HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bkoike@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Bryce Koike)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Generating Characters during play.
Date: 16 Nov 92 16:07:55 GMT
Article-I.D.: sdcc12.41042
Organization: University of California, San Diego

In article <Bxo1C7.Ks6@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> jacobus@symphony.cc.purdue.edu (Bryan J. Maloney) writes:
>
>Interesting idea, that, and It's one I've proposed once or twice to my players.
>However, they seem to not really go for it.  (Actually, half would do it, and

	Hmn.  Normally I have my players make their characters and
during the first handful of sessions (first two or so is normally
all it takes) I'll let them change disads and quirks so they can
roleplay what they really WANT to role-play.  Oh, yeah, there's all
sorts of arguments about this, but I'd rather have good gaming that
sticking strictly to something that'll only ruin a character for a
player.  And it happens infrequently at best, so there's little
worry for me.

>the powergamer half won't do it--of course that half consists of one guy who
>I am still trying to train away from citing skill level numbers when a 
>prospective employer asks his character what he can do.  Another member of

	Heh.  Reminds me of a game where an employer asked if
so-and-so was any good at something.  "Uh, shoot...how good IS a
14?"  The guy sitting next to the player said, "Hey, you're only as
good as you THINK you are!"  (I took this to heart in a space GURPS
game with some pretty spectacular effects...your character is only
as good as YOU, the player thinks it is!)
	"Well, yah, I can hit the sparrow...got a 17 in bow."
	"What?"
	"I said a got a 17 in bow?"
	"What the hell are you talking about?"
	[boink...if you give character points during game play, this
is definitely a penalty.  Talking about not playing in character...]

>that contingent claimed that he was unable to actually design a character
>without the dice to dictate his attributes for him--I disabused him of that
>notion rather quickly.)

	Not to start up the PA vs. random rolling, but there's
definitely a point to both sides.  Generally, if a player already
has a type of character he wants to run, I have him use PA.  If not,
some style of random generation is used...or at least I try to work
with the player to create a shell of a character that can be used to
spark ideas.  (Most games don't let you have it both ways, though,
and for pretty good reasons, too.  Still, in an Ideal Game, you
could select the degree of randomness you want and make a character
according to your own preferences on the matter...prolly need a
computer to do it, though)
From: gobeski8618@iscsvax.uni.edu (Steve 'Gobes' Gobeski)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Hero Question: focii 
Date: 16 Nov 92 13:44:37 -0600
Organization: University of Northern Iowa

In article <1992Nov13.202821.16547@daffy.cs.wisc.edu>, hague@cat20.cs.wisc.edu (Vince Hague) writes:
> 
>   B) Double strike: this attack does two very fast hits to an opponent
>        in the same phase. Here is how it is bought:
> 

Additional speed or limited autofire will probably work best.  Note limited
autofire will mean both attacks hit if the attack roll is made by 2 or more.
The additional speed should be bought with the lim 'only for attacks', worth no
more than -1/4 (you can't block or dodge or move or rec or...) and I'm sure
someone will jump in and say it's not worth anything, from experience I
disagree.  Nothing like having your attack phase come up and not being able to
close or rec.

> 
>        Any comments?
>        Also, if legal, would it be out of line to be able to attack
>        two opponents with one attack each???
> 

Check out the sweep maneuver.  If this power represents a feint-strike routine,
you could at least get multiple strikes, though not feints.  Depends on special
effects (neat way of saying GM's option).


> On an alternative question,
>   When attacking witha melee weapon, If I am using a Great Axe (2d6 HKA),
>   How much endurance do I expend when using a 2d6 attack? (3 END?)
>   Also, can I choose to strike lighter (a 1/2 d6 attack) for (1 END?)?
> 

Most heroic games use 1 END per 5 pts for STR... weapons with a STR min use
endurance based on the strength used.  I don't see why you couldn't use less
than the minimum strength, I just don't think anybody has done it.

Do note that weapons with STR min use endurance and work slightly different
than normal powers.  END is 1 per 5 pts of the STR min, you need at least the
STR min to wield the weapon properly, and for every 5 STR over the min, you can
opt to increase the DC by 1, up to 2x the original DC of the weapon.

-- Steve 'Gobes' Gobeski // GOBESKI8618@iscsvax.uni.edu
From: tdunn@ecst.csuchico.edu (Tim Dunn)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: SJ Games Licenses White Wolf's Vampire
Date: 16 Nov 92 22:45:09 GMT
Article-I.D.: charnel.1e989lINN3vb
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: hairball.ecst.csuchico.edu

Kurt Bose writes:
>Which brings up another point.  Who will write the GURPS supplements?  One of
>the good things about WW has been the relative cohesiveness of the game in
>terms of the similar worldview of the authors.  

Too bad the rules aren't written with any cohesiveness at all.  The player's
escalation handbook introduces Chimenistry, which can in effect render 
redundant Obfuscate, given the absolute lack of thought that went into the
power.  Illusions.  Can I create the illusion that I'm not there?  Can I
create the illusion that I look like someone else?  Can I create the illusion
that the subject has been shot in the back (only one sense, so I'll mimic
the gunshot noise.)  Can I create the illusion that he's not speaking?

The very opening of the Player's Guide admits that the book was intended
to be for all types of vampire players, including methusalah hunters.
Of course, I can choose not to use rules that don't fit, that I don't like.
Of course, I can change the ones that don't work well, or don't work at 
all.  I ask you this, in the midst of all my changing: what am I spending
money for?  Bradstreet is the only contributor with whom I have no problems.

And he's one of the artists.

-- 
Pascal, n.:
	A programming language named after a man who would turn over in
his grave if he knew about it.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: apace@mta.ca
Subject: Re: Converting a book into a world
Reply-To: apace@mta.ca
Organization: Mount Allison U, Sackville, N.B. Canada 
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 23:21:33 GMT

In article <1992Nov17.222854.28162@Veritas.COM>, joshua@Veritas.COM (Joshua Levy) writes:
>I have found a work of fiction which (almost :-) exactly describes a
>world I want to run an RPG in.  I'm planning on "converting" this
>book into a game world.  
>
>Does anyone have any good ideas on how this should be done?
>Has anyone done this?  If so, what were your experiances?
>
Well, I once converted _Islands in the Net_ for a one shot adventure.

What I did was take those nifty little plastic tabs, and affix them to
the pages of important descriptions, amusing quotes, etc. That way, I
could use the actual book as a quick and handy reference during play.

It seemed like a good idea, but I'm not exactly sure how well it would
work in practice.  You see, I was GMing Munchkins at the time, and in 
actual play they had all been either killed or arrested by the time the 
Commerzbank executives arrived. [sigh...].

Oh well, hope you find my tip useful anyways.

						-Tony Pace
						apace@mta.ca
From: maillet@tls-cs.cert.fr (Luc Maillet)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Role Master Physics question
Date: 19 Nov 92 08:14:34 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: CERT, CS Dpt. Toulouse, France

In article <u894793.721928017@bruny>, u894793@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (T. Little) writes:
|> 
|> In Fantasy gaming, I use physics as a tool;  it is (one of) the most 
|> coherent and powerful 'models of reality', and as such it can be a basis 
|> for inventing other such models.  Besides, if you use it as a model you
|> get the advantages of having all the work done for you, and you can just
|> define the rest as 'magic'.  (Recalling a quote from Douglas Adams, "We
|> demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!")

  Oh. And how, pray tell, do you "model" magic, which is essentially non-reality?
I believe magic screws up most of the physical laws as we know them, and replaces
them with a "variable set" of laws. So if a physical law is defied by magic, the
magic ALWAYS wins ( as long as it is active, of course ). RM implies that in
spell descriptions ( "when the spell duration ends, the object is again subject
to physical laws..." says it all ).

  Physics also tend to prevent such things as Giants, and that is trouble for
many fantasy worlds...

  Of course, magic notwithstanding, the physical laws OF THE LOCAL UNIVERSE
(which are not necessarily the ones we know) apply. SO, if it was your idea all
along, please do not be offended. (just an afterthought).

								Redwing

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: darknite@camelot.bradley.edu (John S. Novak III)
Subject: Re: Converting a book into a world
Organization: Bradley University
Date: 18 Nov 92 02:08:05 GMT

In <1992Nov17.222854.28162@Veritas.COM> joshua@Veritas.COM (Joshua Levy) writes:

>I have found a work of fiction which (almost :-) exactly describes a
>world I want to run an RPG in.  I'm planning on "converting" this
>book into a game world.  

>Does anyone have any good ideas on how this should be done?
>Has anyone done this?  If so, what were your experiances?

[method]

>Does this sound like a good way of translating a book into a world?

Well, it doesn't sound like a bad method, but since you have
specifically left out both the novel you're looking at, and the
system with which you are playing, I can't really be any more
specific.

The problem is, there are some books which simply do not
translate well into the mechanics of certain games.  Can you
really imagine playing an Amber-style campaign with AD&D or GURPS
rules?  I can't.  Or for that matter, playing in any other
setting with the Amber rules?  I think not.

At any rate, I'd start by reading the book or books at least
twice after I decided to run a campaign set in them.  Then I'd
come up with a complete, fairly detailed plot and campaign
setting building off the plot material described in the books.
Following this, I'd start taking notes on my own plot ideas and
campaign settings, but no specific stats, or anything of the
sort-- do it all in terms of character descriptions and so forth.

Having done that, I know fairly well what the players are going
to run into in the areas of combat, travel situations,
role-playing,  discoveries, and so forth.  Now, I can look at
things from the point of the games-mechanic-- are there any
effects (high tech, magic, whatever) that appear in the book
which aren't modelled well in my chosen system?  If so, how am I
going to reconcile the setting to the system?  Equally as
important, are there any effects in the game which aren't
mentioned or allowed in the novels?  Again, fix the
discrepancies.  I would want to prepare a fairly complete list of
rule changes, modifications, additions, deletions and if need be,
log tables to make sure everything is consistent.

If the world you want to recreate is too far away from the
system, this may prove to be a monumental task, which may involve
quite an intimate knowledge of the way dice work (for the
mechanic and game balance) and a good insight into the reasoning
behind these special effects.

Finally, having a general, systemless set of descriptions, and a
good set of rule changes, all that remains is adding stats to the
descriptions.

That's how I would approach it, at any rate.

--
John S. Novak, III		darknite@camelot.bradley.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: pmwg1641@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Peter M. White)
Subject: Re: SRUN I: Questions from the Minotaur
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 02:41:55 GMT
Keywords: shadowrun, srun

In article <1992Nov17.224828.758@ncsu.edu> jlperkin@eos.ncsu.edu (JERRY LEE PERKINSON) writes:
>
>Query:  Since it is called a focus, I would
>assume that you focus your energies through the item and increase its power.
>Could you then have multiple "focuses."  I have argued no in the idea that
>when you focus, you can only focus on ONE item, or else you are not really
>focusing your power.  I have also heard arguements to support the idea of
>multiple focuses.  Any comments????
>
>Killjoy, occasionaly eater of fingers

Hmmm...I never considered really considered that possibility.  I suppose
that I simply jumped to the conclusion that only one could be used
based on my personal assessment of game balance and authors' intentions.
Actually, I am quite certain that the game designers expect only one
could be used simultaneously.  There are some rules in the Grimoire
about using Enchantment to reduce bonding costs, which, to my recollection,
would only make sense if only one were allowed.  Otherwise, mages would
bond multiple low power focuses instead of a high power one.  It is
true that higher power focuses survive Astral Combat much more easily;
but, face it, Focuses less than rating 4 are slag anyway.

Note: Clearly a mage may have multiple focuses bonded, just no point
in carrying more around.

Another question about focuses to chew on:
Does a PA who bonds a Power Focus get those extra attribute points
to spend on more abilites?  (IMHO, nyet; but I wondering what others
think...)

--Peter
______________________________________________________________________________
						|
     "Guards!  Let me draw their fire!"		|	p-white@uiuc.edu
		   --Scapegoat,_Marshal Law_	|
______________________________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: jasonr@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Jason F Ralph)
Subject: Re: Rolemaster Physics
Organization: University of Sussex
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 11:50:33 GMT

a481@mindlink.bc.ca (J.D. Frazer) writes:
: > jasonr@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Jason F Ralph) writes:
: > Physics is a science and should therefore be confined to obscure places
: > of little or no interest.
: 
: Speak for yourself, pal. Science can be utterly fascinating. Additionally,
: a decent understanding of science is critical if you want to run a
: realistic SF rpg.

Science CAN be utterly fascinating, but it is impossible to explain why
or how to the average man in the street. Your Mr.Average has little
interest and even less understanding of what science really is. Even
allowing for that, most science is incredibly dull... most research is
incredibly dull, but there are those very special moments when
everything falls in place and it all works... there is no better
feelling than knowing how it all works, and WHY it all works... and
that's Science (WITH the capital 'S'!).

: 
: > Remember gaming isn't 'real' and doesn't therefore have to conform to
: > anyones preconceived ideas about reality... and that's magic!
: 
: If you want to run a universe that is consistent, you must! must! must!
: have a consistent set of laws. If consistency means little to you or your
: gaming group then sure, throw caution to the winds.
: 
: I prefer my game worlds to be well thought-out and consistent. Magic is, to
: me, simply another aspect of matter->energy->thought and therefore follows
: several well established laws of nature. You needn't do this as well, but
: I've discovered how useful it is to be consistent. See, the PCs have to
: follow these laws too.

The original message was written to incite some flames, so thank you for
obliging my slightly warped sense of humour/reality. I missed the actual
argument about the spell (which ever one it was) and it all seemed to be
a bit pointless discussing changes in weight, mass, inertial mass and
gravitational in relation to magic.
 
: In response to your first comment included at the beginning of this
: message, I say that because physics is a science (and perhaps our most
: important one), it should be appreciated as the useful tool for gaming that
: it is.

Physics is the ONLY science (cf. Lord Rutherford)!
 
: Followups to .advocacy, of course.

OOPS!


E.E. 'Doc' Splot.
From: ecasey@mailer.cc.fsu.edu (Edward Casey)
Subject: Re: Testing, please ignore
Organization: Florida State University
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 14:09:21 GMT

In article <1992Nov17.093020.22254@ousrvr.oulu.fi> sn@phoenix.oulu.fi (Sami Nieminen) writes:
>Sami Nieminen (sn@phoenix.oulu.fi) wrote:
>: 
>: This is a test.
>
>And this is another test. :)

Who tests the Testers? :/
From: amigaman+@pitt.edu (Russell A Howard)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: SR2:Grounding through Quickened Spells
Date: 21 Nov 92 04:17:33 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

Well, some of you aren't going to like this but, and I got this directly
from Tom Dowd himself, spells CAN ground out through quickened spells.

Some people at GenCon were asking about this and Tom said they were dis-
cussing it. The Final Verdict was that a physical spell (and only a physical
spell) could ground through the quickened spell, and even if it is an area
effect spell, only the person "connected" to the quickened spell is affected
by the spell that is cast. (BTW, the quickening is broken, too.)
-- 
Russ Howard
Internet:  amigaman+@pitt.edu
BIX:       russhoward
From: jlperkin@eos.ncsu.edu (JERRY LEE PERKINSON)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Srun 2: Sequels?
Date: 23 Nov 92 01:19:05 GMT
Reply-To: jlperkin@eos.ncsu.edu (JERRY LEE PERKINSON)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Originator: jlperkin@c00396-346dan.eos.ncsu.edu


In article <By1tG8.78t@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (RedSwordTarga) writes:
|>>Point two:  (Universal Brotherhood)  Your chacters weren't meant to survive.
|>>This was supposed to be the 'no-win' run.
|>
|>Oh, come now. With all that firepower? I'm sorry, but the bugs weren't that
|>tough. I suppose, however, that the GM's not really being a good tactician
|>and some of the players having been in the military may have affected the
|>outcome. ("Echelon left, Grenadier open up on those bugs..")
|>

Well a direct conflict with the *BIG* bug should have been bad.  I think one
dose of the fear power, and most people wouldn't have been able to stay to
fight.  As I recall, it was a high essence creature, which the pcs would
have to make a 12 threshold of 12s with their willpower or something
ridiculous like that.

     Either way, we just hired a demolitions team who planted a bunch of 
explosives, and drove a truck with a ton of explosives through the front door.
BOOM!  A temporary solution anyway.

Killjoy, eater of lost children.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: barnett@mummy.agsm.unsw.OZ.AU (Glen Barnett)
Subject: Game in subject line (was Re: Explosive rounds)
Organization: The Australian Graduate School of Management
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 22:33:01 GMT

Please put the game to which your post refers in the subject
line *whenever* you make a post related to a single game.
E.g, if your post is about Shadowrun, then put that
in the subject line. Really.

Glen
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: goldm@rpi.edu (Mitchell E. Gold)
Subject: Re: The Adventurers and rec.games.frp.campaign
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 18:10:42 GMT

Note that Ridley McIntyre's _Red_ is a campaign in progress. The Net.Story.Book
is a story in progress; I asked that the coordinator send me proofread copies
of older chapters so he wouldn't have to send many updates of the same material
to .archives. Bryce Koike has told me he has another story or campaign in
progress. I wish the group had been available when Nick (Janow?) was posting
Groombridge, as that would have been perfect material to place in .archives
and was just as much covered by the charter of the group.

The material is out there, and I'm willing to post it. Both campaigns that
have been completed and those in progress.
--
 Mitchell Gold     /  middleman of
 sundance@rpi.edu /  rec.games.frp.archives
From: tdunn@ecst.csuchico.edu (I Need a Life)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Testing, please ignore
Date: 18 Nov 92 20:11:39 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: grotus.ecst.csuchico.edu

Coyt D Watters writes:
>Sami Nieminen writes:
>>This is a test.
>Hey Tim!  What do you think this one's up to?  Not an anonymous posting.

Hmm, maybe someone left themselves logged in, and this was supposed to
be flame bait to flood his mailbox?

-- 
While anyone can admit to themselves they were wrong, the true test is
admission to someone else.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: wilder@nx02.mik.uky.edu (jeff wilder)
Subject: Re: Shadowrun-Trid and other questions
    <1992Nov14.212351.44792@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu> <wilder.721852298@mik.uky.edu> 
    <BxryB2.50z@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu>
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences
X-Path: nx02.mik.uky.edu!wilder
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 23:53:23 GMT

In <BxryB2.50z@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> pkaminsk@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu (Peter Kaminski) writes:

|>|>      Trolls is tough, and grenades is not.  Grenade tech didn't rise
|>|> quite so fast as armor tech.  Now, if you use SPECIAL grenades...

|>|Second edition solves this problem.  A single grenade in a small room
|>|is enough to kill about anyting (except maybe a dragon.)

|>No, SRII didn't fix this.  Grenades now do a Serious base, but there's no    
|>way to stage up the damage code.  However, through the use of the concussion
|>wave rules, a character in an enclosed area *will* take that serious wound.
|>I'd suggest upping the damage code on grenades to D, and fiddling with the
|>power level.  It *is* possible to survive a close-by fragger, it's just not
|>real likely.  

|  Actually, I believe that SRII states that you use your successes on your
|Throwing success test to stage up the damage, as usual - as well as for
|accuracy.  (ref:  p.97, right column, second paragraph from the top)  So, yes,
|grenades CAN kill now - and it's not even too difficult!  :-)

Wow.  You're right.  I can't believe I overlooked this, considering that I   
was specifically looking for it...

Thanks.
--
==============================================================================
| Jeff W  uk06666@ukpr.uky.edu | Meddle not in the affairs of cats, for they |
| Wilder  & wilder@mik.uky.edu | are subtle, and will piss on your cyberdeck.|
==============================================================================
From: s892341@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au (Matt=Goodall)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Adventurers? (was Re: Carrying weapons..(was Re: META: Swords..))
Date: 18 Nov 92 04:13:35 GMT
Organization: RMIT Computer Centre
NNTP-Posting-Host: minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au

thornley@mega.cs.umn.edu (David H. Thornley) writes:

>	In fact, this is NOT a medieval setting; the change in setting and
>mood and society will be akin to the change after the Industrial Revolution,
>or even more so.
>
>	Add to this a large and diverse population of sentients, active
>gods, inherent Good and Evil, and you have something that CANNOT be judged
>on the basis of what our tame and rather dull (by comparison) world had
>in its medieval period.

It is fantasy and so I can make a realistic setting if I choose (and am good
enough), I was not trying to limit your choices, please do not limit mine.

The important fact is that in the middle ages people believed in the power
of god, magic etc etc. In a realistic fantasy world (very low powered) all
people would see was the confirmation of their faith(s).

Matt


-- 
Matt Goodall
s892341@minyos.xx.rmit.oz.au
Famous last words: "Who's the bitch with the spiders?"