HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: z_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Why are their level limits?
Date: 27 Aug 92 17:55:54 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

In article <66993@hydra.gatech.EDU>, ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge Diaz) writes:

[many examples of the silliness of AD&D classes]

> Notice that all my examples are class-based instead of race-based.  That's
> because the class restrictions (IMHO) are the most ridiculous of all.
> But hey, we live with them, in the name of game balance....
> 
> 

	That might be why I play mainly GURPS now :-)

Brandon Cope
From: morpheus@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Morpheus Nosferatu)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: A new version of Familiars
Date: 27 Aug 92 16:09:10 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center

In article <1992Aug27.035538.13203@oz.plymouth.edu> pyr530@oz.plymouth.edu (Rob Holden) writes:
>	I liked the idea on the "new" familiars that Morpheus suggested, but
>obviously it cannot be a first level spell.  I would make it a 5th or 6th level
>spell, and rename it to Summon Familiar.
>	I also think that there will be alot of griping by the mage-haters out
>there, who will insist that mages are too powerful already and don't need any
>more.  However, if the spell is made to be 5th level, then it cannot be gotten
>except by a 9th level mage (or higher), and if 6th, then by a 12th level mage
>minimum.
>					Rob

I don't know about this.  I had thought of this as a way to increase the
magical abilities of low level mages, giving them a couple extra spells much
like a cleric's wisdom would do, without overly overpowering the mage at
higher levels.  Making a summon familiar spell be of 5th or 6th level would
completely counter this except for the rare mage who managed to lay his
hands on a scroll with a copy of the spell when he is still low-level.

If you really don't want a first-level mage to be too powerful with a
familiar, then just give him a 1 HD familiar as I described, then he would
only gain one extra spell.  Or alter the probabilities so that a low level
mage would only get a 1HD familiar, or 2HD at best, while higher level
familiars would be more likely for high-level mages.

This idea of making the summoning spellat around 5th or 6th level is
counter to one of the main ideas I had for coming up with this type of
familiar.

But to each his own.

					Morpheus
From: doherty@ctron.com (Jim Doherty)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Tales from the Floating Walrus
Keywords: Greyhawk, Trashed
Date: 2 Sep 92 16:29:45 GMT
Reply-To: doherty@olympus.ctron.com (Jim Doherty)
Organization: Cabletron Systems INc.



Thomas Miller writes:

>  Can anyone who actually _has_ this set provide some insight?  Thanks,


From the Ashes is not due out until November.

I'm pretty ticked at the concept of trashing the entire world, but who knows,
they might actually do a decent revamping (being very optimistic here).  My
suspicion is that getting Gygax's name off the product was the only real goal
here.  When I put forward this suggestion to Kim Mohan at GenCon, he didn't
deny it very enthusiastically.  The woman who is writing the new set (forgot 
her name) seemed to be a real Greyhawk fan, so maybe there is hope.

The whole Rary story, by the way, is laid out in the "Rary the Traitor" module,
which I think is selling in stores now.  It's pretty decent, though not 
amazing.

I agree with the earlier poster who said that this world gets the imaginative
juices flowing.  Just flipping through the brief country descriptions in the
original boxed set is enough to inspire long hours of adventures.

I really hope they don't screw this up.

Jim
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: dmatiske@vyasa.helios.nd.edu (david matiskella)
Subject: Re: Why are their level limits?
Reply-To: dmatiske@vyasa.helios.nd.edu (david matiskella)
Organization: University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 16:15:29 GMT

	Maybe thieving shouldn't be a class.  After all can't you have a magic user who steals or a fighter who steals? They got rid of the assassin with this logic so maybe they will can the Thief.
	One thing about levels that is totally unrealistic is how thier is constant, steady improvement as you  gain levels. ( the figethers thac goes down by 1 every level.) In reality it just wouldn't happen that way. Thier should be
a large gain at the start of his career and very little gain at the end.
	The major problem with removing level limits from nonhumans is that they become Gods. Take the average human mage starting at the age of 20. If he gains one level a yearr after twenty years he is forty years old and most likely beginning to feel that adventuring is  getting to be too tough at his old age.  Meanwhile the 100 year old elf is now 120 with another 100-200 prime adventuring years left.  Which race is going to have more high level mages? The other problem with high levels for mages is they spen






d thier whole life memorizing spells. I takes a high level mage over half the day to memorize all his spells which really cuts down on adventuring time.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd,rec.games.frp.advocacy,rec.games.frp.misc,rec.games.frp
From: spzkny@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (JAMES ZAKANY)
Subject: Re: HMGS Siege of Gondor?
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Keywords: What the hell happenned?
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Date: 31 Aug 1992 08:20 EST  

In article <13824@chalmers.se>, d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se
 (Bertil Jonell) writes...

>>At GenCon, Saturday afternoon (2:30ish), the Historical Miniatures Gaming 
>>Society's event was packed up!

>  Was those the guys who went around with namelists that protested that they
>had to remove their fully functional guilliotine...

	No
        ^^                                        James S. Zakany
From: boelter3945@iscsvax.uni.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Scrolls and spells
Date: 1 Sep 92 15:35:35 -0500
Organization: University of Northern Iowa

In article <1992Aug31.152240.5225@news.cs.indiana.edu>,
   switzki@hammerhead.cs.indiana.edu (Shawn M. Witzki) writes:
> [...reply to message about scribing scrolls into spellbooks...]
> 
> Don't forget that the mage must also have access to a magical laboratory, if
> you're a stickler for rules and other picky details.  ;-)

   Really?  I never used this rule, didn't even know it was a rule, at least
for scribing spells into spellbooks.  I, of course, required access to these
things for doing spell research (need some lab 'toys' to experiment with and
mix together, after all... :-) but not for simple scribing.  Maybe the ink,
paper, and pen had to be more than just common stuff, but that's about it.

   Hmmm, I just can't see the reason for needing a lab for scribing scrolls
into spellbooks.  Any other thoughts on this?

                                        John "Nightwind" Boelter

--
*******************************************************************************
* John Boelter        a.k.a. Nightwind            boelter3945@iscsvax.uni.edu *
* Organizational Manager and contact person for everything and then some.     *
*******************************************************************************
* The individual who said we only use 10%  * The first 90% of a task takes    *
* of our brain's mental capacity, was      * 90% of the time, and the last    *
* probably 90% incorrect.                  * 10% takes the other 90%.         *
*            -Unknown comic on A&E-        *   -99 rule of Project Schedules- *
*******************************************************************************
From: ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge Diaz)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Question on Armor Class
Date: 27 Aug 92 13:23:35 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <1992Aug27.062905.28924@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> ba446@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Todd M. Hanson) writes:

>Check out the rules on unarmed combat (either phb or dm's guide). A
>person with a weapon facing an unarmed person is +4 to hit AND DAMAGE.
>This sounds like some pretty severe penalties to me.  :)
>
>Also makes those cesti just a little less god-like.

Oh, cool.  I never read about it, so it's probably in the DMG (which I've
never read)....  Does this apply just to humans/elves/dwarves/etc, or
does it apply to *any* creature that doesn't have natural weapons (such
as a troll) and is fighting weaponless, like orcs, goblins, etc?

Paul, you reading this? :-)


-- 
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."
From: boelter3945@iscsvax.uni.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Hit points and Level draining (was Re: Multi-Class Hit Points)
Date: 31 Aug 92 12:53:22 -0500
Organization: University of Northern Iowa

In article <RANNOU.92Aug27023634@zuse.info.polymtl.ca>, Rannou@info.polymtl.ca
  (Patrick Rannou) writes:
> In article <1992Aug24.141916.6211@iscsvax.uni.edu>
>    boelter3945@iscsvax.uni.edu writes:
> Another thing about hit points: Don't you think it's too harsh to let a
> fighter have a "1" on his hit points? I think it's too nasty, so I've mde a
> house rule saying the miminum number of hit points a HD gives:

   I agree, I reroll 1s for player's hit points, so a fighter essentially has
equal chances of 2-10 on the die roll, no ones.

> Also, I give HALF the constitution bonus (rounded down) to HP for levels
> after name level. this means that a fighter with 18 CON gets +5 HP/level
> in his higher levels... and hepls me make demi-gods which have many HP...
> Giant's also nenefit from it greatly, since they have very high consts...
> 
> What do you think about these two ideas? Too unbalancing?

   Well, personally I do think this would be a bit more unbalancing.  After
all, if the fighter has an 18 Con, they'll already be getting a lot of hit
points from all the before-name-level levels.

> That's why I introduced ANOTHER idea: partial-level-permanent-loss.
> What this means is that if an undead drains you for 1 level, you lose one
> level but only half a level is "permanently" lost until special healing
> takes place (restoration, etc). The other one comes back naturally, at a
> rate of half a level per day, twice as fast per day of full rest. Natural
> and magical healing is at half effect during this period.

   I like this idea, sounds good.

                                        John "Nightwind" Boelter

--
*******************************************************************************
* John Boelter        a.k.a. Nightwind            boelter3945@iscsvax.uni.edu *
* Organizational Manager and contact person for everything and then some.     *
*******************************************************************************
* The individual who said we only use 10%  * "I hit it with my Sword+10 of    *
* of our brain's mental capacity, was      *  Super Slaying" - "It laughs" -  *
* probably 90% incorrect.                  * "I give the DM the rest of my    *
*            -Unknown comic on A&E-        *  pizza" - *munch* "It dies"      *
*******************************************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: Rannou@info.polymtl.ca (Patrick Rannou)
Subject: Re: Why are their level limits?(not like the others)
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal, Canada
	<1992Aug25.172245.12279@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu>
	<1992Aug26.180929.12336@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu> <2414@tymix.Tymnet.COM>
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 08:45:14 GMT

In article <2414@tymix.Tymnet.COM> sbrogii@copernicus.Tymnet.COM (Scott Brogley) writes:


	   WHY ASK WHY?!

ME GOT POWER! ME YONDER WHY? WHY YONDER ME? ME GOT POWER!

;-)

--
/---------------------------\
| Patrick "Paradak" Rannou. |
| Rannou@info.polymtl.ca    |
\---------------------------/
From: z_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Paladins
Date: 28 Aug 92 17:30:31 GMT
Article-I.D.: ccsvax.1992Aug28.113031.715
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

In article <Btp5F5.MAB@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, StarWatcher@uiuc.edu (StarWatcher) writes:
> Rannou@info.polymtl.ca (Patrick Rannou) writes:
> 
> : I.E. Sex is socially more acceptable than death. Astonishing, huh?
> :      We truly live in a crazy world.
> 
> Do you have a problem with sex?  After all, it is responsible for all of
> our existances....

	I think he switched 'sex' and 'death' in his statement by accident.  If
you flip the two, it makes more sense (the sentence, not the world).

Brandon Cope
From: pyr530@oz.plymouth.edu (Rob Holden)
Subject: Re: A new version of Familiars
Reply-To: pyr530@oz.plymouth.edu (Rob Holden)
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, N.H.
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 20:21:23 GMT

In article <BtnGvB.FpE@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> morpheus@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Morpheus Nosferatu) writes:
>In article <1992Aug27.035538.13203@oz.plymouth.edu> pyr530@oz.plymouth.edu (Rob Holden) writes:
>>	I also think that there will be alot of griping by the mage-haters out
>>there, who will insist that mages are too powerful already and don't need any
>>more.  However, if the spell is made to be 5th level, then it cannot be gotten
                  ^^
>>except by a 9th level mage (or higher), and if 6th, then by a 12th level mage
>>minimum.
>
>I don't know about this.  I had thought of this as a way to increase the
>magical abilities of low level mages, giving them a couple extra spells much
>like a cleric's wisdom would do, without overly overpowering the mage at
>higher levels.  Making a summon familiar spell be of 5th or 6th level would
>completely counter this except for the rare mage who managed to lay his
>hands on a scroll with a copy of the spell when he is still low-level.
>
>If you really don't want a first-level mage to be too powerful with a
>familiar, then just give him a 1 HD familiar as I described, then he would
>only gain one extra spell.  Or alter the probabilities so that a low level
>mage would only get a 1HD familiar, or 2HD at best, while higher level
>familiars would be more likely for high-level mages.
>
>This idea of making the summoning spellat around 5th or 6th level is
>counter to one of the main ideas I had for coming up with this type of
>familiar.

	Agreed.  That's why I said "if", for those groups/DM's that feel that
 mages are too powerful already.  Personally, I almost always play a mage or
 some combination of a mage, usually mage/thief or mage/warrior, and so I know
 first-hand how weak magi are at low levels.  There's nothing worse than being
 in a group where you fire off your single 1d4 +1 magic missile, then find a
 tree to hide behind because the DM says you cannot even use a shield to hide
 behind, especially if every monster seems to instinctively KNOW that the mage
 is the first thing to try to kill, even if the fighter is standing directly in
 front of it.

						Rob

-- 
(~~~~)------------------------------------------------------------------(~~~~)
 |  |            Rob Holden               I'm not prejudiced...,         |  |
 |  |      pyr530@oz.plymouth.edu                 I hate everybody..!    |  |
(____)------------------------------------------------------------------(____)
From: gajensen@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: What is with these Katana's?
Date: 29 Aug 92 09:39:39 GMT
Article-I.D.: miavx1.1992Aug29.143939.12397
Organization: Miami University Academic Computer Service"

In article <1992Aug28.200413.21792@burrhus.harvard.edu>, canders@isr.harvard.edu (Carl E. Anderson) writes:
> 	Here's something I've been wondering about for quite some time:
> Why does a katana do d10 damage in AD&D?  Why is it so much better than a
> scimitar or even a long sword.  Don't make sense to me.

I think it had something to do with how the weapons were made. Historically,
they were constructed by continually folding the metal back on itself, the
process had a name but I forget what. Also, these were the only weapons from
medieval times capable of actually dismembering someone during combat.
Something to do with the sharpness of the weapon. 

I guess the Japanese have always had it over the West when it comes to quality.
:-)

> Cheers,
> Carl
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Carl Edlund Anderson	            	"Hefi ek ok aldri sva reitt vapn
> canders@isr.harvard.edu			at manni at eigi hafi vidh kommit."
> OR
> anderso2@husc.harvard.edu			- Skarphedhinn Njalsson 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Silk
   Cause I'm tired of my other .sig.	
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Axly)
Subject: Re: Weapon Specialization
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 19:15:50 GMT

ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge A. Diaz) writes:

>I was reading over weapon specialization, and I noticed somehint that
>seemed kind of strange.  The way weapon specialization is described in
>the PH, I got the impression that a fighter can only specialize in
>ONE weapon.  He may become proficient in others, but he can only
>specialize in one.

You hit it right on the head. A followup article in a Dragon said
exactly that.

Axly

********************************************************************************
*  Axly            * "Well, yes, I did it... but it's not my fault. "          *
*  Red Sword Targa * "Alright, it is my fault... but I'm not responsible."     *
*                  * "Well, maybe I am responsible..but I'm not to blame."     *
*                  * "Yes, I am to blame... but they made me do it."           *
*                  *   -Axly                                                   *
********************************************************************************
From: barton@latcs1.lat.OZ.AU (Douglas P Barton)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Scrolls and spells
Date: 28 Aug 92 01:41:41 GMT
Organization: What ORGANISATION???  This mess is total chaos!!!


Can an MU copy a spell from a scroll to his spell-book?

i have just argued with another, more experienced player, that
an MU should be able to do this, otherwise an MU of any level
should be able to cast the spell on the scroll with near automatic
success...

Reasons:
if the spells on the scroll are just trigger words to release the
inate power from the scroll, then the spells would be uncopyable
BUT the MU (of any level) should be able to cast the spell with none
of the normal disadvantages such as ageing etc as the power is
transmitted/channeled through the scroll (hence the disintegration
of the scroll when all spells are used up)

Otherwise the scroll has the actual spell scribed upon it and
the actual spell components are somehow bound into the creation
of the scroll.  the mage provides the vocal component and the
required motions (if any are described along with the spell)...

This could lead to a number of interesting scroll variants if
each type of scroll may be found...

This might be an alternate way for MU's to learn new spells...

I know this idea is used by at least one well published DM, the
writer of the Adventurers Story series (a damn good series they
are too)...

-- 

Douglas Barton - barton@latcs1.oz.au
		"My ,son.  Take for thyself another world,
 		 for that which I leave thee is too small..."

And your fortune for today --

Hark, Hark, the dogs do bark
The Duke is fond of kittens
He likes to take their insides out
And use them for his mittens
	From "The Thirteen Clocks"
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: Rannou@info.polymtl.ca (Patrick Rannou)
Subject: Re: Paladins
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal, Canada
	<BtJuuu.CBq@news.cso.uiuc.edu> <66909@hydra.gatech.EDU>
	<BtM93z.3LK@news.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 07:59:52 GMT

In article <BtM93z.3LK@news.cso.uiuc.edu> dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Axly) writes:

[...about paladins...]


   The LN character is actually the one more likely to take the thief in to
   the proper authorities. It's the paladin's good side that is more likely
                                              ^^^^
   to lead him to kill this larcenous bandit. If the paladin moves in
                  ^^^^
   alignment
   at all, it's going to be away from Law not towards it. Killing someone who
   steals without a trial is a good act, not a lawful one.  Lawful neutral
   characters are very strict about following the letter of the law.

   The mindcontrol issue: I think you're reaching.

   Axly


BWAHAHAHHA!!!

It makes me think about a MAD joke:

Guy: Hey, I have good news!
Other guy: Really?
Guy: Yeah, you remember, the movie in which the girl makes an passionnately
     hot and long love scene with the spy?
Other Guy: Boy, do I remember!
Guy: Well, I've succeded in making it rated PG-13 instead of X!
Other Guy: (stunned and happy) How did you do that?
Guy: Well, I reshot the scene. Now, instead of doing love to her, he 
     kills her.
Other Guy: Duh.

I.E. Sex is socially more acceptable than death. Astonishing, huh?
     We truly live in a crazy world.

I feel the "it's his good side which will make him kill the thief" is just
as twisted.

A truly GOOD person won't try to kill. Quite on the contrary.
Your paladin is very obvisouly lawful neutral, and even borderline
NEUTRAL neutral at that. Some might say that it's even a temporary laspe in
neutral evil. Killing for theft. Maybe, but recheck your history books.

First they give them a trial. THEN they kill them!
In front of the whole village, too.

That's lawful neutral.



Pat.




--
/---------------------------\
| Patrick "Paradak" Rannou. |
| Rannou@info.polymtl.ca    |
\---------------------------/
From: z_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Why are their level limits?
Date: 30 Aug 92 23:09:15 CST
Distribution: na
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

In article <1992Aug29.133730.12392@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu>, gajensen@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu writes:
> In article <1992Aug26.220054.695@ccsvax.sfasu.edu>, z_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu writes:
>>
>> [my list of possible race/class combinations deleted]
> 
> Yes, I'm sure that you will argue until you are blue in the face that such
> possibilities could occur. However, these type of characters do not make PC's
> that maintain your precious game balance. If you start to hand out these
> combinations to any player who wants them, you will end up with, and you can
> dispute this for as long as you feel like it, a party where no-one is a human.
> Then, if you take that into account, you would then have to, careful now you
> have to use a bit of logic, assume that if no-one wants to playa human, they
> must be less powerful, and the other PC races would also realize that. Humans
> would quickly get relegated to second class citizens. They are second class
> citizens if they live in demi-human cultures even now, and if you give the
> demi-human races that type of power, they would eventually overrun human
> cultures.
> 

	I want it where any race can choose just about any profession. However,
I also want it where the races are balanced with respect to each other for use
as *PCs*, while humanity has advantages over demi-human races that still result
in it being dominant.


>> 	I want penalties that make sense, not penalties that are slapped
>> together for 'game balance' (that ugly phrase again) so that T$R can claim that
>> game worlds would be humanocentric.
> 
> The penalties do not make the game humanocentric, they make humans a viable
> race.

	The penalties are still not logical.
	
> 
>> 	I want penalties to balance out the advantages of each race, so that no
>> race is inherently weaker or stronger for PC use.
>> 	I want specific penalties for each race, that are (more or less) unique
>> to that race.
>> 
>> 	Yeah, I want a lot. I want the game to make sense and to be balanced in
>> a better, more logical, way.
> 
> I think you are going to be in for a disappointment.
>  

	Yeah, it is a pipe dream. But it just might work out, and I might be
able to come up with something by the end of the month (September).


Brandon Cope
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd