HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Subject: Re: Vampire vs. Hero vs. Gurps etc...(Long!)
Reply-To: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 05:29:22 GMT

durrell@pinball.arcade.uiowa.edu (Bryant Durrell) writes:
>jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim) writes:
>>	Vampire, in contrast, has the ST set a difficulty *and* a number 
>>of successes required. What is the difference between a higher difficulty 
>>and a higher required number of successes? It is not clear. 
>
>Sure it is.  The difficulty number is how hard it is to succeed at 
>all.  The number of successes determines how well you succeed.  
>Sometimes a marginal success won't get you very much, so you need
>more than one success on the roll.  I don't find that I require 
>that very often; your milage may vary.

	I can think of several examples right off the bat. Jumping, for 
one: this is a contradiction in the rules - the rules for Jumping on page 
144 say that the difficulty of a jump is almost always 3, and that you jump 
4 feet horizantally for every success. In the example on page 159, they say 
that in order to make a long jump, Elucid must roll against a difficulty of 
6 and get at least one success. 
	Later on in the same example, someone must turn and dive back across 
the same gap. Now the example states that the person must accumulate 5 
successes in order to make it across in time (the roof is bursting into 
flames). 

	The same example also requires someone to make *two* difficulty 9 
successes in order to catch a thrown torch, using this same number of 
successes mechanics. 

	I find that the rules continually have these inconsistant way of 
handling things. You want to climb up a tall tree: the GM must set a 
difficulty for the climb, and a number of successes required to make it 
to the top (each success is five feet). 
	Setting these two different numbers overcomplicates the situation. 
Let us take an example from the book's "Simple Rolls" (p141):

"Can you convince a crowd of mortals to do as you have asked? Roll Charisma + 
Leadership as you attempt to give an off-the-cuff speech (difficulty 7). 
You'll need four successes to completely convince them." 

	How is this different from setting it at difficulty 4 and requiring 
seven successes in order to convince them? How is a GM supposed to know what 
difficulty to set this sort of thing at? 

	These sort of things certainly can be handled, but they add an 
unneccessary amount of confusion and complication to the rules. The book is 
filled with complicated, time-consuming ways of resolving things - and then 
contradicts them in its examples. I think it would do much better to decide 
on a more consistant, simpler set of mechanics. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Kim                    | "Nostalgia ain't what it used to be."
jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu | "The future's not the same anymore."
Columbia University         | "What the hell's wrong with my langauge."
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: acadams@afterlife.ncsc.mil (Arthur C. Adams)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: RPG's That Belong on Every Gamer's Shelf
Date: 21 Nov 92 12:24:58 GMT
Organization: The Great Beyond

I'm going to steal a thread from over on rec.games.board and bring
it over here.

What RPG's do you feel belong on the shelves of every gamer? 

I'll separate into two different categories: Five game systems 
and five game supplements. So, here goes:

FIVE GAME SYSTEMS THAT BELONG ON EVERY GAMER'S SHELF:
(in no particular order)

1) AD&D: Not so much for quality, but because it's something almost
any gamer will be familiar with. It's also really good for pick-up 
games.
2) GURPS: Good for genres oriented on character's skills, like 
Espionage. Also very well supported.
3) Hero System: Good for genres oriented towards character's 
non-"human" abilities, like super-heroics, or gadgetry oriented
S.F. and Espionage.
4) The Storyteller System: Best game system for ROLE-playing, as
opposed to ROLL-playing. 
5) Ars Magica: Because I love it.

FIVE GAME SUPPLEMENTS THAT BELONG ON EVERY GAMER'S SHELF:
(again, in no particular order)

1) Chicago by Night (Vampire): Spectacular detailing of fascinating
characters.
2) Faeries (Ars Magica): Absolute brilliance. A set of beings more
alien than found in any science fiction game. 
3) The Primal Order (All): Supplement for all game systems dealing
with Gods. Fascinating, but I'll admit its a topic I've always
been interested in.
4) A Torg Worldbook: (Except Living Land!): Most all of the worldbooks
are very entertaining. I can't pick a favorite.
5) Queen of The Demonweb Pits: A great high-level adventure for 
AD&D. Very challenging, especially the "web" dungeon.

So, what's on your version of this list?


-- 
We need not fear those who do evil in the name of evil, but Heaven
protect us from those who do evil in the name of good.
Arthur C. Adams acadams@afterlife.ncsc.mil            	<fnord>
No, I'm not the Arthur Adams who draws comic books. Don't even ask.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: dago@stud.cs.uit.no (Dag-Frode Olsen)
Subject: Names
Organization: University of Tromsoe, Norway
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 13:31:44 GMT

As a GM a have had BIG problem with good(??) fantasy
names on cities, npcs, fortesses and like.

It would be nice if we could help each other...

A good name could make it more interesting to play.
(You can't name a npc minotaur king James or
your elf Sauron i.e.) :)

Here are two names to start with:
Boz the Minotaur.
K'eeli the Elf.

Dag-Frode Olsen
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: TUK865@maccvm.corp.mot.com (Stephen Gill)
Subject: Re: RPG's That Belong on Every Gamer's Shelf
Organization: Motorola
Date: 23 Nov 1992 06:40:27 CST

>From: acadams@afterlife.ncsc.mil (Arthur C. Adams)

>I'm going to steal a thread from over on rec.games.board and bring
>it over here.

>What RPG's do you feel belong on the shelves of every gamer?

Well, for what it's worth, here's my sixpenneth worth:

GAMES
1. Cyberpunk 2020, the game with the most atmosphere I've ever run or
   played. QUALITY.

2. One of the DnD range, if only for quick and nasty games. I personally
   hang on to my original DnD and one or two of the other little booklets
   in order to save space, it all fits in that tiny box.

3. One of Traveller, Megatraveller or Space Opera, good old fashioned
   'generic' SF stuff with fairly understandable universes. Me I'm greedy
   I like all three.

4. Daredevils, Justice Inc., or Call of Cthulhu. It's amazing how much
   more feeling a 20th century game can have compared to the rest. Come
   to think of it, it seems easier to get that believability factor right
   up there with games set from 1920 to 2020 and LOW magic levels.

5. Toon, Paranoia, TFOS, Floating Vagabond. Pick whatever suits your
   more twisted side. Yet again I'm greedy.

ACCESSORIES
1. Night City and Chromebook. These two really show how city and gear
   supplements should be put together, eminently readable and chock full
   of juicy stuff.

2. Grimtooths traps. The ultimate scare the players supplement, instills
   paranoia in seconds.

3. Any of the Daredevils scenario books. They cost vitually nothing, but
   each has numerous scenarios and plot outlines.

And optionally...

4. Trollpak. Remember, monsters have feelings and can become PCs too.

5. Any of the Chaosium's Call of Cthulhu adventure packs, there's so much
   happening in beautiful detail.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Gill, internet TUK865@maccvm.corp.mot.com  - imitation .sig file

These opinions are mine, mine all mine   nya,ha,ha !
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: gharris@jade.tufts.edu (George W. Harris)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: More Names
Date: 20 Nov 92 18:26:07 GMT
Organization: Tufts University - Medford, MA

In article <1ehb64INNi88@manuel.anu.edu.au> ingrid@helios.anu.edu.au (Ingrid Jakobsen) writes:
>In article <1992Nov18.134023.1403@news.uit.no>, dago@stud.cs.uit.no (Dag-Frode Olsen) writes:
>|> I got a nice Namelist posted from Per Beremark yesterday.
>|> Thanx, most of my problems are history.... :-)
>
>Lots of names deleted...
>
>|> Alexia Falk, Queen of the Shadows (15)
>
>I thought of 'Alexia' as a name myself once. Then I discovered that 
>'alexia' = 'condition of being unable to read' (like dyslexia). The name 
>can still be used, but it's a piece of trivia worth knowing if you do...

	Well, there's nothing wrong with having a name that's a word as well.
I had a fun elven mage in RM named Quinine.  Then of course there's the
female elven fighter, called Areola of the Elves.

>Ingrid Jakobsen 		ingrid@helios.anu.edu.au
--
gharris@jade.tufts.edu          
George W. Harris              	"He'd kill us if he had the chance."  
Dept. of Mathematics            
Tufts University              			The Conversation  
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: gm1116@albnyvms.bitnet
Subject: Re: Character Detail
Reply-To: gm1116@albnyvms.bitnet
Organization: University of NY at Albany
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 23:45:04 GMT

"As it is, you can create the World's Best Linguist for far fewer points
than you could create the World's Best Martial Artist" - paraphrased

umm, if your arguing for HERO better than GURPS(which I agree with)
you just used an extremely BAD example since the same holds true for
both HERO and GURPS.

proof:
HERO system, world's best linguist
10 points of increased INT(bringing it up to 20)
 3 points for linguist perk
16 points for 4 4-pt(actually 5 point with the perk) levels
   in 4 other languages beside native.  Pick the groups the languages
   are in carefully and you can understand almost any language!
29 points total, worlds best lingust
vs
30 points of increased DEX(bringing it up to 20)
20 points of martial arts maneuvers
 8 points of knowledge skill, specific style martial arts
   2 points for general skill lvl(11) + 6 points for a +3 to chances(14-)
58 points total, worlds best martial artist

twice as much to make the worlds best martial artist, a signifigant
difference I'd say.

BTW- I do like HERO better, 4 "base" abilities to define a charector
just seems ridiculous to me!

Badger
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: news@sifon.cc.mcgill.ca
Subject: Re: Medieval Pain-in-the-Arse
Organization: McGill University
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 02:44:14 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.185743.20162@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> corleyj@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (Jason D Corley ) writes:

>In article <17NOV92.12841182.0062@VM1.MCGILL.CA> news@sifon.cc.mcgill.ca writes:

>>Ho-hum. As for CoC: well, *I* have played mad, evil sorcerers.

>Whoa! Talk about missing the point of a game!  CoC is NOT
>designed for that, nor is the tone appropriate to it! Wow!
>Low SAN is one thing, and _slowly transforming_ into a mad evil
>sorcerer (at which point you become an NPC, see the rules on
>madness) is probably OK, but starting OUT as one?
>Sorry to get so o'erwrought about this but I play with a bunch o'
>munchkins (tm) and I thought I heard one of them say this a whiel
>back.

Don't worry! I didn't start out an evil sorcerer! I slowly
became one, as you say. However, though the *character* had
no knowledge of sorcery, or its existence, initially, I
(as a player) decided this fate, if it was ever possible,
was for me!
     And damn the rules on madness!! I'll happily play a mad
character as a PC, thanks! I resent any rule that says "..when
you do X you will become an NPC and be removed from play.."
Geez. Give up a character just as it becomes interesting. I
have yet to meet a GM who could play a madman as well as I
can. When I do, I'll relent.
     As a GM, BTW, I regularly let my players play characters
which, in the early days of RPGs, were reserved as NPCs. I
think everyone deserves a crack at playing an evil murderer,
or the undead, or a madman....

Hee hee hee hee....

_______________________________________________________________________
|  "Did you have intercourse with  | More of what you want, for less! |
|              Mary?"              |  *** Roach Powder, 50% off! ***  |
|       "Yes...yes, I did."        |    *****  Ask for Bill. *****    |
|               ___                |----------------------------------|
|  "Oh! You are sick, aren't you?" |  Kromm is CX6L@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA  |
|        -from Eraserhead.         |        -->Who are you?<--        |
|__________________________________|__________________________________|


Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: 900667c@ace.acadiau.ca (GERALD RICHARD CAMERON)
Subject: My top 5s
Organization: Acadia University
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 02:12:52 GMT

Well, I might as well throw my hat into the ring.  First, the games:

1) Toon - It's been said before, but if your group enjoys mayhem and Warner 
Bros. cartoons (and who doesn't), this is the #1 choice.

2) Rolemaster - Okay, I realize I've just raised a million eyebrows with 
this, but I've been playing this for  (egad) five years now, and can barely 
imagine FRP without its critical hits and FUMbllllles!  Also, while the game 
is hell on the GM, it's great for the players to participate in.

3) Shadowrun - The systems (at least 1st edition) are really painful to 
learn, but the background is a must for imagination.

4) Paranoia - Also good for mayhem.  It's a good way to relieve (or create:) 
inter-player hostility, as they are encouraged to blow each other away at an 
opportune time.

5) Chill (2nd ed.) - I'd say the best generic horror game around.  Although 
CoC is better when the adventures are good, this one is easier to sink your 
teeth into, since you don't have to be familiar with the works of a hard to 
read authour to get the most from it.  Also, I think the systems are 
effective, and not overly cumbersome.  I give CoC its due later.

As for supplements:

1) Masks of Nyarlathotep/Horror on the Orient Express - See, I told ya :)  
Both of these have much the same thing going for them that Shadowrun does: 
imagination and atmosphere.  One's a classic, one probably soon will be.

2) Tooniversal Tour - There's something there for everyone to enjoy.  Even 
Cthulhu fans.

3) Dark Sun - While I hate AD&D with a passsion, this was almost enough to 
get me into it, just to check out this setting.  Again, it's got lots of 
imagination.

4) Classic Enemies - A collection of some of the best characters ever made 
for an RPG.  Long live Foxbat!

5) ??? - I'd say whatever happens to be the best supplement or adventure 
available for your favourite RPG, so that you get a chance to see how that 
game is handled right.

*sigh*, now to get into the asbestos jumpsuit :)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
| Gerald Cameron - 900667c@ace.acadiau.ca                           |
| 201 Eaton House, Acadia Univ., Wolfville, N.S., CANADA, B0P 1X0   |
---------------------------------------------------------------------
| Happiness is Love and the Freedom to express it.                  |
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: Patrick_Andrew_Barnes@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: RPG's That Belong on Every Gamer's Shelf
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 92 13:58:35 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

A problem with these kinds of lists is that they don't say WHY the games
should belong on every gamer's shelf.  Without that, it takes a lot of
the interest out of reading peoples' lists.  If person A is listing his
5 favorite games as games that should be on every shelf, while person B
is listing one great game from each genre, and person C is listing the
classics of roleplaying, etc etc etc there really isn't a way to compare
the lists in any useful manner.  If the lists aren't created using the
same goal in mind, they aren't comparable.  My favorite 5 games would not
be the same list as the 5 games that should be on every gamer's shelf.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: clanti55@ursa.calvin.edu (Christopher Lantinga)
Subject: Re: Vampire vs. Hero vs. Gurps etc...(Long!)
Organization: Calvin College
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 21:30:36 GMT

Well, that seemed to be an unusually intelligent addition to this
flamewa -- sorry, I mean conversation!  Sounds like you made something
excellent out of Vampire: The Masquerade.  You did it by avoiding the
game mechanics because they're so bad.

I'm not sure I believe that the designers at White Wolf planned that
carefully, thinking, "No, these mechanics are too useful.  They've got
to be absolutely CRUDDY to keep people from indulging in pure
Gamespeak!"  However, even if they did, there was an easier way. Do as
Amber did.  Don't put mechanics in at all.

Of course, then, you must do as Amber did, and include a lot of
instructional material telling people HOW to run a game without using
mechanics.  But if White Wolf is really the avante-garde
gods-of-storytelling kind of place that it would like us to believe,
that should have been easy for them.

(Myself, I get a bit irritated by White Wolf's "We are the roleplaying
GODS, all others must bow before us" attitude. But that's another
topic.)

Obviously you and your gaming group really got into the background
that Vampire supplies; that's very cool.  I suspect a lot of Vampire's
detractors prefer to make up their own backgrounds and buy games
basically for the mechanics.  (Myself, I think either way is fine.  It
can be just as creative and difficult an accomplishment to bring
someone else's vision to life as it is to make up your own...)

--Ed Heil
c/o Chris Lantinga
clanti55@ursa.calvin.edu
From: pdevisse@twilight.tdkcs.waterloo.on.ca (Paul Devisser)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Names
Date: 21 Nov 92 01:50:58 EST
Organization: The Realm Of Twilight BBS * (519)748-9026


RE: Names...

        Something I found fun was going out and investing in a few English-Foriegn Language dictionaries, like Welsh, Japanese, Sumolian, Celtic, and even Latin.  I also got a book of names from around the world.  It does get boring hearing the same type of names, and I really can't understand how a culture that is so radically different from ours here in real life could have the same method of generating names as we do.  Names such as Bob, Paul, David, all stem from Hebrew, or Latin sources.  Where would 
elves or dwarves get those kind of names.  I'd rather use Burmese, or Old German, or a type of background that no one commonly uses for naming characters.

eg.
        Namid the Fair
        Nascha the Wise
        Pravat
        Garrick
        Arkady

        All are names that are in use around the world, but aren't common, but have made great names for characters.

Paul Devisser

--- Via UCI v1.11 (C-Net Amiga)

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: barnett@mummy.agsm.unsw.OZ.AU (Glen Barnett)
Subject: Re: Names
Organization: The Australian Graduate School of Management
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 06:50:12 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.133144.23713@news.uit.no> dago@stud.cs.uit.no (Dag-Frode Olsen) writes:
>As a GM a have had BIG problem with good(??) fantasy
>names on cities, npcs, fortesses and like.
  [stuff deleted]
>Here are two names to start with:
>Boz the Minotaur.
>K'eeli the Elf.
>
>Dag-Frode Olsen

How's this: A couple of thieves called Nick and Rob.
:) 

Glen
From: gharris@jade.tufts.edu (George W. Harris)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Character Detail
Date: 18 Nov 92 19:46:46 GMT
Organization: Tufts University - Medford, MA

In article <1992Nov17.215054.18487@oz.plymouth.edu> sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan) writes:
>gharris@jade.tufts.edu (George W. Harris) writes:
>>
>>	Steffan, you should read what you're replying to before being snide.
>>When you don't, you look like a fool as well as a jerk.  Much better to just
>>look like a jerk (I should know :-{)> ). 
>
>I looked carefully, George.  Andrew claimed I could not make an
>interesting character that I enjoyed playing by following the GURPS
>rules.  Period.  Rather than risk losing my temper by denouncing such
>an outrageous slam on a system I play (I'm learning, George :-), I
>chose to answer as I did.

	Yeah, I was a little harch there.  Bad day.  Sorry.

>I will respond more accurately now, though: 
>
>Although I admitted I have slackened up on strict rules interpretation
>in the last few years, *all* of my characters - and those of the people
>I game with - are made according to the GURPS rules without bending
>them at all.  The rules I bend have to do with speeding up the playing
>pace, not the character creation.  I never said which rules I was lax
>on - Andrew merely assumed I meant character creation, and asssumptions
>are often dangerous things to make.  (The voice of experience, here.)

	Dangerous, but it seemed a reasonable assumption to make given the
way you stated your counterexample.

>To imply that *any* system isn't capable of creating interesting,
>enjoyable characters is frankly an unprovoked slam of the greatest
>magnitude I have yet seen on the net.

	Well, it would be, but I don't thin anyone has implied that yet 
(at least not in the current thread).  The criticism of the GURPS character
creation rules is not that interesting characters cannot be made with them,
but rather that the points system gives bizarre and counterintuitive results,
like a character being cheaper with a higher DX, or with Eidetic Memory, or
that it is not even close to being balanced, as trying to make the World's
Greatest Musician and the World's Greatest Martial Artist on the same number
of points would demonstrate.

>  - Steffan O'Sullivan		         sos@oz.plymouth.edu
--
gharris@jade.tufts.edu          
George W. Harris              	"He'd kill us if he had the chance."  
Dept. of Mathematics            
Tufts University              			The Conversation  
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: bell@pooh.cs.unc.edu (Andrew Bell)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Character Detail
Date: 23 Nov 92 21:07:06 GMT
Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

In article <23NOV92.12969379.0098@VM1.MCGILL.CA> news@sifon.cc.mcgill.ca writes:
>>[In response to what basis is there for GURPS' point costs]

>GURPS has a fairly consistant philosophy

What you see as "fairly consistent" is, in the eyes of multiple
net.readers, inconsistency.  To be consistent is to be uniform
throughout.  However, this is a semantic quibble.

>Nowhere does it say in GURPS that the play
>balance characteristics or usefulness will determine a point
>cost.

So why does GURPS have a point-based system?  If roleplaying is
the goal, why waste people's time over point calculations?

>     The GURPS system emphasizes role-playing first

Actually, I find GURPS' points system actually *discourages*
roleplaying, because it appeals to people's munchkin circuits by
making "powerful" characters cheaper than ones with personality.

>...the use of reality-checks allows for a more
>believable game

Please give an example of this.  I don't believe (for example) making
Appreciate Beauty not cost a lot of points is going to cause an
overabundance of potters in the party.  The only thing that encourages
an overabundance of a particular characteristic is if its cost is
cheap relative to its power.

>I am surprised that the points I made above aren't apparent to all.

They are apparent, but the logic behind them seems faulty to many.

>I, for one, would rather have a Nobel Prize in physics
>any day, over being a highly ranked sniper in some death-squad.

So why do you approve of a game system encouraging people to play
the latter rather than the former?

   Andrew Bell
bell@cs.unc.edu