HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: drac@uumeme.chi.il.us (Bruce Maynard)
Subject: Re: ShadowRun HEROIC??? (was Re: Burn, GURPS...)
Organization: UUMEME Public Access Xenix
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 15:41:17 GMT

As far as "ShadowRun being a game of incredibly massive combat with characters
being secondary to the hardware they carry or had implanted"...

If that's how yer campaign runs, then yer doin' something wrong. The game SHOULD
be more of finding a way to accomplish something without being pounded into
strawberry jam/captured&experimented-on/jailed for 300 years...

As far as guns in version I not being instant-kill weapons... take a look at the
real world, friend. A .45 in the chest, unless it's very well-placed, will simply
send you into shock & make you useless... unless you bleed to death.

Now then... for the "unbelievable amounts of hard/cyberware"... you actually
allow players to continually START with all this crap? No friggin' wonder...
guy, a lot of the stuff in the books IS available, just hard to get... as in
making 'em a worthwhile LONG-TERM goal. Personally, I don't allow players to
start with anything out of the 'security catalog', or the extended weapons
in the Rigger book, or Shadowtech... gives 'em something to work for. Try
not running a Monty Haul campaign for awhile and you'll see what I mean. Letting
players start with anything they want within chartacter generation is like
starting an AD&D campaign with everyone starting out at 12th-15th level...
in other words, insane! Would YOU allow a starting 1st level M-U a Staff of
the Archmage, crystal ball, & mebbe an Artifact or three? Of COURSE not...
From: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Burn, GURPS, BURN!
Date: 27 Jan 93 21:16:14 GMT
Reply-To: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Distribution: rec
Organization: Columbia University

dseal@armltd.co.uk (David Seal) writes:
>A GM can unbalance *any* set of points values within his or her campaign 
>by choosing a sufficiently unbalanced set of problems to throw at the 
>players. There are two solutions to this: IMHO the more enjoyable one is 
>simply for the GM to produce a more varied campaign, in which a wider range
>of stats and skills can be useful. The other is for the GM to say to the
>players "Look, I'm running a very combat-oriented campaign. Since this makes
>DX more useful than normal, I'm making DX more expensive than the normal
>rules say."

	This is one of the troublesome things about point systems, which 
is what everyone complains about - that it must be based on a pre-conceived 
mix of problems which the PC's are expected to face. IMO, there is nothing 
wrong with a campaign without combats, or with a campaign which is heavily 
focussed on combat. 
	A point system should explain what sort of campaign it expects 
itself to be balanced for, and suggest problems that it may encounter. 

>
>Valuing stats/advantages/etc in points terms is not an exact science: as a
>GM, I'm willing to tolerate some inaccuracies in the process, while as a
>player, I usually find I've "wasted" some points by sticking to a particular
>aspect of my character concept. An inappropriate character concept for the
>genre can waste far too many points - e.g. a high ST character who expects
>to use his strength to win *ranged* combat in a high tech environment. But
>this is a problem with the concept: you're trying to do something which just
>doesn't make sense in the genre. 

	I don't see at all that a high ST character is out of genre for a 
high-tech game (Wookies come to mind, for example). There is nothing wrong 
with the concept of a strong character in a high-tech society. The problem 
comes if a GM tries to insist that this character should be less effective 
than others by simple-mindedly sticking to the point system. 
	If the high-ST but competant character is not unbalanced, then why 
disallow him? 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Kim                    | "You're on the cutting room floor, Chaplin.
jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu | Not a good place to be."
Columbia University         |                  (from the movie 'Chaplin')
From: Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow)
Subject: Re: Random Rolls
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 10:06:41 GMT

jacobus@symphony.cc.purdue.edu (Bryan J. Maloney) writes:

> YES!  O, thou sinner!  Thou hast profaned the TEMPLE OF THE ONE TRUE GAMING
> WAY.

Gee, Dave Nalle must be checking his game rooms for vandalism.  O:-)

> Aye, and knowest thou not the ONE TRUE GAMING WAY is to perform naught but
> that holiest of holys !!!!!!!!!!!!ROLE PLAYING!!!!!!!!!!  Aye, it is only
> !!!!!!!!!!ROLE PLAYING!!!!!!!!!! for which these holy GAMES are worthy.

According to the Church of the Poisonous Jellyfish, the ONE TRUE GAMING WAY
is HEROIC role-playing, and only HEROIC role-playing.  Any non-heroic gaming
is a sin.

Meanwhile, BlueRazor the apostle, will be preaching the virtues of The Holy
Book of Lock 'n Load.  a684@mindlink.bc.ca will be calling the followers of
Legacy to load their dice in defense of random generation.

Oh no!  I see religious wars sweeping the net.  The devout followers marching
their fingers to frp.crusades to do battle with the unspeakable heretics.
Blood, guts, crispy crusaders!


Sounds like fun.  :)

--

Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca
From: paul@sco.COM (Paul Jackson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Burn, GURPS, BURN!
Date: 25 Jan 93 19:09:32 GMT
Organization: SCO Canada, Inc.

In article <1993Jan22.035735.17492@Princeton.EDU> mfterman@phoenix.princeton.edu (Mutant for Hire) writes:
>In article <2314@blue.cis.pitt.edu>, seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp) writes:
>>	Then you aren't playing in the genre at all, and your claims
>>about whether or not GURPS handles these well is at best very, very
>>weak. The true SUPERHERO genre includes the nice people like Captain
>>America, Superman, and Spider-man, in the days of the Comics Code.
>
>
>Then all those comics put out by DC and Marvel that don't fall into
>the Comic Code are of course not superhero comics, despite having many
>people wearing special costumes, throwing around strange powers, and
>so forth.
>

In other words, GURPS is only capable of modelling SOME comic book universes.
It cannot handle the traditional, 4 colour genre of comic books well.
From: seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: ShadowRun HEROIC??? (was Re: Burn, GURPS...)
Date: 24 Jan 93 01:51:54 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
Originator: seawasp@unixd1.cis.pitt.edu

In article <1jsr9eINNlvl@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu> cwagner@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Christian Wagner) writes:
>GURPS fails when one wants to run a highly-heroic (read ShadowRun) style CP
>game, with PC's running through gunfire, assaulting buildings with big heavy
>ultra-tech weapons, and -surviving-. If one wants to simulate the literature,

	SR HEROIC?

	That's the first time I've encountered THAT. The only problem we 
encountered with the rules was the armor autosuccesses. Make those extra
dice, and you're done.

	After that, it's GODDAM DEADLY! One thing all of my characters know:
when the bullets start flying, you LEAVE! Unless you're in full armor, 
any medium weapon will TOAST you unless you're close enough to prevent it 
from firing. 

	Last combat we had was a bad random encounter -- we had to meet 
someone in the bad section of town and got ambushed by a kill-happy gang.
Now, we had two mages, gadgets, and two of us were coming up a distance 
behind the ambush, so they didn't even know we were there.

	Despite weapons, magic, shield spells, etc., two of us were 
essentially dead, two others hovering at death's door, one moderately
wonded, and another only lightly. If it weren't for DocWagon Platinum,
healing magic, and a LOT of luck, not one of us would have even made 
it to the meeting.

	And THAT wasn't all that nasty an encounter compared to the 
PLANNED ones...

	I've heard a lot of  SR gripes -- too many dice from hell, 
genre mixing that some people don't like, and so on... but non-
deadly is NOT one of the ones I'd agree with.

                                 Sea Wasp
                                   /^\
                                   ;;;
From: paul@sco.COM (Paul Jackson)
Subject: Re: Prices$$$...
Organization: SCO Canada, Inc.
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 17:52:45 GMT

In article <1993Jan20.210443.12104@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca> flindholm@mta.ca writes:
>  I really don't understand why people are complaining about spending 
>$6.95 US for a 32 page module when here in the Great White North we're
>stuck paying $15.00 Canadian which is aprox $11.00 US. Are things relly
>that much cheaper or is my concept of the exchange rate incredibly screwed?
>
>        Cyrus

I think that you're getting shafted by local distributors/stores. Here in
Toronto most game material that I buy is actually cheaper than the list
price in the States (once the exchange rate is taken into account).
Admittedly, stores which sell items for below list price are more common in
the States.

Caveat - I don't buy TSR stuff at all and this observation is mostly derived
from US$12+ items. The observation is also based on a time span of 4 or 5
years ending about a year ago during which I travelled reasonably
extensively in the States.
From: kelek@ais.org (Mike McDonald)
Subject: Re: The Random Roll Question :-)
Organization: UMCC
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 01:04:31 GMT

Forwarded message:
From nemesis.acs.unt.edu!cpearce Mon Jan 25 13:40:09 1993
Return-Path: <cpearce@nemesis.acs.unt.edu>
Received: by ais.org (/\==/\ Smail3.1.25.1 #25.6)
	id <m0nGYjA-000A7eC@ais.org>; Mon, 25 Jan 93 13:40 EST
Received: from nemesis.acs.unt.edu by mercury.unt.edu with SMTP id AA01470
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for <kelek@ais.org>); Mon, 25 Jan 1993 12:40:06 -0600
Received: by nemesis.acs.unt.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1)
	id AA02882; Mon, 25 Jan 93 12:33:16 CST
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 12:33:16 CST
From: cpearce@nemesis.acs.unt.edu (Chris Pearce)
Message-Id: <9301251833.AA02882@nemesis.acs.unt.edu>
To: kelek@ais.org
Subject: Re: The Random Roll Question :-)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Status: OR

In rec.games.frp.advocacy you write:

>  Random rolls give variety and direction, sometimes too much so, or
>sometimes so limited by the rolling methods that it practically equals
>point allocation.  The normal roll 3d6 and assign in order (how many
>people use this, anyways?) 

In WFRP, CoC, and RQ, our group always rolls stats in order. But, the
time that we played AD&D2, we got to arrange. I think I enjoy taking stats
in order.

>If
>the scores are taken in order, a certain kind of character is forced on
>the player, and if the player switches around the scores, the whole
>procedure becomes similar to point allocation, but still with the
>risk of weak/powerful characters.  

I'm of the opinion that one can have fun with *any* character. However,
not everyone agrees with my POV. My GM will typically let players who
are extremely unhappy (not just peeved) reroll their characters once
or twice. Rolling for characters more than that is *highly* frowned
upon. This method typically gives people a character they can live
with, and, typically after the first sesion or two, all the bitching
about one's character goes away completely as players get engrossed
in the adventure at hand.

Feel free to post this if you like. I can read news, but posting replies
is not something I can do.
-- 
Chris Pearce -- cpearce@nemesis.acs.unt.edu

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: jmkaraka@eos.ncsu.edu (JOHN MARTIN KARAKASH)
Subject: Re: Random Rolls
Originator: jmkaraka@c00008-118dan.eos.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: jmkaraka@eos.ncsu.edu (JOHN MARTIN KARAKASH)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 23:26:49 GMT


|>What I am saying is that if $6M is a lot of money, then it should be difficult
|>to get, or keep, for a Poor player.
|>

	Good point.  Reminds me of story (true) that I heard.  A woman died
and left her cat $15,000.  In less than three years the cat was broke.
Obviously the cat started with Dead Broke and didn't acquire the skills to
maintain the money.  :)

	-john-
From: slouie@ocf.berkeley.edu (Shelley Louie)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Burn, GURPS, BURN!
Date: 22 Jan 1993 10:37:26 GMT
Organization: Bat Radar Studies, U. C. Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: monsoon.berkeley.edu

So what have we learned?  

GURPS -> realistic, but not perfect. Has a tendancy to slightly distort 
certain real and fantasy worlds.  Requires a decent GM and non-munchkin 
players to maintain a sense of balance and realism within particular
genre.  

NGRPGs (Non-Generic RPGs) -> Focus on their genre tends to provide for 
more genre-related "believablity". Not always realistic, nor is it always
easily translatable to other NGRPGs or GURPS. Requires a decent GM and 
non-munchkin players to maintain a sense of balance and realism within
particular genre.

Points systems -> Balanced. Requires a decent GM and non-munchkin players
to maintain a sense of realism.

Random systems -> Realistic. Requires a decent GM and non-munchkin players
to maintain a sense of balance.

So the conclusion should be shoot the munchkins and sell the bad DMs into
slavery.  

For you poll takers out there, I like GURPS and points, but would actually
like to go back and play TFT for a while....

-Shelley Louie
"Roll 3 die vs. dexterity for masterbation. You want low."
"Okay...Uh...whoops."
"You are filled with incredible self loathing, emptiness, and frustration.
 A fingernail catches. The sheets are wet with blood. Roll 1 die for damage."
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: maillet@tls-cs.cert.fr (Luc Maillet)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: RE: Burn, GURPS, BURN!
Date: 22 Jan 93 08:31:24 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: CERT, CS Dpt. Toulouse, France


  [... crossfire deleted ...]
 
 OK, I want to give my $0.02 to this GURPS vs the World thread.

 I don't like GURPS. Let that be clear. For some reason(s), each time I tried
to make a character, the sheet ended in the bin. I must add it is the ONLY game
where it happens ( in the forty-odd games I've created characters for ). Now it's
less easy to tell why.

1) Attributes "granularity" : the problem with GURPS is that it tries to desc-
-ribe the inherent abilities ( as opposed to learned ones ) on 4 attributes,
and these attributes have different "descriptive width". And, while 4 attributes
can be enough in 4-color comics genre ( not necessarily true, that ), I feel it
woefully too few in many others. If you want to cover all genres IMHO, either
you make a modular attribute set, of you take them all (HERO, Basic Roleplaying).

2) Someone said INT represented pure IQ as well as experience. He could have
added average perceptive ability. I disagree. Experience is only IMHO a function
of what you have done and for how long you have done it. Attributes have nothing
( or not much ) to do with it.

3) "all or nothing" advantages : most of them could have been "scaled", where
they haven't. They lose most of their descriptive power as they become too much
archetypal.

4) The Advantage/Disadvantagee range is ill-described. When they could have
scaled all physical disadvantages in half a page ( as HERO does ), they wasted
space to make each one a particular case. And, while HERO make these disads
scalable, GURPS does not.

5) I don't like the stats+variable add system. In GURPS, attributes have way too
much importance in skill resolution. I prefer the HERO/Rolemaster scale, where
attribute importance is diminished either by a constant ( the 9+(att/5) in HERO )
or by learned skill ( the rank value + level bonus in RM ).

6) If there ever was a bad way  ( BIG IMHO ) to described combat in RPGs, it
is with hexes. Now that's something that made me close the book at once the first
time I tried to read it ( I've tried other times since then ). I positively hate
that.

7) Cosmetic reason : the book is difficult to read, because of bad presentation,
bad font choices, bad taste in graphics. Granted, GURPS is only one game among
others in that.

  There's something else, but I can't find it...

  So this is it. I hope I haven't been too much of a flamethrower. Well, if
GURPS afficionados want to refute the above, they are welcome to it. But in
polite terms, please. Remember I have less experience in GURPS than you do.

								Redwing
From: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Random Rolls
Date: 27 Jan 93 22:14:43 GMT
Reply-To: doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu
Organization: Department of Chemistry, UCLA

In article <C19y63.HBD@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (RedSwordTarga) writes:
>Well, since GURPS is based on 3-18 stats, and 3d6 can generate characteristics
>in that range, I don't see what the problem is. People who want
>random stats can have random stats, they just have to pay for them. Those
>who don't want random stats can build their characters as per normal.
>The real reason this doesn't work: Most people who generate random characters
>just roll until they get really great stats, and point allocation makes you
>pay for what you get free in random generation.

Argh!!!!!


Let me repeat, 


GURPS IS ***NOT*** BASED ON 3-18 STATS!!!!!!!!!!


Where did you people get this silly idea?

The stats HAPPEN to be centered around 10.  Not 10.5, like a 3d6 roll, but 10.

There is a random generation system provided, but it's really badly broken, and
is only intended for quick NPC generation (I hope).


-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: cwagner@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Christian Wagner)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: Burn, GURPS, BURN!
Date: 24 Jan 1993 01:27:10 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: mickey.cc.utexas.edu

In article <C19yoo.HLt@news.cso.uiuc.edu> dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (RedSwordTarga) writes:
>Ouch. Well, GURPS does work well for some genres. On others, it falls flat
>on its face. HERO comes a little closer, but there are still genres that just
>don't work in either system (GURPS Cyberpunk..Yuck, pooie..CyberHero...Gag,
>barf). No game designed to be universal can ever work as well as one designed
>*well* for that specific genre. 

Actually, having played ShadowRun, Cyberpunk 2.0.2.0., CyberSpace, and GURPS 
Cyberpunk, I have eventually settled on GURPS CP over all the other specificly
designed games. 

Why? It -works-. The closest 'genre game' was CP2020, and it had all -kinds- of
problems, from the armor rules (broken) to the netrunning rules 
(incomprehensible). ShadowRun's a -joke-, and CyberSpace is too damn dense, and
-way- too AD&D-like. 

I have been running a GURPS CP campagin at the University Gaming Society here 
in Austin for almost a year now, and it's worked -perfectly-. A few mods to the
net rules, and some new point values for some cyberware, and it fits the genre
quite well. It's flexible enough to have a bunch of different character types 
and allow the GM to dictate certain character creation options. It has a 
remarkably deadly combat system, even with the modern-day weapons most of the
PC's are using; when one brings in the heavy stuff like the Gyroc rifles, gauss
needlers, and (in one case) upgraded versions of the Barrett Model 82, the PC's
learn real quick that fighting is -not- the solution to problems.

GURPS fails when one wants to run a highly-heroic (read ShadowRun) style CP
game, with PC's running through gunfire, assaulting buildings with big heavy
ultra-tech weapons, and -surviving-. If one wants to simulate the literature,
with a heavy death toll, atmosphere, and neat characters, GURPS works damn 
well. 

-- 
    "Well, do you ever get the feeling that the Story's too damn real
                        and in the present tense?"
               Christian Wagner - cwagner@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu 
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: kogoma@triton.unm.edu (Taki Kogoma)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Re: ShadowRun HEROIC??? (was Re: Burn, GURPS...)
Date: 26 Jan 1993 01:29:33 GMT
Organization: Nit-Pickers for a Better Tomorow Afternoon
NNTP-Posting-Host: triton.unm.edu

In article <2464@blue.cis.pitt.edu> seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp) writes:
>In article <1juu53INN99d@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu> cwagner@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Christian Wagner) writes:
>>[About his experiences with SR and players thereof.]
>
>	Blame THAT one not on the system, nor on the players, but on the 
>GM. That kind of thing is just flat out STUPID. 

I'd like to suggest that the venomous jellyfish keep this statement in
mind the next time he rants about GURPS...


-- 
Capt. Gym Z. Quirk  (Known to some as Taki Kogoma)  kogoma@triton.unm.edu
 I'll get a life when someone demonstrates that it would be superior to
                          what I have now...
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
From: jbridson@kean.ucs.mun.ca
Subject: Review: Legacy
Organization: Memorial University. St.John's Nfld, Canada
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 01:07:41 GMT

Just a quick review on Legacy, the new SF game from Discordian Games:

The background seems top-rate, and I will be using it even if I don't use 
the mechanics.  It's original, but of a quality that makes it seem to have 
come straight from a novel by Larry Niven (to name my favourite sf writer). 
The claims that it is well thought out, plausible, and consistent are 
indeed true - even the faster-than-light drive seems real!

The mechanics I'm not so sure about.  I am a real minimalist when it comes 
to games, I guess, so the mechanics seem a little complicated.  However, 
I'm getting more and more used to them... They are certainly are not as 
complex as Hero, for example, while offering a great deal of realistic 
detail and flexibility.  There are too many numbers for my taste, but the 
amount is not unmanageable.

Character creation is rather involved, combining random elements, point-
allocation, and centering around a life-path method.  It took me 2.5 hours 
to create my first character, a robotics researcher/developper for Luna 
Robotics Company (a part of Dimitri Standard Holdings).  It was a 
fascinating 2.5 hours though, and Kelly Nathaniel Vezhpa seems pretty real 
to me.

Now on to the bad points.  Legacy, as it stands, could use an index, and 
better organization.  As an example, I knew that a formula for fallign 
damage was there somewhere, but try as I might I could not find it.  Later 
on that day, I accidentally came upon it under "Climbing"...  While not as 
bad as a lot of games, it's a pain having no index.

The art is nothing outstanding - black and white filler images mostly.  
There's one page which is a bit of an eye-sore... don't buy it for the 
artwork!

The binding does not seem terribly durable, being soft-cover, but only time 
will tell.

All in all, I woudl recommend Legacy, if only for the background.  As it 
turns out, it has good rules as well.

 --- Robert Bridson (using jbridson's account)