HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: blum@medici.ils.nwu.edu (Dan Blum)
Subject: Re: Board game design
Reply-To: blum@ils.nwu.edu
Organization: The Institute for the Learning Sciences
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 01:06:45 GMT

About religion in board games - have you looked at Empires of the
Middle Ages?  I haven't seen it myself, but it's supposed to be very
good, and I believe that it does include religion (it would have to,
wouldn't it?).  A Mighty Fortress also includes religious aspects, but
sounds like a bit of a mess (although I haven't seen it either).


--
_____________________________________________________________________
Dan Blum           Institute for the Learning Sciences   Room 327
blum@ils.nwu.edu   1890 Maple Ave., Evanston, IL 60201   708-467-2306

 He thought he saw an Argument
 that proved he was the Pope;
 he looked again and found it was
 a Bar of Mottled Soap.
"A fact so dread,"
 he faintly said,
"extinguishes all hope!"
____________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: ketil@ii.uib.no (Ketil M. Malde)
Subject: Re: Net.rpg: Skills
Followup-To: rec.games.design
Reply-To: ketil@ii.uib.no
Organization: student of numerical analysis at the University of Bergen, Norway
Date: 17 Nov 92 15:26:58

>>>>> On 16 Nov 92 18:51:16 GMT, (Spike) said:

	Spike> 17" paper! Instead, how about setting it up so that
	Spike> characteristics are the defaults rolled for skills.
	Spike> Below characteristics are "broad" skills (Comp Sci,
	Spike> Thief, Magic, Guns). Below these are sub-skills:
	Spike> Programming, Debugging, Hacking; Pickpocket,
	Spike> Lockpicking, Stealth and so on. This gives the players
	Spike> a simple way to fine-tune the level of detail they want
	Spike> in the game.

I second this!  Yes!
And if a character has a 'broad' skill but not the applicable 'narrow'
skill, use the 'broad' skill at a disadvantage.

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

I think perhaps skills should be less affected by stats (or actually
attributes), how well you can perform a task depends much more on your
skill than on physical attributes.  (yes I know this is a wee bit
general, and all generalizations are dangerous :-)




--
 = Ketil Malde                     In real life:  ketil@ii.uib.no =
 = Nuke the whales!                    Honk if you love unicorns! =
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: magnus@bark-fddi.ii.uib.no (Magnus Alvestad)
Subject: Re: RFD rec.games.netrpg
Reply-To: magnus@ii.uib.no
Organization: UVBS -> SFK/T-DSA / SOPS - HOS / RNoN
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 02:28:46 GMT

I just want to clarify.

If net.rpg gets as far as I think it will, we will need another
newsgroup sooner or later anyway. Since people have already started
complaining about the volume, I think a move would be a good idea. 

Two reasons; first I don't want to read the 'other' messages. I just
don't have time for that now. If we had our own group, that wouldn't
be a problem. Second - I don't think those that don't want to read
about net.rpg should have to, and I'm afraid the sheer net.rpg volume
may stop others from posting here about other themes.

We'll see what happens in news.groups now.

Of course we'll keep it up here in the meantime. :-) I'll be posting a
new faq in a day or two. There are a few changes, and I've cleaned up
the old text so as to remove ideas we have thrown overboard.

-Magnus
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: fks1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Scaramouche)
Subject: Re: net.rpg: Character Stats [based on skills]
Reply-To: fks1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 18:08:26 GMT

In article <1992Nov19.194427.1@kean.ucs.mun.ca> jbridson@kean.ucs.mun.ca writes:
>In article <1992Nov19.085038.12265@midway.uchicago.edu>, fks1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Scaramouche) writes:
>> In article <1992Nov18.221344.3370@alf.uib.no> magnus@ii.uib.no writes:
>>>
>>>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.
>> 
>> This sounds pretty interesting (certainly original, i think) but if
>> you work this backwards by having a character pick skills which then
>> effect the related stats, i don't think you model life to well.  I 
>> mean that means that the more skill you have the more you are better
>> at it.  i.e.  say Joe takes fencing.  If he takes it at a low level
>> he has a low Agility (or whatever), but if he takes it high he has
>> a high agility.  This doesn't make too much sense.  Why can't Joe
>> have a high AGI but be a poor fencer?  
>
>
>As for you statement that Joe shoudl be able to have low fencing, but high 
>Agility, it's perfectly easy to do this with this method of character 
>generation.  Easier than a lot of other systems, I might add.  A stat is a 
>representaion of a talent, or general level of ability in one direction.  
>If you're not good at anything involving this talent, obviously your 
>general level of ability won't be high.  In Joe's case, he gets a low 
>Fencing skill, but high in other Agility skills (eg. throwing, catching, 
>dodging, running, jumping...).  No-one can have high Agility, but be lousy 
>at all agility-related actions.  This high agility must be manifested 
>somewhere.
>

i don't think that it has to be a result of skills.  dexterity is something
genetic (i think) and as such is fully independent of practice.
People can be born dextrous (or intelligent, or charismatic, etc) but
never really get a chance to express it.  Nevertheless, these naturally
endowed people will have an easier time picking up skills, or rather 
putting them into practice.  i.e. Joe Quick takes up fencing, and after
only 1 month can equal Timmy the Clumsy who has been taking it for
1 year.  

>
>>>-Magnus
>>>
>>>PS Good work! DS
>> 
>> -- 
>
>Robert Bridson (using the account of jbridson)


-- 
>>>-----------------------------------------------------------------------<<<
"It is human nature, I suppose to be futile and ridiculous"
"If the windmill should prove to formidable, I may see what can be done
           with the wind."            -Scaramouche (fks1@midway.uchicago.edu)
From: bjbisset@eos.ncsu.edu (BILLY JOE BISSETTE)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: net.rpg.slug
Date: 22 Nov 92 04:37:02 GMT
Reply-To: bjbisset@eos.ncsu.edu (BILLY JOE BISSETTE)
Organization: Raise A Great Old One Foundation
Originator: bjbisset@c00120-100lez.eos.ncsu.edu


  I've been reading both this thread and the net.rpg thread, but haven't really
commented on either yet, until now...
  Steffan, I'm glad that you seem to be simplifying the rules to your freeform
system, for a little while they were beginning to get too complex.  But about
your action resolution, something doesn't seem right about picking the lesser
of the two values when the numbers on the dice differ by more than one... Is
this because you don't want the varience of the result to be large(since this
system allows a maximum modification of 4 I think)?  Well, actually, it seems
like a good idea when I think about it, better than something like: the
difference - 1 is the change...
  Also, I must say that I am glad cards are not being mentioned now.  That
system would have too many problems...

  Well, continue the good work, if I can think of anything, I'll contribute. 8)

PS: Bernie Hsiung, you seem to be over analyzing everything, step back and take
a break, this isn't the net.rpg thread...

-- 
----------bill the insane cultist, bjbisset@eos.ncsu.edu
Please make a donation to the "Raise a Great Old One" Foundation.
Everyone chant with me:  Ph-nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!
                         Ph-nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: magnus@bark-fddi.ii.uib.no (Magnus Alvestad)
Subject: Re: Net.rpg: Lifepath
Reply-To: magnus@ii.uib.no
Organization: UVBS -> SFK/T-DSA / SOPS - HOS / RNoN
	<BxxCr1.2F7@knot.ccs.queensu.ca>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 00:08:13 GMT

>>>>> On Wed, 18 Nov 1992 18:30:37 GMT, dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca (David
>>>>> Lamb) said:

	David> A "life path element" (LPE) is a collection of
	David> character-sheet-modification possibilities including -

I think the way to go is to define some such LPEs in each genre, and
then let the GM use them and/or create his own. If one player wants to
become a paladin, he goes through a Paladin LPE. If there is one. If
there isn't, the GM adds one to his LPE collection (and posts it on
the net.. :-) 

I think the 'format' you sketched is very good, it makes for a
loosely-knit, easy to use, easy to expand system. Very much for
creativity in the process. It will also help the player and the GM
work together to create the character.

Brilliant!

-Magnus
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: magnus@bark-fddi.ii.uib.no (Magnus Alvestad)
Subject: Re: Net.rpg: Attributes
Followup-To: rec.games.design
Reply-To: magnus@ii.uib.no
Organization: UVBS -> SFK/T-DSA / SOPS - HOS / RNoN
	<1992Nov18.225507.4711@alf.uib.no>
	<1992Nov19.135924.1@wharton.upenn.edu>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 00:27:38 GMT

>>>>> On 19 Nov 92 18:59:24 GMT, millerl@wharton.upenn.edu said:

	Loren> The reason they seem wrong is that Agility and
	Loren> Dexterity are in the wrong tree. They are more highly
	Loren> correlated with intelligence than with physical power

As you say, they are nervous stats, and so belong in the intelligence
tree. Why is that? Couldn't we put the nerve-stats in an own tree, or
beneath physcial in an own subtree?

What stats are really related to the nervous system?

-Magnus
From: smith@ctron.com (Lawrence C Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
Subject: Re: net.rpg -- offline
Date: 18 Nov 92 13:35:07 GMT
Reply-To: smith@ctron.com
Organization: Cabletron Systems, Inc.


	
In article <4258@bcstec.ca.boeing.com>, hall@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Robert J. Hall) writes:
> Hey guys, this discussion is fascinating and all that, but it is consuming
> 95% of the bandwidth in this group. Would you mind terribly moving it off

Excuse me, the net.rpg is a GAME and it's in a DESIGN phase, and rec.games.
design is WHERE such discussion is _supposed_ to occur.  And from where _I'm_
sitting, 95% is nineteen posts to one on other topics, hardly a high enough
volume to merit such a suggestion.  If you don't want to read about rpg game
design, fine, virtually all the posts have "net.rpg" in the Subject: line,
killfile it and stop bellyaching.

Larry Smith (smith@ctron.com)  No, I don't speak for Cabletron.  Need you ask?
-
Liberty is not the freedom to do whatever we want,
it is the freedom to do whatever we are able.
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: magnus@bark-fddi.ii.uib.no (Magnus Alvestad)
Subject: MOVE NET.RPG DISCUSSION  YES/NO
Reply-To: magnus@ii.uib.no
Organization: UVBS -> SFK/T-DSA / SOPS - HOS / RNoN
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 18:45:20 GMT

	Tim> But what are we to use this group for, then?  This matter
	Tim> is definitely within charter of the newsgroup.

Agreed - but even so, if other people agree with the original poster -
that the net.rpg discussion should be moved, I can arrange for the
creation of a separate group.

So: If you think net.rpg should be moved - mail me.

-Magnus <magnus@ii.uib.no>
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: cleggp@aix.rpi.edu (Paul Jason Clegg)
Subject: Re: net.rpg.slug: Action resolution
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 07:54:44 GMT

In article <1992Nov21.191104.16559@oz.plymouth.edu> sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan) writes:
>cleggp@aix.rpi.edu (Paul Jason Clegg) writes:
>>Well, it's definitely a SIMPLE concept and easy to learn.  BUT it's very
>>counter-intuitive for a GM to come up with stuff on the fly.  
>
>??? I don't see why you say this.  What do you mean?
>
>>It's also
>>very limited, because the results are limited to the seven results that 
>>the stats/skills are defined as.
>
>True, true.  Playtesting will see if we need to expand the attribute
>range.  I suppose we could go with the familiar 2-19 range that many
>games have, but I like the concept of relating things to words.
>
I think it's counter-intuitive because it's hard to quickly implement a
quick chance idea.  I mean, I don't know what I mean.  I guess you could
just assign a result requirement, and if the person gets it, they get it.
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.

It's a limited example (at 2:30am, lots of things are limited :) but also
apply it to combat (no! Not Combat!  Yes, Combat!)  You'll have to be really
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".

...Paul



-- 
+                +        +    +  + + +  +    +        +                +
  Paul Clegg, cleggp@aix.rpi.edu.   Project Galactic Guide Coordinator.
            System One RPG designer.   But generally unknown.
+                +        +    +  + + +  +    +        +                +
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: ketil@ii.uib.no (Ketil M. Malde)
Subject: Re: net.rpg:  separate skills and stats altogether
Reply-To: ketil@ii.uib.no
Organization: student of numerical analysis at the University of Bergen, Norway
	<KETIL.92Nov18164612@sandel.ii.uib.no> <Bxy9oE.1C0@acsu.buffalo.edu>
Date: 19 Nov 92 17:28:12

>>>>> On 19 Nov 92 06:21:49 GMT, leet@acsu.buffalo.edu (Brian D. Leet) said:

	Brian> <Previous arguments deleted to save space...>
>
>Again, I would make the distinction between Talents that affect your
>ability to learn skills, and Attributes that affect your ability to
>perform them.

	Brian> It appears to me that you are using the word talents to
	Brian> describe cognitive or mental activities and acuity,
	Brian> while you use stats to describe physical ones.  I
	Brian> understand your reasoning behind this distinction but I
	Brian> think it is an arbitrary one.  Some skills do not fit
	Brian> the above pattern and will therefor pose problems (ie
	Brian> mental arithmatic).  Not distinguishing mental from
	Brian> physical solves this problem (IMHO see my other posting
	Brian> on the subject).

No, I'm not nescessarily distinguishing between physical and mental,
but between the ability to learn a skill and the ability to excercise
it.  There isn't really any reason to not include physical and mental
facets in both groups, except that they seem to be divided more or
less like that.

There is also no reason that every skill must have a fixed number of
talents and attributes associated with it, so arithmetic could have a
talent like 'conscious.intelligence.numerical' or something, and the
rest would depend on experience (i.e. skill level)

On the other hand, everybody can run (can't they?), and only physical
attributes matter. (Maybe)

Any game system will be a simplification, so there's always some skill
people will have problems with fitting in, or at least argue about.







Ketil> = Nuke the whales!

Brian>     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Brian> Can't, I don't have a warhead, got any to spare? 

It's the principle that matters.  Thanks for your support!

(Always assuming that if, hypothetically, you were in possession af a
thermonuclear warhead, and, also hypothetically, assuming you had no
immediate use for one, you'd go out and blow a few tons of aquatic
mammal to hell)

--
 = Ketil Malde                     In real life:  ketil@ii.uib.no =
 = Nuke the whales!                    Honk if you love unicorns! =
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: ketil@ii.uib.no (Ketil M. Malde)
Subject: Re: Net.rpg - "modularity"
Reply-To: ketil@ii.uib.no
Organization: student of numerical analysis at the University of Bergen, Norway
	<1992Nov12.214019.8861@alf.uib.no>
	<1e1k3eINN8b1@charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu>
	<1992Nov14.232256.179@alf.uib.no>
Date: 16 Nov 92 02:26:41

>>>>> On Sat, 14 Nov 92 23:22:56 GMT, magnus@bark-fddi.ii.uib.no (Magnus Alvestad) said:

>>>>> On 14 Nov 92 01:17:34 GMT, tdunn@ecst.csuchico.edu (Tim Dunn) said:

	Tim> the task at hand, then the score is the gross stat.  If
	Tim> the character has two or more substats that apply, then
	Tim> we have a mess on our hands. =)

	M> Yes.. of course - we could somehow implement .. a way in
	M> which a roll between the stats was marginal success, a roll
	M> beneath the lowest was a failure, and a roll above the
	M> highest was a good success. Not very pretty, but it
	M> probably would work.

I'm not at all convinced that you should roll against the stats at
all.  I guess it reminds me too much of That-Horrible-System (tm of
You-Know-Who) 

Some thoughts on stats:

Basically, I see stats as one of two:  Talents for different areas of
skills, or physical/mental attributes.  I think there's a need to separate
those two aspects, and from what I've seen, few rpgs do that.

If stats represent talents, I don't think they should be rolled
against, if they're attributes, well, I see why you roll against your
DEX to avoid falling into the pit.

And:

Should stats-as-attributes change during the game?  (I think they
should) 

Should stats-as-talents change?







--
 = Ketil Malde                     In real life:  ketil@ii.uib.no =
 = Nuke the whales!                    Honk if you love unicorns! =
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
Subject: Re: Movement in board games.
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, NH.
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 00:32:18 GMT

Re: movement systems:  did you include Adel Verpflichtet's?  It's sort
of "current board situation" but is more complex than that  - it's also
the result of current conflict.  The winner of the turn's Exhibition
moves the first number of whatever space the lead pawn is on; the
second-place winner moves the second number.  The others don't move,
*except* if you opted to play a detective *and* someone played a thief,
in which case you move the number of spaces equal to your current
standing (i.e., one space if you're in first place, four spaces if
you're in fourth place, etc.).

Those are the *only* two ways to move in the game, BTW - interesting
game!

-- 
  - Steffan O'Sullivan		         sos@oz.plymouth.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca (David Lamb)
Subject: net.rpg - printing the rules (was Re: Net.rpg - "modularity")
Organization: Computing & Information Science, Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 17:31:49 GMT

In article <1992Nov17.181309.15349@alf.uib.no> magnus@ii.uib.no writes:
>Well, it will be modular. I've been thinking of a program for writing
>out a version of the rules. For example:
>net-rpg basic | lpr -Plp0
>net-rpg all | lpr -Plp0
>net-rpg basic+char-gen.pa+combat.realistic | lpr -Plp0
>net-rpg all-*.cinematic | lpr -Plp0
>net-rpg > /dev/null 	;-)

I think that having "a program" to print the rules is a great idea -
but I think the real requirements for a tool like this are a lot more
complex than your examples show.  To me that means the requirements
are worth discussing, which is why I've started the new thread.

It seems to me you're assuming the rules can be viewed as a set, from
which one selects subsets.

The first complication is that there's more structure than that.  As
one of your examples suggests, there's "combat.realistic" versus
"combat.somethingElse" - so it makes no sense to include both of
those in one 'print'.

The second is: we would need to generate indices, appendices, and
summaries, whose contents depend on what subset of things you selected
earlier.  Thus for example the set of modules you select might in turn
imply a set of skills.  If you want a "summary of skills" chart or
index, its contents depend on information (the names of the skills)
from all over the rules.  If there's a skill tree, you'd want a
summary of "what skills are specializations of Intelligence?".  If
there's a magic system, then "memorize spell" might be one such skill,
but you'd leave it out if you left out the magic system.

Also, different modules might include overlapping sets of skills;
you'd like the skill descriptions to each appear once.

It's likely that some people will want immediately to focus on
"implementation" issues like "no problem, use macros in your document
formatter" or "no problem - make the 'module writer' stick to writing
subsets, and don't print those fancy summaries".  I'd rather see a
discussion of "what functionality does a 'print the rules for my
version of net.rpg' program have to have to make life simple for
players (including game masters)"? (or, that subset of people willing
to acquire a program and spend the money to print their own, tailored,
variant of the rules).
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
Subject: net.rpg.slug: Recoil (was Re: damage system for Steffan's SLUG)
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, NH.
		<1992Nov18.131410.954@oz.plymouth.edu>
		<1992Nov18.194112.14854@crd.ge.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 01:29:20 GMT

(Spike) writes:
>
>I assume you're ignoring recoil?

Well, I would, yes.  But I don't play any genre that has any weapons
where recoil is a factor, so perhaps someone else interested in SLUG
should tell me if we need to consider recoil.  The only genre I play
with guns at all is 17th-century cinematic/historical, and it takes too
long to reload to worry about recoil.

-- 
  - Steffan O'Sullivan		         sos@oz.plymouth.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.design
From: mathers@sibelius.trl.oz.au (Steven Mathers)
Subject: Re: game system
Reply-To: s.mathers@trl.oz.au
Organization: Telecom Research Labs, Melbourne, Australia
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 22:06:32 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.184841.5319@alf.uib.no>, magnus@bark-fddi.ii.uib.no (Magnus Alvestad) writes:
|> >>>>> On Mon, 9 Nov 1992 23:53:25 GMT, mathers@sibelius.trl.oz.au (Steven Mathers) said:
|> 
|> 	Steven> This is a problem with the player, not the system.  If
|> 	Steven> a player wants to design a real-life type character,
|> 	Steven> he/she can.  If the player wants to
|> 
|> Agreed, but I think a career-based character will help the player do
|> the right thing. I know a lot of good players that have made somewhat
|> single-faceted characters, and then regretted it.
|> 
|> 	Steven> system is fairly nice in this repect because it allows
|> 	Steven> players to get more points for taking on weaknesses,
|> 	Steven> and less points for taking on special abilities/
|> 	
|> Weaknesses are nice as long as they are optional.
|> 
|> -Magnus

Reminds me of a friend who was designing a Ars Magica character.  He
wanted some extra points to get a special ability of some kind, and so
needed to take 2 weaknesses.

The first was `Scared of loud noises` and the 2nd was `deafness` :-)

Seriously, in the case you mention above, your 1 dimensional friend has
nobody to blame but himself.  This is better than cursing the designer.
Newsgroups: rec.games.design