HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: cks@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu (Chris Siebenmann)
Subject: Re: Combat Characters? (Was: SR: Melee Weapons)
Organization: Ziebmef home away from home
Date: 21 Jul 92 05:38:09 GMT

oroboros@acca.nmsu.edu (The Wyrm Ouroboros) writes:
| Actually, I somewhat assume that runners are something around the cream of
| the shadows.

 I've assumed this as well; assuming otherwise gets you an awfully
powerful campaign. Just look at how much money the typical PC street
samurai has spent on cyberware; that's nowhere near spare change for
your typical street character. It's possible to have characters that
define themselves as entry-level people, if only in experience, but it
isn't the default. At the very least, PCs are clearly almost always
real Shadowrunners instead of the much more numerous wannabees.

--
"SVR4 much more resembles a high-speed collision between SVR3 and
 SunOS--you can find bits and pieces of both systems in unlikely places,
 some intact while others are barely recognizable."	- Dick Dunn
cks@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu	           ...!{utgpu,utzoo,watmath}!utgpu!cks
From: ratinox@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Richard Pieri/Stainless Steel Rat)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Mr. Fantastic in Champions
Date: 28 Jul 92 20:17:31 GMT
Organization: 3WA, Boston Office. Or Nu Meta Chi. Take your pick.
In-reply-to: aq061@cleveland.Freenet.Edu's message of 28 Jul 92 18:15:00 GMT
X-Get-A-Clue: Have two, they're small.
X-Signature-Virus-Protection: Version 1.51
X-Posting-Software: GNUS 3.14.1 [ NNTP-based News Reader for GNU Emacs ]

>>>>> On 28 Jul 92 18:15:00 GMT, aq061@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Scott Devine)
>>>>> said:

SD> I have been trying to convert my favorite Marvel characters into the more
SD> detailed game of Champions but I ran into some trouble with Mr. Fantastic
SD> and his unstable molecules.  I don't know how I should set it up, if any
SD> of you know a way please post or send me mail.  Thank you.

The tough part, I assume, is the "elastic" body.

Elemental Control: Elastic Body, Powers include Stretching, Shapeshift, a
limited Desolid (to get through cracks in doors and windows). Damage
Reduction is a possibility (and needs a GM okay to go into the EC). Extra
Limbs might be nice, but it's so cheap it wouldn't go into the EC.

--Rat

||||| | | | |  |  |  |   |   |    |    |    |   |   |  |  |  |  | | | | | |||||
                                                   __        ___ 
Richard Pieri, Northeastern's Stainless Steel Rat/   | /| / /   | The Worlds
Internet: ratinox@meceng.coe.northeastern.edu   /__  |/ |/ / /| | Welfare Works
    UUCP: ...!northeastern.edu!splinter!ratinox/   | /| / / / | | Association:
  BITNET: UA_RLP@NUHUB{.BITNET}               /__  |/ |/ / /  | | I will solve
  USNail: 14 Westdale RD  Holbrook, MA 02343 /   | /| / / /___| | any problem
 ICBMnet: 42 deg 1 min N, 71 deg 0 min W    /    |/ |/ /_//_____| for you.
From: ward1@husc8.harvard.edu (Lester Ward)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: SRUN: Toning down mages
Date: 28 Jul 92 14:20:21 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc8.ward1.712333221

chem7l@elroy.uh.edu writes:
>First, I treat any item or effect (including Quickening) that a mage has put 
>karma into as a suitable link for ritual magic.

Then why bother Quickening?  If I can pay 1 karma point to lock a spell
or many karma points to quicken a spell for the same effect, why pay more.
It can't be the money; any moron can make a spell lock for near nothing.

>Second, I consider any sustained spell to be astrally active, and therefor  
>vulnerable in astral space. 

The rules do to.

> Spells can't be used on them of course, but they
>can still be destroyed.

Spells .can. be used against them, they just can't .ground. through them.
A spell can be cast an any astrally active object (mage, foci, other spell)
and will engage it in astral combat.  A particularly effective technique
in astral combat is to cast a high force spell at a mage, then attack the
mage yourself.  He'll have to split his pools between two simultaneous
attacks.

>Third, I make the shift to astral projection or perception take one action.

This becomes offcial in SRII.

>Last, for physical adepts I make the cost of increased reaction the cost PER
>LEVEL, so increased reaction +3 is out of the range of non-initiates.

Yeah!  This I like immensely!

>Most importantly, my NPCs (and PCs) take advantage of the vulnerablility to 
>sudden astral attack.  However, I also rule that foci are not actually astrally
>active except when in use.  This keeps people from being killed by their power
>focus while asleep.  (Spell locks, however, are always in use...)

I didn't used to agree with the last sentence, but I've been persuaded (and
so has FASA) otherwise.  In SRII foci (including spell locks) can be turned
on and off.  I'm still not sure I like that.  I completely agree with that
first line.

>Just my personal ideas on how to control mages.  How does everyone else do it?
>And does SRUN II put more emphasis on astral combat?  

Yes, and they also make it much easier to mix astral and non-astral actions,
as far a timing goes (meaning that astral and normal combat use the same
initiative and action phases).

>Happy Running.....

Wordman

"And with my meager earnings from my TV ministry, I purchased...
 Wayne Newton."
                    -- Steve Martin
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
Subject: Re: LACE AND STEEL ?
Reply-To: sos@oz.plymouth.edu (Steffan O'Sullivan)
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, N.H.
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 12:06:23 GMT

On the Marketplace board, barkeep@IASTATE.EDU (Marlan B Hoffmann) writes:
>Forgive my ignorance, but what is LACE AND STEEL?
>I like the sound of it.

Lace and Steel is an interesting game from Australia that combines
fantasy elements with a swashbuckling era.  Magic is low key but
definitely present; gunpowder is 1645 level: black powder wheellock
pistols and matchlock muskets.  Rapiers are the sidearm weapon of
choice.

The rules are largely good, but of the sort that leaves a lot to the
GM's discretion.  There is nothing wrong with that if it's your style -
those that prefer a rule for every contingency will not be happy with
the system, however.

Things I like about Lace & Steel:

It's aimed at a lot of social interaction.  There's actually a lot
for a courtly lady character to do in this game.

2d6 skill resolution system  (I like a bell curve.  While 2d6 isn't the
best bell curve in the world, it's a lot better, IMO, than percentiles
and systems that use a single die.)  While not the best system on the
market, it's simple and it works well.

Cards for combat resolution.  Your hand size, redraw size, etc., are
determined by your dexterity and other factors.  Fun stuff.

Repartee "combat."  For players who want their characters to be able to
have cutting remarks, impaling wit, and crushing retorts but can't
think of anything at the moment . . . the game allows using the combat
cards to cut someone down socially!

Self-image rules.  If you succeed at tasks, your self-image goes up,
allowing you better chance of success at other things.  The converse can
also happen.

Things I don't care for: DRMs.  The die roll modifiers don't fit in my
head easily, because they work backward.  A negative die roll modifier
is good for the character, and a positive DRM is bad for the
character.  This is the opposite of the way it should be, and I get
confused constantly because of it.  A little reworking of the mechanics
allows a more logical system to be used:  I simply adjust the
difficulty number in the correct direction.

-- 
  - Steffan O'Sullivan		         sos@oz.plymouth.edu
From: a481@mindlink.bc.ca (J.D. Frazer)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Huge Robots as weapons, are they valid? Does it matter?
Date: 27 Jul 92 19:11:10 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

> Veltyen writes:
> There is one valid reason that seems to have been missed on this thread.
> Psychology.
> 
> Think about it, which is better to cow the natives.
>   a) a box on wheels (or treads etc)
>   b) a vaguely humanoid mean son'o'bitch.
> 
> Look up adeptus titanicus for this sort of idea expounded. Of course this is
> only really effective if the "natives" are quite superstisious.

So, we spend billions of dollars developing a 'mech that's only effective for
cowing natives?

Unh-huh. Total economic sense.

Personally, I think any show of destructive force will cow a relatively
primitive race. Like tanks that fire high explosive rounds, for example.

--
J.D. Frazer, a481@mindlink.bc.ca, (Vancouver, B.C., Canada)
-----------------------------------------------------------
*BRRRRAPPAPPAPPAPPAPPAPPAPPAPP!*
"MEIN LEBEN!" <thud>
"You shoulda thought about that when you signed up, buddy." - Valaria
From: a481@mindlink.bc.ca (J.D. Frazer)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Genres
Date: 24 Jul 92 16:31:47 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

> Andrew G Hummell writes:
> Tanks are already pretty much obsolete now.  The average infantry soldier can
> carry a tank killing rocket.  An A10 Warthog can chew up tanks like
> bubblegum,
> with proper air support.  Tanks are only effective against troop transports,
> buildings, and other tanks.

Untrue. Armour still plays a vital role in modern combat. Exploitation attacks
are the domain of tank tactics.

You have to realize that tanks are simply one part of a combined arms effort in
any battle. They fulfill a role that no other element of the military can.

> If you can't bring yourself to beleive that giant robots are a *possibility*,
> how can you play *any* science fiction game?  FTL travel is no more unlikely
> that giant robots.  Sentient robots/androids/computers are no more unlikely
> than giant robots.  The same goes for any other type of fantasy as well.

I don't think *possibilities* are being questioned here, just *sensibilities*.
A giant, lumbering 'mech doesn't make any military or economic sense. It's too
big a target, no doubt very expensive, and far far less efficient than a
company of tanks. Heck, a flight of A-10s could probably shred it in seconds.

In case you're wondering what I'm talking about, consider this: Given that you
have an average 'mech, what mission could it fulfill that other military
elements couldn't?

Be honest here -- if you suggest something ridiculous, you can expect to be
jumped all over.

--
J.D. Frazer, a481@mindlink.bc.ca, (Vancouver, B.C., Canada)
-----------------------------------------------------------
*BRRRRAPPAPPAPPAPPAPPAPPAPPAPP!*
"MEIN LEBEN!" <thud>
"You shoulda thought about that when you signed up, buddy." - Valaria

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: phi@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Steven Mancini)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: SRUN: Player Conception & Min/Maxing
Date: 22 Jul 92 01:04:58 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center

mancinis@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Minotaur)
>>Do any of you GM's out there have a problem with players who just want
>>to roll a lot of dice and don't really care about building a character?
>Unfortunately, but not always dice, how about enough autos to choke
>a Juggernaut?

>>Do they cause your roleplayers (as opposed to roll players) stress? 
>Yes, but more often they make other people's skills seem obsolete and thereby
>detract from tehir enjoyment...

But, if the character is so good in this area, doesn't he have any
weaknesses in other areas?  Or is he just an all-around-god type char?

>> Do they cause you stress? 
>Minimal, I tend to ignore it when they do it, I bypass the grandeur of the
>rolls, or the barrage of autos and simple say "fine, you got this/achieved
>that" as quickly and passively as possible, then get on with the rest of 
>the player back to the challenge of the game....

What about making the game fun for That char/player?  Since he spent so
much of his Magic on the autos, doesn't he deserve his time in the sun?
I think it may be a little unfair to do this to him.  If you deal with
it this way, why did you allow the character in the first place?

>>--gray
>-Minotaur

Aeleck
From: mb8p+@andrew.cmu.edu (Mark A. Baxter)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Magic in HERO games
Date: 30 Jul 92 17:18:45 GMT
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


   I was wondering if anyone had come up with a workable magic system
for HERO games.  I should say I haven't read Fantasy Hero but I HAVE
read "Mystic Masters" and was unimpressed by the latter.  At present I
have three methods of representing magic spells. 
1) buy it as a power, flat rate.  This gets expensive for the character
though realistically it is a fairly accurate representation.  A
variation on this for specialist mages is to buy spells in an elemental
control.  This is an option I haven't really explored because I kind of
feel it violates the spirit of an EC.
2) buy it as a slot in multipower.  The multipool is the amount of
magical ability (innate) you have, the slots each represent one spell
you've learned.  I allow slots to have limitations against the pool cost
in this case so a 6d6 EB slot with act.14 and 2xEnd would take up 15
pool points, rather than a full thirty. This system is actually too
flexible, as slots for new abilities are much too cheap.  I've
considered requiring the character to by a KS for each spell equal to
1/10 the active points in the slot.  This would raise the cost somewhat
I think.  This is what I use in superheroic campaigns.
3) buy a magic power pool where the character can change spells from any
to any but with limitations as to when they can change.  This is the
predominant system in "Mystic Masters" and I dont feel it represents my
conception of a mage who knows a given number of spells which can be
used.  This gives at once too much flexibility "well, I'll just create a
2d6 AP Hka spell to slay the demon with, since I know he's highly
resistant to lightning and swords."  And not enough "Sorry guys the
three spells I have are flight, Force field, and a 5d6 EB".
Also, the infinite flexibility sounds to much like infinite power in
game terms if not real terms.  
    None of these have the right flavor for a non-supers campaign like a
Shadowrun or Rifts style.  I'd like to hear how others do these things. 
Post or E-mail        thanks, Mark

Mark Baxter              |One is for sorrow,
<mb8p+@andrew.cmu.edu>   |Two is for joy,
ext #4690                |Three for a girl,
                         |Four a boy,
         I               |Five is for silver,
       Have              |Six is for gold,
         A               |And Seven's a secret
      Secret             |Never to be told.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: stedee@auto-trol.com (Steve Deemer)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Cyberpunk (was: SR: SRII combat mods)
Date: 22 Jul 92 20:02:48 GMT
Organization: Auto-trol Technology Corporation

In article <BrrD26.9yJ@news.cso.uiuc.edu> dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Axly) writes:
>goodwin@orionsci (Ben Goodwin) writes:
>
-deleted-
>>And the question that needs answering is, does your decker always tag
>>along with the sams?  What if he goes out alone one night, to go to
>>a club or something, and someone decides they want to get even or
>>somesuch.  "Gee, I don't know how to use a pistol."
>
>He runs. Having a gun makes one think one should stand and fight, when
>in all honesty, you are outclassed. No gun lends wings to ones feet
>in time of need.
>
But then, who'd hire a decker who runs at every sign of trouble?

The decker, like the sams, lives in a heirarchy of violence.  The
combat-specialized characters are at the top of the heap, much more
lethal than the decker, but the decker doesn't live outside that
heirarchy, just lower down.  Any character who manages to survive
any length of time is going to know their position in the food
chain.  When the dangerous types are at work, the smart decker
runs.  When the decker's bothered by street sam wannabes, he slaps
them down.

Survivors won't let the fact that they carry a weapon affect their
judgement about when to stand and when to run.  When the smart decker
with a gun runs into trouble with the big boys, he knows he should
run.  He also knows that running isn't always an option.  If he's
cornered and there's no way out, a weapon is handy to have.  In
most cases, it probably won't make any difference, but then that's
the biz.  And then, he just might get lucky.


______________________________________________________________________________
Steven Deemer                 "They say a boy should tire of being a creep and
stedee@auto-trol.COM           should sit quietly and ask Respectability to
                               lead him away.  But when Respectability comes to
                               me I will fight it and I, Eddie Haskell, I will
                               tear the letters off its very sweater!"
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: aq061@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Scott Devine)
Subject: Mr. Fantastic in Champions
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 92 18:15:00 GMT


I have been trying to convert my favorite Marvel characters into the more
detailed game of Champions but I ran into some trouble with Mr. Fantastic
and his unstable molecules.  I don't know how I should set it up, if any
of you know a way please post or send me mail.  Thank you.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------
_  //   Scott Devine (aq061@cleveland.freenet.edu)
\\//                                              
 \/ Amiga, the world's most perfect machine.
From: mfp+@CS.CMU.EDU (Michael Polis)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Fantasy Genre...
Date: 26 Jul 92 17:58:57 GMT
Organization: Carnegie Mellon University

In article <dlaird.0w6q@terapin.com>, dlaird@terapin.com (Delbert Laird) writes:
|> The spells are "purchased" as components.  The game system in which they spell
|> laws would take place also use a point-generation system.  In the precluding
|> system so far, there are three catagories of components:  Control, Subject,
|> Modifier.......No spell may have more than one Control, but may use multiple
|> Subjects and Modifiers.
|> 
|> An example:    Create  Fire   Range   (Character may create/apply fire at      
|>                                 range..ie Fireball or Pyrokinesis.)

I found I needed more parameters:
	Volume - area of effect
	Active Duration - time during which spell is active
	Delay - time until spell becomes active
	Range
	Effect Created
	Effect Intensity

Not all of these are used in every spell, and when they aren't, there are default
values for each.  Costs for most parameters are proportional to the log of the
parameter value.

I never actually used the system, because I was having trouble listing a wide
variety of effects and assigning balanced point costs for all of them.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: wildcard@nevada.edu ( WildCard !!)
Subject: Re: Cyberpunk (armed deckers)
Organization: Shadowland BBS
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 02:09:53 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.153107.10782@visix.com> gray@visix.com (Gray Jones) writes:
>Remember, in SR (or any other system), player characters are adventurers.

>The decker archetype is not just some random computer geek.  Typically they
>have genius intelligence (6 is the MAXIMUM human Intelligence) and exceptional
>athletic ability (Quickness of 4 is above average, most characters have 5 or 6).
>They also tend to be light weights (Strength and Body of 2 or 3).

>If you are a 120 pound athletic genius, wouldn't you want to be quick with a
>gun or maybe learn some akido or something?  Wouldn't you be able to do it
>too?

>If you don't have the skills to make it outside the matrix, you either get "hired"
>by a corporation (good money, nice benefits, you'll learn to like it, really you will)
>or you get geeked.

Agreed. The decker in our campaign has tried to be a jack of all trades, and
has thus built up an expansive repertoire of skills. But because he isn't
a soldier, he doesn't dabble in the newest hottest gun, but prefers a simple
sawed-off shotgun, etc... He is an adventurer and technofetishist. That means
he isn't a mega-introvert who can't do anything but work on computers and
maglocks. He's got a genius IQ for crying out loud, he's got to live up to
his potential!  :)

If you're a decker, you gotta be more than just any computer jockey, you gotta
do it all, or you're spare parts.

                                - WildCard !!


+ "Touch my deck and I ventilate your thorax..."                              +
|				- WildCard !!                                 |
|				  [ "Plex Personalities" Shadowland BBS ]     |
+ wildcard@redrock.nevada.edu                                                 +
From: a_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Military Mechs?
Date: 31 Jul 92 06:15:17 GMT
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University

In article <28JUL199214000608@jane.uh.edu>, chem7l@jane.uh.edu (Corbit, Jim) writes:
> 
> 1) Increase distances and timeframes by a factor of 6, i.e. hexes are 180 meters
>    (instead of 60) across and combat rounds take 1 minute (not 10 seconds).
>    This makes the ranges more reasonable.

	In a set of changes I posted to GMAST-L a while back. I lengthened the
range of non-mech mounted cannon (reason: they are relatively unstable 
platforms). I do like this suggestion though.

> 
> 4) Cut the price of IC engines to 1/3 of their current cost and reduce their 
>    weight to the same as the comparable fusion engine (including fuel reserve
>    and drive equipment).  Also, cut the cost of normal missiles and ballistic 
>    weapons to 1/2 or 1/3 of their current cost.

	In the same changes I proposed, fusion engines for non-mechs were not
increased in mass, and ICEs were only upped by 50%.
 
> 
> 5) Allow no energy weapons on any vehicle that uses an IC engine.  This makes
>    sense because energy weapons use a tremendous amount of energy, and internal
>    combustion simply cannot burn that much gas that quickly, while fusion power
>    can provide a great deal more energy.

	I also proposed that any fusion-engined vehicle (mech or otherwise)
that fired energy weapons in a turn had a reduced maximum speed on its next
move.

> 
> 6) Assume that there is such an extensive use of (more effective versions of)
>    chaffe and flares that (standard) computer guidance systems are unreliable,
>    and all direct fire weapons and missiles must be hand guided.  (I know, this
>    isn't very realistic, and is really just a fudge, but it IS a game...)  ;)
>    This would explain the importance of skill over equipment.

	The way I look at it, the to-hit rules assume that chaffe, flares, ECM
pods, and targeting systems (for missiles, bllistic, and energy weapons) are
being used. With defense and offensive electronics effectively canceling each
other out, skill becomes more important (sidenote: If you watch a great deal
of documentaries involving aircraft, tanks, etc, you'll get the impression 
that in combat, the training of the crews has more of an impact that the
quality of the vehicles; most knowledgeable experts have this opinion as well).


	The other big change I remember making was to drastically increase the
speed of VTOLs (so that you can have some good 5-10 ton designs that can make
200 mph).

Brandon Cope
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc