HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Bastard DM From Hell Pt 2
Date: 17 Aug 92 12:40:49 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
Originator: seawasp@pmax1.cis.pitt.edu

In article <phil.714031568@adam.adelaide.edu.au> phil@adam.adelaide.edu.au (Phil Kernick) writes:
>seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp) writes:
>It is a *very* dangerous thing to says things like this in an open forum.
>You may disagree with my ideas and rulings but it is *very* bad manners to
>insult someone whom you don't know.

	Sorry, but from what I'm hearing what can I say? No experience
for fighting when fighting is one of the things you do... that should
not matter whether you wear plate armor or robes.

>Consider.  If a ranger wears armour when he needs to fight (gaining full xp)
>and takes it off at other times (so he get's special abilities) why would
>*anyone* become a straight fighter?

	Maybe because he won't learn as fast? Maybe because he doesn't
feel like protecting the woodlands or what have you? Maybe because he
can't find a trainer?

	It's easy to get trained to be a generic fighter. Rangers have a
lot harder time getting trained, learning their wood-stuff, and all that.

>>	Two feet by one and a half and a half and it weighs SIXTY POUNDS?
>>My GOG, what in all the seven hells of space is it MADE of, IRON? Or is
>>it like one of the books in B.C. -- carved in stone?

>As it was never pointed out, I suppose that I will say.  It is bound in a
>wooden jacket that is about 1/2" thick and has a very large and ornate metal
>lock on it.  Before flaming anyone, go find a piece of dense wood that is
>about the size of the book and pick it up.

	I'll give you thirty pounds, max. Sixty is ridiculous, even with
a "large lock" on it -- that lock, even if HUGE, won't weigh more than
five pounds. SIXTY? I have a mahogany desk which has a top an inch and a
half thick, measuring about six feet by four feet (yep, big desk). Since
I've had to move the thing (damn heavy), I'd guess that the desktop could
by itself weigh somewhere in the neighborhood of 150 pounds. Maybe 
200. However, that heavy, dense wood would make a total of 12 sets of 
your bookcovers (3 layers of 1/2 inch, 4 pairs fitting on the top), and
even assuming a 200 pound desktop you still don't even get 20 pounds for
the covers. Add in a monstrous 5 pound lock and you still have 5 pounds for
PAPER before you even get over 30. Hell, even if I assume the desk top is
THINNER and could only make 8 sets, you only get 25 pound bookcovers total,
so you might, with huge locks and disgustingly heavy paper, manage to get
to 40 pounds. Still a LONG way short of sixty. Personally, I'd say about
20 for the whole thing.


                                 Sea Wasp
                                   /^\
                                   ;;;


Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: braca2@cspyr1.cs.adfa.oz.au (BRAY CHRISTOPHER)
Subject: Re: A really neat character!
Organization: Australian Defence Force Academy, Canberra, Australia
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 07:17:06 GMT

gregs@meaddata.com (Greg Smith) writes:

>I agree that phobias, loves, hates, etc are helpful in rounding
>out a character.  Thinking up the answers to those "what would
>you do in this situation" question ahead of time can also give you
>a good sense of the character's morals.  (Something on the order of
>the game scruples).  Seemingly contradictory things can be fun.

I've seen two cases which proved fun.  
	A very powerful mage (21st level I think) that hated anyone 
	touching her.  She would just get hysterical, and we stopped taking
her on adventures.

I have this 4th level fighter who has an insipid past.  He escaped from 
slavery, and wandered round the bushlands, until he came across an old 
battle.  There was a dead Wyvrn, and some dead people.  One of the people
was still alive, and so this guy finds out where the village is and takes
all the food and heads to town.  This deed has been on his conciencse since
and as a result is very aggressive, and smokes alot.
     This may not seem bad for a fighter, but as the campaign we play in
is very social (and slowly moving up the social ladder), he is becoming
more and more of a hassle to the other players.

Hookkkk
From: ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge Diaz)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Paladins
Date: 20 Aug 92 19:16:05 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <BtAJ0F.F54@news.cso.uiuc.edu> dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Axly) writes:
>reza@magellan.ae.utexas.edu (Alireza Vali) writes:

>>In article <1992Aug16.204249.10357@wam.umd.edu> you write:

>Well, I tend to think this is a bad call on your GM's part. 

I disagree.  I think the DM was 100% correct in his call.

>1) The gnome stole from the group. 
>2) Given the average LG diety, the gnome broke a dietic stricture.

No, the gnome broke a law, possibly even a church law.  I doubt that a
diety would consider execution an appropriate punishment for theft.
In all honesty, I don't think he/she/it would give a f**k. :-)

There's a big difference between what the law/church wants and what the
deity wants.  I play a cleric, and I'm always having to have keep in
mind that the words of the church are not necessarily 'straight from
heaven'.

>Theft, in medieval times, tended to be taken as a much more serious
>crime than it was in our times. Theft of a bag of platinum would be
>a serious crime. That's quite a sum of money. 

Yes, but in medieval times, the church *was* the law.  Are you saying
that the Inquisition executioners were doing what there god wanted
them to do?  Somehow, I doubt it.  They were doing what the church
wanted them to do, for whatever reasons it had dreamed up.

>Most fanactics have rather inflexible ideas about the laws that their
>diety has given them to follow. Executing an unbeliever who flouts
>the laws of his diety is not out of character or out of line for 
>a paladin.

That depends on how you view your paladin, or more specifically, how
your paladin views its 'mission' in life.  Paladins are LG.  Killing a
thief in cold blood is not, in my opinion, good.  I would never allow my
paladin to do that.  It might even be lawful if the penalty for theft is
death, but there ain't no way in hell that you could convince me that it's
good.  And in situations where law and goodness are in conflict, good always
wins (for me, at least).


-- 
Jorge Diaz                       | Sign in a restaurant:
Georgia Institute of Technology  | 
Office of Information Technology |   "We reserve the right to serve refuse to
ccoprdj@prism.gatech.edu         |        anyone."
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: cscott+@CS.CMU.EDU (Curtis Scott)
Subject: Re: Monty Haul (was Re: Levels)
Organization: Carnegie Mellon University
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 16:09:00 GMT

In article <batemanc.714062879@p4.cs.man.ac.uk>, batemanc@p4.cs.man.ac.uk (Mad Chris) writes:
|> CC100PG@GITVM1.GATECH.EDU (Paul Goodwin) states:
|> 
|> >I'm really gonna show my age here, but Monty Haul (in campaign terms) means
|> >a campaign where characters (of any level) get rewards which have no logical
|> >connection to the risks they take.  Anyone remember 'Let's make a deal' ?
|> 
|> I know that this term has been used since second edition D&D at least ( I
|> believe it appears in the glossary ), but I wondered if anyone knows where
|> the term actually comes from? A DM called Monty? I've been waiting nine
|> long years, and no-one seems to know.
|> 
|> As for remember 'Let's make a deal' - they're still SHOWING it over here!

If so, then you should remember that the host of the show is one Monty Hall.
And THAT'S where the name "Monty Haul" comes from.

Curtis Scott
Yet Another Greybeard
From: ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge Diaz)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Paladins
Date: 17 Aug 92 07:27:23 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <2A8F5222.28205@ics.uci.edu> kgieselm@ics.uci.edu (Kenneth Gregory Gieselman) writes:

>Evil acts, characters, thoughts, etc., are not tolerated within the party.
>More than one thief has gone with a broken nose, arm, etc., to study the path
>to "the Light".

Man, you would HATE our party.  Considering some of the guys I play with,
your paladin would wake up one morning with his throat slit.
:-)

-- 
Jorge Diaz                       | Sign in a restaurant:
Georgia Institute of Technology  | 
Office of Information Technology |   "We reserve the right to serve refuse to
ccoprdj@prism.gatech.edu         |        anyone."
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: tsang@cs.washington.edu (Donald Tsang)
Subject: Re: Rangers and studded leather armor
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 92 11:18:59 GMT

In article <> marc@cfmu.eurocontrol.be (Marc Philips) writes:
>As a ranger wearing studded leather you can attack twice per round
>(say, once with your dagger and once with your long sword) with no
>inconvenience even if your DEX is as low as 13.  Quite an asset
>when you're one of the front fighters.

With two weapon proficiencies, a fighter can do the same thing
(Two-handed style specialization, and ambidexterity), and use heavier
armor and two same-length weapons to boot!  The Ranger's ability
isn't so amazing anymore, is it?

>Give it a try, being able to kill an opponent fast can save your
>life more surely than a set of Plate Mail +2.

Uhh... against a bunch of Orcs, I think I'd rather take the Plate +2.
(With Dex 15, damage potential goes down from 35% to 5%, so you can
fight 7 times as long!) It depends on average damage, THAC0's, and the
opposing ACs.

-- 
Donald Tsang                    "Ho!  Haha!  Guard!  Turn!  Parry!  Dodge!
tsang@june.cs.washington.edu     Spin!  Ha!  Thrust!"
..!uw-beaver!june!tsang                       -- Robin Hood Daffy
From: kimcm@login.dkuug.dk (Kim Chr. Madsen)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Paladins
Date: 23 Aug 92 15:11:30 GMT

seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp) writes:

>	Okay, let me state that in this post I'm sort of playing devil's
>advocate; I *DO* believe in absolute Good and Evil...

>	But to the discussion at hand: why would killing the theif be,
>necessarily, not-good? What if the beliefs of your deity are: 
>	1) Amoung others, the right to property is an inalienable right and
>must not be infringed

>	2) Those who choose to violate inalienable rights are, BY THEIR
>OWN VOLUNTARY CHOICE, giving up ALL of their own rights, because they
>show no respect for others and thus deserve no respect from those others

>	3) Society must be protected against all those who do not show
>the basic respect for these rights.

>	If that's the deity's position, then the theif automatically gave up
>ALL his rights, including that to live, when he chose to steal. In that
>case, it is Lawful and GOOD WITHIN THAT GOD'S EYES for the Paladin to
>decide the theif's fate, anywhere from a slap on the wrist to death.


OK I'll byte (-;

1. All the above is all very well, but does not amount to a LG deity,
although the deity might try to pose as one! At best it would be a LN
deity who have such rules. One of the most principle notions of LG is
the principle of mercy, not necessary mellowness, but more like exact
the minimal punishment needed to teach the offender to think twice
before doing a "bad" deed again.

But then again, there are as many definitions of the D&D alignments as
there are players... So why don't we stuff this system, and start using
some more usable definitions:

All characters follow some higher principle or ethics codex, either the
Gods (Clerics, Druids, Paladins, Monks), or their brotherhoods
(Magic-Users, Illusionists, Thieves, Assassins) or a mixture of both
(Fighters, Rangers, ...). What is necessary is to have either clearcut
definitions of what each deity/brotherhood/other oganization view as
acceptable conduct and have the characters stick to that (and not some
fancy LG badge on their soul) or have the players state the ethics of
their character, when it is created (sure it can drift, and there
should be penalties if the drifting gets it to removed from the
original. A priest who deviates too much from the deitys ethics, will
find himself in ill-favor, An assassin who has second thoughts about
doing a kill or fail to deliver might find that the Guilt is going to
remove the stain on their reputation....etc.)
					
					Kim Chr. Madsen
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: tremblay@leland.Stanford.EDU (Marc Tremblay)
Subject: Re: Paladins
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 19:11:40 GMT

In article <1992Aug17.143617.25164@sei.cmu.edu> jbm@sei.cmu.edu (Jason Mahoney) writes:

>my Palidin, Sir Edward Van Halen, really put everything into place! Especially
             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

love that name... 8-)


========================================================
| Marc Tremblay                  |  There's no time    |
| tremblay@sunrise.stanford.edu  |  like the pleasant  |
========================================================
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: barth@wam.umd.edu (Kevin J. Barth)
Subject: Re: finding a game
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 07:30:18 GMT

In article <1992Aug19.030653.6286@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> kjenks@gothamcity.jsc.nasa.gov writes:
>
>We all know about the practice of posting a message on the (paper)
>bulletin board where AD&D books are sold, but how do you find GOOD
>players, not random munchkins?
>

However you get involved in a group you take the luck of the draw with 
regard to players.  Some of the ways that I have gotten into groups:

1) The everpresent bulletin board in the local gaming store
2) Notices on the internet
3) Word of mouth from acquaintances 

No matter whether you are starting a new group or joining an existing one, you
take your chances.  All of the above methods have gotten me winners and losers.
You just have to be prepared to drop out (if you are a player) or kick out
(if you are the DM).

>A further question: how do you dis-invite a munchkin without too many
>hard feelings?

Again, if the player is a true munchkin (ie, incurable), why are you concerned
with not offending him...after all, his playing style offends and unbalances
you and your campaign...But I have found the best way is simply not to play
into the munchkin's hands.  Don't allow ultra-powerful chars, refuse any
actions that are not in keeping with the mood and.or special rules of your
campaign, and in general keep things on an even keel.  If you don't permit 
a munchkin to operate, he will get bored and leave.

On the other hand, sometimes you will have a player who is, in your estimation,
curable from the disease of munchkinism.  In that case, you may want to spend 
some time explaining why his actions are unacceptable, and perhaps (after the
session is over) suggesting alternative actions.  

What symptoms exactly does your munchkin show?

Kevin Barth
barth@wam.umd.edu

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: wbennett@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (William F Bennett)
Subject: Multi-Class Hit Points
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 21:48:06 GMT


     I have just started a new campaign after being out of touch with DND for 
several years. One of the players is a multi-class elf. I have always had a 
problem with the hit points for multi-class characters. It seems after they 
struggle along to get their levels due to the splitting of the exp they are
again penalized by doling out meager hit points. The max a
fighter/magic-user/thief can get is 3 HP on his fighter level, 2 hP on his 
thief
level and 1 on his MU level. When they are traveling wth characters with
higher levels because they didn't split their exp's they are also a 
disadvantage because their ht points are so low. This is even more a 
discrepancy at higher levels when the multi-class is limited .

     I have tried to come up with a better way of giving HP's but have had 
difficulty. If I give a regular dce throw not divided then the HP's go up too 
fast.

          Any Comments
-- 
*******************************************************************************
Bill Bennett              Dept of Radiology           The Ohio State University

*********************  wbennett@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu  ********************
From: yt1@eng.cam.ac.uk (Y. Tremblay)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Paladins
Date: 17 Aug 92 22:23:58 GMT
Organization: Cambridge University Engineering Department, UK

In article <66181@hydra.gatech.EDU> ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge Diaz) writes:
>In article <2A8F5222.28205@ics.uci.edu> kgieselm@ics.uci.edu (Kenneth Gregory Gieselman) writes:
>
>>Evil acts, characters, thoughts, etc., are not tolerated within the party.
>>More than one thief has gone with a broken nose, arm, etc., to study the path
>>to "the Light".
>
>Man, you would HATE our party.  Considering some of the guys I play with,
>your paladin would wake up one morning with his throat slit.
>:-)
>
>-- 
>Jorge Diaz                       | Sign in a restaurant:
>Georgia Institute of Technology  | 
>Office of Information Technology |   "We reserve the right to serve refuse to
>ccoprdj@prism.gatech.edu         |        anyone."

   Error Jorge, he would _NOT_ wake up :-)  

   (Sorry I couldn't resist)

Yannick
From: Rannou@info.polymtl.ca (Patrick Rannou)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Kender
Date: 22 Aug 92 09:21:58 GMT
	<1992Aug20.115338.22425@cs.ruu.nl> <1992Aug21.164512.11358@aimla.com>
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal, Canada

In article <1992Aug21.164512.11358@aimla.com> jc@optimla.aimla.com (John VanHoozer) writes:

...

   DM: As you remove the box,  you here a *snick*.  Mr. Fighter and you then
   hear a loud *snick* and then you [the kender] hear a loud crash.

   Fighter:  I didn't hear a loud crash?

   DM:  No.  A trap door in the ceiling 30 ft overhead opened and a 
   large (LARGE) iron trunk fell right on top of you.  You are dead.

...

My, why does that reminds me of Gigax's traps.

"You are dead, no save. Nothing. YOU A-R-E D.E.A.D."

Duh. I mean, you know. Duh. If I was the fighter's player, I would have to
be pretty deseperate to continue playing with you as a GM after a stunt
like that.


Pat.

--
/---------------------------\
| Patrick "Paradak" Rannou. |
| Rannou@info.polymtl.ca    |
\---------------------------/
From: gupw@uniwa.uwa.edu.au (Paul Wagland)
Subject: AD&D Mailing list (Where is it?)
Summary: Sorry If this is a FAQ
Organization: University of Western Australia
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 00:33:48 GMT

Could someone out there please send me the address of the AD&D mailing
list and details on how to join it.

Thanks in advance

Paul
-- 
Paul Wagland            | These opinions are mine and no-one elses
gupw@uniwa.uwa.edu.au   | Bingy Bingy Bingy Frogs Go round and round
------------------------+     -- Another silly quote from me  :-)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: covin@tartarus.uchicago.edu (David Covin)
Subject: Re: The illogic of draining levels
Organization: University of Chicago Computer Science
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 19:45:47 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.181129.12171@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu> jwwalden@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu (P'relan) writes:

   Has anyone else ever thought that the ability of undead (and certain other
   creatures) to drain experience levels just didn't make any sense?  I could see
   perhaps some creature with the special ability to drain your memory and skills,
   but I don't see undead as doing that, especially when the ability is called
   energy draining. 

Well, yes and no.  Levels in (A)D&D don't make sense, so ... Yes, the
idea that the critter is actually making you *forget* things seems
odd, but I have no problem with certain undead creatures, like
Tolkien's ring-wraiths, actually draining power and life-force, and
levels are power in (A)D&D.  Your solution of having them drain
strength and h.p. is a good one, though.

The major problems I have with level-draining undead are: 
   1) game balance.  Two wights can obliterate a mid-to-high-level
party if they get a few lucky rolls.  I *like* undead, but I don't
like punishing my players that severely on a regular basis.
   2) frequency.  Any moderately powerful undead critter can drain at
least one level per hit-- it's the trademark ability of all D&D
undead.  As I said, I like undead, and don't like the fact that
critters that are so weak the party could easily obliterate them are
also so strong the party will throw everything they have at them, and
are screwed if they get ambushed.
   3) vampires.  Because level-draining is the trademark ability of
all D&D undead, vampires have to drain levels, or they couldn't be
powerful undead.  Indeed, they have to drain 2 levels per hit.  Which
means that no vampire would ever bother to go through the convoluted
courtship/stalkings of Dracula or Nosferatu-- indeed, no vampire
*could*.  Merely shaking hands with a dinner guest will kill the poor
sap if he's not an experienced adventurer; and will announce your
nature for all the world to see in any case.  Sneaking in repeatedly
to nibble on Lucy and Mina Harker's tender necks?  Forget it!  Either
will crumple instantly at your touch, and rise again undead before the
night is out.  For a GM who likes vampires, this is no fun at all; and
not at all in keeping with the vampires of literature.

Though I didn't do this in the last game I ran, which was quite a
while ago, I rather like the idea of 1) changing level-draining to
just drain h.p., strength, and constitution; 2) restricting
level-draining abilities to wraiths and wights; and 3) making up
something else entirely for vampires (and spectres).

--
David Covin                           covin@despair.uchicago.edu
From: reza@magellan.ae.utexas.edu (Alireza Vali)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Bastard DM From Hell Pt 2
Date: 17 Aug 92 21:30:28 GMT
Organization: Center for Space Research Imaging Lab, University of Texas at Austin

In article <1992Aug15.172123.19025@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> cb317@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Stephanie J. Kessler) writes:
>
>Rangers can wear any type of armor they wish, however some of
>their abilities cannot be used when wearing armor heavier than
>studded leather.  I am running a ranger, and if I have a chance,
>I'm going to TRY and get her some heavy armor (maybe chain), and
>keep the studded leather handy in case we get a hint that a
>situation may arise where my skills would be needed.  I believe
>the  only skills affected are the thieving skills, and I don't
>Move Silently or Hide in Shadows very often as one of the front
>fighters of the party.

At lower levels, the two-handed fighting without penalty is the
biggest advantage of the Ranger (IMHO).  I think that the two
attacks per round in exchange for higher AC is a good trade-off.
The Move Silently/Hide in Shadows skill is pretty useless prior
to 7th or 8th level.  I have not yet succeeded in doing either
(currently 5th level) and believe me, I have TRIED!!
I think a Ranger in plate mail is a bit out of character anyway.

WRT the original thread, I think the DM is too harsh in his/her
ruling that "Ranger experience" cannot be earned while wearing
armor heavier than Studded Leather.  The PHB2ed leaves a lot
to the DM's discretion, but this is clearly an abuse.  it does explicitly state that Rangers
can wear any armor.  It already (reasonably IMO) penalizes wearing
heavy armor....  And I thought our DM was nasty because he  didn't
let me play a NG Ranger/Druid!!!!

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: cwatters@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Coyt D Watters)
Subject: Re: Tarresque - Anyone killed one?
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 20:11:16 GMT

In article <66465@hydra.gatech.EDU> tmiller@prism.gatech.EDU (Thomas Miller) writes:
>
>

>  Ahh...if I could just bring Godzilla and some of his buddies into
>the AD&D world...I guess this would be more appropriate for some
>kind of super heroes game.
>  Just my two cents.


The first "real" second edition book, Oriental Adventures, has rules for 
bringing Gargantua into the game, guidelines on the different big
lizard/moth/mutant/slime/gorilla into the game.

Mayhem and destruction for one and all.

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd