================================================================
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
From: a481@mindlink.bc.ca (J.D. Frazer)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: game vs reality simulation
Date: 6 Oct 92 01:30:15 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

> maxxon@swob.nullnet.fi writes:
>
> CX6L000 <CX6L@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA> writes:
>
> > >If a projectile strikes bone, it will generally shatter everything
> around
> > >it, sending sharp pieces of your own skeletal structure throughout your
> > >chest cavity.

Um, wrong poster. I wrote that.

> maxxon@swob continues:
> Depends very much on the projectile. High powered rifle rounds do this
> almost regularly, lower powered pistol rounds hmmm...

Agreed. Handgun rounds like the .45ACP *can* do some pretty destructive
damage to bone material. The .38hp probably won't.

> Pistol rounds are not designed to work against bones (this is true).
> Hitting a bone WILL lessen chances of mortal wound and incapacitation.

This is not *entirely* true. The .45 for example.

I agree that hitting bone with low energy rounds will lessen chances of
outright debilitation, but even medium energy rounds like the 5.56mm will
mess up a sternum.

> A pistol round is going to have a permanent cavity of around 10mm diameter
> - not that much. Yes, it's not nice, yes you get internal bleeding,
> punctured lungs and such (that's why it does damage) but NO, it's not
> vitals as in survival or instant incapacitation.

Sure, I agree. I don't think I ever said otherwise.

> > Well, that rings true. Perhaps that's the real point.
> > I can see how a raking slash, or a punch, or even a
> > narrow rapier thrust could bite into the chest area
> > and miss all that is vital. I *cannot*, frankly, see
> > how a bullet (except *maybe* a high-velocity armour-
> > piercer) could possible hit the "Torso" target in
> > GURPS without hitting the "Vitals"!
>
>
> Unfortunately, you are wrong. A bullet that does not expand, can very
> well miss everything important enough to put someone permanently down
> (vitals).

Bryce Koike wrote that. Having a problem with attributions today? :)

> There are several cases and debates on "bullet placement", but it all
> boils down to this - the chest is not just the chest. Several different
> organs lie underneath and that's where it really counts.

Exactly!

--
J.D. Frazer, a481@mindlink.bc.ca, (Vancouver, B.C., Canada)
-----------------------------------------------------------
*BRRRRAPPAPPAPPAPPAPPAPPAPPAPP!*
"MEIN LEBEN!" <thud>
"You shoulda thought about that when you signed up, buddy." - Valaria

From: r_ellison@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Bob Ellison)
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1992 18:22:08 GMT
Subject: Re: Sexist (?) Language in Rules (was Re: Q: Looking for "women's" rpg.)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy

> >Just for the record:  TORG (West End Games's innovative, "state of the
> >art"(?) role-playing game) uses "she" virtually without exception as
> >the "generic" pronoun.  I found it refreshing!
> 
>   Did they include the obligatory "For ease of readability we have decided
> to use this one, but that shall be interpreted as meaning either"?

When initially reading the TORG rules I found the use of feminine pronouns
as neuter to be terribly distracting; it was a strange construction to my
eye, and prevented me from efficiently scanning the text.

It has gotten easier with practice (yep, I own about all of TORG :-).

I do find the use of feminine examples very refreshing, especially in
character archetypes that have been traditionally masculine.  Looking at
their female Indiana Jones archetype stimulates new thinking and ideas on
character development and stereotypes.

Bob Ellison, HP Fort Collins
From: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Question about Wizards of the Coast and The Primal Order
Date: 29 Sep 92 19:32:46 GMT
Reply-To: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Distribution: usa
Organization: Department of Chemistry, UCLA

In article <1992Sep28.211721.18544@muddcs.claremont.edu>, wcarone@jarthur.claremont.edu (Bill Carone) writes:
>
>  I have read much about The Primal Order on various newsgroups
>and mailing lists, and have so far been impressed. However, I am
>unable to find a copy. Could someone get me an address where I
>could order it? Thanks in advance for your help.
>
>Bill.

Hmm... I see you're out in Claremont.  If you happen to find yourself in West
Los Angeles anytime soon, I've seen it at Games of Westwood, which is at the
corner of Westwood and LeConte just across the street from UCLA.  As for
ordering it, I don't know...

[disclaimer:  I have no connection with Games of Westwood other than as a VERY
satisfied customer]


-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: cm182s182@pdrome.UUCP (Clayton Miner)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Theatrical License
Date: 29 Sep 92 11:16:19 GMT
Organization: The PowerDrome BBS [(716)825-3614 Excelsior]
X-BBS-Software: EXCELSIOR! v0.960

A comment was made regarding theatrical license getting in the way of gaming.  
I can see where this happens (look at Star Wars for crying out loud...tailor 
made to allow theatrical license get in the way of things).  When refereeing I 
allow theatrical license to add a little dramatic spice from time to time; the 
player adopts a dramatic pose at a heroic moment (and usually gets shot at a 
lot for being a dummy and standing up in a fire fight), small but useful 
coincidences happen at the right moments, the occasional off camera scene is 
played out if the scene is appropriate but will really not affect the game 
that much (the players are in the Imperial cell and instead of the jailer 
telling them that Vader is coming to deliver them to the Emperor personally, 
the scen cuts to Vader on the holo-link telling the base commander what time 
his ship will be arriving in system), but I try not to allow theatrical 
license to impede the flow of the game or overturn otherwise negative results. 
 From my experience a little theatrical license helps a game but ust be 
handled as the referee seems fit and that it takes practise and experience to 
use well.
 
Skeksis
From: proberts@castle.ed.ac.uk (P Roberts)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: State of the art
Date: 29 Sep 92 11:44:43 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

No no no no no.

  Thought I'd disagree with whoever it was that slated the Jorune
system.  I think it's one of the best systems that I've come across.
This is the old edition I'm talking about as I haven't played the
new one yet.  Once you get the hang of it it is nice and easy to use.
The skill system is dead simple to use and very easy to graft new 
skills onto if they are needed.  The combat is fairly lethal, which
is one of the better ways of dissuading players from hitting everything
they come across, and feels right.  It is also simple to resolve once
you know your way around.  The disadvantage is the length of time that
big fights take but if you get into too many big fights then you're
probably doing something wrong.  (Oh,yeah ... "big" here means with a
large number of combatants.)
  The weakness in the system is the handling of dyshas which always
felt slightly botched to me.  They had a lovely background for it but
then they seemed to run out of time and just chucked a few dyshas on
top of it haphazardly.  The new edition looks to have sorted out that
problem (i.e. the dyshas build on logically from the background and
a lot of intervening/connecting stuff has been added).  I'm trying
to decide whether to graft the new dysha system onto the old mechanics
or whether to use the new system in its entirety.
  Oh, by the way, for those who don't know Jorune, dyshas are the
spells.
           Paul.
From: scst74@csc.liv.ac.uk (Mr. D.W.F. Liu)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Anti-RPG programme
Date: 5 Oct 92 15:49:22 GMT
Organization: Computer Science, Liverpool University

Hi there,
	I've been away for 3 months so I'd like to catch up on some news.  A month or so before my summer holidays the rec.games.frp was abuzz over a US programme which blamed roleplaying for the death of this person (can't remember the title of the programme though, think it was FATAL something or other, not sure though) and the usual negative stuff.
	What I want to know is whether anything ever came out of the debate cos a lot of  people (as far as I could tell) sent letters to the TV station to complain.
	Anyone remember?

--
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+                        From The Dude called Denby.                       +
+          In an infinite universe there are infinite possibilities        +
+                 scst74@uk.ac.liverpool.compsci is just one.              +
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
From: z_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: game vs reality simulation
Date: 5 Oct 92 00:20:45 CST
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

In article <1992Oct4.022324.4830@zia.aoc.nrao.edu>, jogle@zia.aoc.nrao.edu (Jim Ogle (Ks. Jim)) writes:
> In article <mumble> bkoike@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Bryce Koike) writes:
>>In article <grumble> a481@mindlink.bc.ca (J.D. Frazer) writes:
>>	A brain shot in GURPS is a -7 to hit.  Unless you're sure of
>>yourself, you're never going to make that shot.  But if you're a
>>sniper and you're sitting on a building, why not?  You've got your
>>full ACC bonus and +3 from aiming...if that's not good enough, then
>>nothing is.
> 
> But a sniper shot is not the same thing as being in combat with
> someone.  A sniper has the time to aim for vital locations.

	OTOH, a character with Guns(Pistol)-18 has a pretty good chance at it
(one character in my GURPS Shadowrun campaign likes to do this at close range
(5-10 yards) with his Colt .45 Automatic; very messy...).

>>	I can think of other situations where this is appropriate.
>>Melee combat when a guy is decked out in plate mail but without a
>>helmet, etc...
> 
> Situations like that do make aiming more worthwhile, especially if it
> is your only chance of taking the guy down.

	In the above mentioned campaign, head shots (not just brain ones) are
common because of the armor protection available.

>>	I mean, people have been shot in the head with .22 bullets
>>and have lived.  People have stepped on the supposedly-lethal
>>landmines (or so they are in some RPG's) and have lived...not quite
>>the same way, but they lived...
> 
> But that is not the norm for those situations - most people who step
> on landmines or get shot in the head (even by small caliber handguns)
> are not going to live.  Depending on the game system in question
> though, this may not be the case of course.
> 
>>>I have no idea who wrote those combat rules, but they seem to need a lesson
>>>in projectile trauma themselves. Either that, or it's your interpretation
>>>that needs to be re-examined.

	The only problem with this is that firearms tend to vary a great deal
with their effects. In one study, a veteran police officer said he's seen
people get hit by a .25 pistol round in a non-vital place drop dead, while
he's seen others get hit in the torso by a .44 magnum and not stop (and no, the
target wasn't on PCP).

	While you can make some general conclusions (a .44 magnum will hurt
someone more than a .25 will), its hard to get very specific, since there are a
*lot* of variables. Most games have to try to do the best they can and end up
with something that is reasonably accurate, but is playable (the Aftermath
system for handling a bullet may or may not be accurate, but it is so slow and
cumbersome [2-page flowchart, I think] that it is pretty much worthless, for
example).


Brandon Cope

Xref: sparky rec.games.frp.advocacy:2645 rec.games.frp.misc:6508
From: sl9b4@cc.usu.edu (Deep Six)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy,rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: GURPS High Tech, 2nd Ed.
Date: 5 Oct 92 01:08:25 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

In article <1992Oct3.024159.27206@oz.plymouth.edu>,(Steffan O'Sullivan) writes:

> I see the new High Tech, 2nd Ed. addresses some of the problems people
> have been having with gunfire and GURPS.  While not as clean a mechanic
> as "Coolness under Fire," it's a good start.  Chapter One has a section
> on "Flinch, Buck Fever and Bullet Shyness" that makes a lot of sense,
> but still doesn't quite bring gun battles into realistic realms.

> I don't play genres with gunfire, myself, beyond Black Powder weapons.
> Anyone who plays this stuff try these rules?  Opinions?

That's all I really play, and I'm looking forward to seeing the new
High Tech. Just a question, it sounds like Flinch, etc.. are all disads.
Is that how they worked it in? Or would everyone experience those 
problems? I dunno if I'd like it if everyone who failed a Will roll
experienced those effects. I guess I'll hammer it out when I get the 
book, though. 

About Will being separated from IQ -- is that really necessary? I used 
to think the two were too closely associated, until I heard someone
suggest (was it here on the net?) that Will rolls be based on ST, IQ
or HT, depending on the situation. Base it on HT if the character
is starving and he's being bribed with food. Base it on IQ if the 
character is being offered a lucrative but shady deal. In some cases,
the same Will roll would be based on different attributes depending on
the character. If a character is Lecherous, then base the Will roll on
HT to avoid seduction. For a character with normal sexual appitites, base
the same roll on IQ. I've used and played it a few times, and it seems
really sensible. Just find the stat that matches the situation and use
it for Will. GM's call.

Okay,
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Chadd VanZanten SL9B4@CC.USU.EDU + ``I'm a walking nightmare, an arsenal of 
doom. I kill conversation as I walk into a room.'' --Police, Demolition Man
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: RM: Chaotic Lord
From: george@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz (George Ma)
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 06:45:38 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland, New Zealand.

Regarding results of chaotic critical changes, I always thought that
the changes should be limited to organic ones. It seems a fair bit too
powerful to allow changes into arbitrary states of matter, don't yyou
think? 


Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy