HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rjr@titan.ucc.umass.edu (Richard J. Resnick)
Subject: Re: Campaign to save Prometheus
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 17:11:51 GMT

>Sorry, but you are wrong about Prometheus being Mortal- he was
>actually one of the greater Titans, along with his brother Epimetheus
>(meaning afterthought as someone has already mentioned) and Atlas (the
>titan who held the sky on his shoulders). What this means is that
>Prometheus was a god, as Zeus, Hades, etc, were the offspring of the
>two major Titans, Kronos and Rhea. Atlas is the one who Heracles
>tricked into getting the golden apples from the garden of Hesperides,
>by taking the weight of the skies on his own shoulders, and who was
>later turned into Mount Atlas by Athena (?) who took pity on him and
>showed him the hed of Medusa.

	Hm? What are you trying to say here? I don't quite understand, is this
	for your sake or ours that you tell us all of this?

>While on the subject of Greek mythology, it really does annoy me when
>people use the greek god names (Hades, Zeus, Ares) and not the Roman
>ones (Pluto, Jupiter, Mars) but Still call Heracles by his roman name,
>Hercules!

	Clearly it does annoy you when people get the Greek Myth screwed up.
	I was the originator of this campaign, and most certainly appreciated
	any corrections made to my knowledge of Greek Mythology. But the
	fact is, a campaign is owned by the DM and his/her characters. And
	they can really play with history as much as they want.

	I guess I am trying to say: correcting people when they are wrong is
	the right thing to do, so long as you are doing it for _their_ sake, 
	and not your own.

	Richard Resnick

*=====/=== ===^=====.==='========`============/==== = ^========~====/====^ =-=*
*        "I'll return your fire, if you take away your vultures..."           *
*                       - Prometheus, gaining leverage                        *
*===^==/=======\======= ===`====='===> ==========>====.===== =^=====/====*====*
                  Internet Address: rjr@titan.ucc.umass.edu
From: ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge Diaz)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: That damn Katana!
Date: 30 Aug 92 05:03:27 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology


Well, now.  One person asks a little question, and there must have been
what, 20 people who followed-up?

And the worst part is that they all said the SAME THING.  "The katana
is a much better crafted weapon, so of course it does more damage."

Great, and I'm sure he got the answer he wanted.  But people, really,
do you think that nobody answered the question before you did?  Why
not wait and finish reading the articles *before* you make that post,
and you'd be surprised at how often someone has already said exactly
what you were going to say.

Not trying to be a dick, or a net-police, but I was truly AMAZED at
how many different people could say the same thing.  I didn't think
it was possible.  PLEASE, let's read the articles before we follow
up.


-- 
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: gajensen@miavx1.acs.muohio.edu
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: prayers vs wizardry (was Re: Why are their level limits?
Date: 29 Aug 92 09:49:30 GMT
Article-I.D.: miavx1.1992Aug29.144930.12398
Distribution: world
Organization: Miami University Academic Computer Service"

In article <1992Aug29.022333.724@ccsvax.sfasu.edu>, z_copeab@ccsvax.sfasu.edu writes:

> 	Unfortuantely, this means that the clerical Detect/Remove Magic will
> not function with regards to mage magic, and mage Detect/Remove Magic will not
> work against clerical spells. This means that clerical spells are not affected
> by Anti-Magic Shell. Are monster's magic resistance good versus clerical or
> mage spells, or both? Which forms of magic does magic protections (rings,
> cloaks, etc) affect?
> 	If the two types of magic are different, there must be noticable
> differences in them. Having the only difference being 'you can wear armor for
> one' is a bit of a crock. The AD&D rules imply that the two types of magic are
> really just one type.
> 	Also, there is nothing in the rules that says that clerical magic
> requires any fewer or easier motions than a mage's.

No, I think you're just nitpicking at this point. True, a cleric's spells come
from their deity, but the deity used magic to channel the power through the
cleric. The deity's magical ability is much greater than possible for a mortal,
but it is still only magic. no need to start creating two entirely different
realms of magic. Jeez, then we'd really be messin' with the game. :-)

> 
> Brandon Cope
>  

Silk
   Cause I'm tired of my other .sig.
From: robertll@sdf.lonestar.org (Robert Loper)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Want to play AD&D in DFW area
Date: 2 Sep 92 01:07:24 GMT
Organization: sdf Public Access UNIX, Dallas--unrestricted free shell access


Hi folx..

I recently moved up to Dallas, TX and have missed my old D&D group.  Is
there a AD&D group around here that would like another player?  I have
played both 1st and 2nd editions for at least 5 years, and have most of
the books for both.  

Please e-mail a reply...

Thanx....

							Robert Loper
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: gregs@meaddata.com (Greg Smith)
Subject: Re: Weapon Specialization
Organization: Mead Data Central, Dayton OH
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 19:41:58 GMT

In article <67301@hydra.gatech.EDU>, ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge A. Diaz) writes:
|> 
|> No, not another "why can't a thief specialize?" post. :-)
|> 
|> 
|> 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.
|> 
|> Am I reading too much into this, or is this a correct assumption?
|> 

From page 52, 2nd column, last paragraph in the 2nd edition PHB:

" ... created.  But even after a player character earns experience, he can
still choose to specialize in other weapons, provided he has the weapon
proficiency slots available."

According to the book, you can as I read it.

As a side note:

I would consider limiting the specialization
to one weapon, but allow specialization after character creation.  Choosing 
another weapons to specialize in (paying the slots and practicing for months)
would nullify the first specialization (on the basis that it takes constant,
devoted practice to become and remain that skillful)  I would allow the
character to be specialized in many weapons as long as he paid the slots, but
allow only one to be active at a time.  I used to fence quite allot.  I know
that after using the foil exclusively for months, the sabre certainly felt
strange, but after time would become familiar again.  (ok, so I wasn't an
olympic class fencer ... sue me ... that's just the way I see it).

I further purport that specialization includes a handedness.  I'm specialized
with the long sword in my right hand.  Ambidexterity does not give your other
arms muscles the training.  It just means that you LEARN to do things equally
well with both hands/arms.  So assuming you allowed multiple specialization,
I would require you to be specialized in dagger in the right hand (2 slots)
plus specialized with the left (2 more slots).


|> 
|> -- 
|> 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."

To each group their own,

-- 
Greg Smith

DISCLAIMER:  My ideas are entirely my own unless MDC decides to patent them.
I am not empowered to speak for Mead Data Central or Mead Corporation.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: edb892rsft@vx24.cc.monash.edu.au
Subject: Stuck for Ideas?????
Organization: Computer Centre, Monash University, Australia
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 04:03:47 GMT



Tough question to ask you veteran AD&D and D&D players /DMS

       What do you do when your players have done everything?

I've been playing D&D and AD&D for about 9 years and in this time i have
run and participated in many campaigns.. But it would appear that i've
run out of ideas for traps, encounters, story lines, and puzzles!

It seems that every thing has been done before!

Does any one have any ideas for any of these things or maybe remember
the classic adventures of theirs....
I would appreciate any replys on the matter.


Hugh Jenkinson
Monash University
Australia
From: Edward_Swatschek@mindlink.bc.ca (Edward Swatschek)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: How do you fight huge creatures? (was Tarrasque stories.
Date: 26 Aug 92 08:06:34 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

> Craig Thomas Judd writes:
> 
> ... [whole bunch deleted]...
> 
> Still, don't ask me how a 6ft ranger is going to hit much vital on a 60ft
> creature...


   There is always the achilles tendon (hopefully the creature has one), the
cutting of which should result in the creatures other vitals becoming
available. (But the picture of the two in battle is still awfully silly.<g>)
--

               Edjs                    _
              ------                _ //  CI$  : 76427,662
   Edward_Swatschek@mindlink.bc.ca  \X/   GEnie: E.SWATSCHEK

                    
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: becherer@sunb2.cs.uiuc.edu (Max Becherer)
Subject: Spells, Monsters and Magic Items
Keywords: Spell Monster Creature Item
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 21:29:43 GMT

Why doesn't anyone pose spells, items and creatures they have created ?
From: IO11330@MAINE.MAINE.EDU (the DM)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: A word on Mages
Date: 4 Sep 92 15:40:31 GMT
Organization: University of Maine System

It takes 10 minutes per spelllevel to MEMORIZE the spell, however
the mage must rest to do the memorizing!  I believe that for first
to third level spells the mage must rest (i.e. sleep) for four hours b
before he can memorize a new spell.  As to the rest of your letter,
I tend to disagree wholeheartedly, as long as you are not running
a campaign were characters die left and right, the mage can be of value
in almost all instances, if you have a cleric let the mage do hand to hand
he can always be healed later, let him fight the same monster (in hand to
hand) as the fighter, any intelligent beast will realize that the fighert
is the more dangerous of the two, thus the mage (at first level) could
have the same base chance of hitting the best (thaco 20) and have a chance
of killing it (assumming you are throwing orcs, kobolds, and goblins at
these guys) i don't know maybe its just me.......

                            Patrick Ellis
                            THE DM
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: praxis@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Laura L Perkinson)
Subject: Re: Munchikinism/Min-Maxing (Require Def'n)
Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 20:37:41 GMT

	I might add (trying not to impugn on r.g.frp.advocacy's turf TOO
much) that AD&D has far less potential for min-maxing than do point
based character creation systems.  (Champions, the Shadowrun method my
group uses etc.) One reason, I think, is that in class/level based
systems like AD&D, the characters personal stats aren't as important.
(This somewhat depends on class. It's perfectly possible to have a nasty
fighter w. strength 9. Low stats for, say, a psionicist = death.)
	Munchkinism, generally speaking, includes poor role-playing, attempts
to "win" (by having more $$$, magical toys and power than everyone else),
rules bending and general un-coolness.
	Hmmm. >Somewhere< I have "The Complete Munchkins Handbook," which
gives a hilarious comparison of the 4 roleplaying types. Ex:
		ELVES
	REAL MEN like Elfquest Elves
	REAL ROLEPLAYERS like Tolkien's Elves
	REAL LUNATICS like Santa's Elves
	REAL MUNCHKINS like storm giants with pointy ears.

	Yar, I'll definitely look for that.
		Praxis
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: spzkny@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (JAMES ZAKANY)
Subject: Re: Poisons
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Date:  4 Sep 1992 08:35 EST  

In article <5430@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP>,
 seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp) writes...

>	Nope, I think that a specialized field of alchemical knowledge
>called Poison Lore is certainly a full-sized proficiency -- maybe
>even a two or three slotter!

Agreed!  I'd make it a rogue-oriented NWP.  Two slots for rogues, three for 
anyone else (poison brewing certainly isn't "general knowledge").

To the original poster: IF your DM's willing, have him decide the 
particulars of this proficiency in his campaign.  It's certainly within the 
spirit of the NWP rules to make up new ones!
                                                   James S. Zakany
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: cmh512@cck.coventry.ac.uk (Iain Morales)
Subject: They say "Kill Hack Slay Everything in sight!!!"........
Followup-To: cmh512@uk.ac.cov.cch
Keywords: beer, cig's and women are better than any fancy computer.....
Organization: Coventry Polytechnic, Coventry, UK
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 17:10:01 GMT

Here's one questions about some of  the short  coming's and  many  of the  "why
didn't TSR make this bit a bit clearer!" questions about the 2nd ed players
hand book!!

	Do Multi-class fighter/any-class get exceptional strength as do normal
fighters, as the rules in the P.H don't seem to prohibit it any where like it 
used to in the 1st ed and I would like to put a dampner on these 18/XX 
fighter/wizard/cleric/thieves etc certain munchkinite players want to play...

   And talking about munchkins... I would like to hear a of a cure for a sorry
looking party, who consists of two pure but seemingly curable munchkins.. one 
real player and another good player who likes to spend half the session arguing 
senselessly  about  minor  calls  and one reforming player, recovering from  a
serious bout of powergaming which was bordering on the munchkin!

what can I do with this sorry looking bunch???


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Iain Morales 		| cmh512@uk.ac.cov.cck				       |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| "First they ran over his cat, then wrecked his car, shot his wife and kids   |
|   and torched his house. Now 'he' wants to blow up the world!!!"	       |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: taylorr@debussy.cs.unc.edu (Russell Taylor)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: A word on Mages
Date: 4 Sep 92 14:14:42 GMT
Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

In article <1992Sep4.162630.1@vx24.cc.monash.edu.au> edb892rsft@vx24.cc.monash.edu.au writes:
>The time to memorize a spell in the first edition was 1 hour
>per spell level but in the 2nd ed I was told it was 10 mins per spell
>level! This means that a low level party in a ruins can effectively cast
>many spells in a day. 
>
	The time to memorize the spell is short, but the mage must rest
for a long time before he can start to memorize a spell.  I recall a table
in the 1st edition DMG that I think said 4-6 hours rest was required before
learning new 1st level spells.  In the second edition, I can only find a
phrase (PHB page 81) that says "The wizard must have a clear head gained
from a restul night's sleep."  I have relaxed this a bit to "from 8 or more
hours rest," but this still means that the characters will have to settle
down (and not be bothered by wandering monsters) for 8 hours while the mage
just sits there resting.


-- 
He who follows a path perpetuates that path.
Practice random kindness and sensless acts of beauty.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: rnmg1200@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (A Lady and her Walrus)
Subject: Re: What is with these Katana's?
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 10:08:12 GMT

In article <Bts2HB.sv@percy.rain.com> pluther@percy.rain.com (Pat Luther) writes:
>
>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.
>
>Because a katana is a two-handed sword!

Actually, it's closer to a bastard sword.  It was designed to be used easily
one or two handed.

>(at least, the one's I've seen are very long, and have hilt of such
>a size that two hands fit on it quite well.  I also generally see them
>used two-handed in ninja movies.)

I kind of doubt the ninja (however they really existed) used katana,
but the movies do indeed show them using katana often.  A better weapon
would probably actually be the wakizashi, which was intended for use by
the peasantry, among whom the ninja could easily hide.  A wakizashi
amongst the common folk wouldn't seem out of place.  A katana, however...

>do the rules specifically say they're one-handed?

I believe they say the katana can be used both ways.  Don't quote me on it,
however.

>There is a smaller sword, which is vaguely similar, called a wakizashi,
>which is used one-handed....

One of the accepted styles of fighting in feudal Japan involved using
the katana in one hand and the wakizashi in the other.  It wasn't 
quite as effective as the Miyamoto Musashi style (he used twin katana),
but gave the samurai an extra weapon and therefore (presumably) an edge
over his opponent.  There is a book used for Japanese history classes
that I think is simply called _Diary of a Samurai_, which is, as the
title implies, the diary of a samurai from the feudal period.  It goes
into more detail about fighting styles and mentions this one, along with
the traditional two-handed katana style which has developed into modern-
day kendo.

The Walrus



Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
From: rnmg1200@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (A Lady and her Walrus)
Subject:  Tales from the Floating Walrus
Summary:  A couple'a questions for Greyhawk players
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 19:22:57 GMT
Keywords:   Greyhawk, Trashed

	Okay, sorry for the weird title, but I couldn't think of anything
better to put.  Anyway, I'll get to the point without any of my usual 
meandering.  

	Back when I first started on AD&D, I was introduced to a game world
known as Greyhawk.  I've been fond of it ever since.  Sure, there's Forgotten
Realms, and Krynn, and Dark Sun, but none of them seem to hold that sense
of nostalgia for me.  

	The question I have is this:  Has anyone been keeping up with the
Greyhawk stuff besides me?  And if so, are you as dumbfounded by this
Greyhawk Wars crap as I am?  I mean, come on!  Rary is Neutral EVIL???  When
did this happen?  And it's explained that he became evil because he was 
ticked at OTILUKE?  Yeah, that's enough to make me evil...:)

	Anyway, just thought I'd see if anyone else thought this was a 
cheesy waste of time.  Are there any other Greyhawkers out there?  
Hellooooo.....:)

The Walrus
From: ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge Diaz)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Why are their level limits?
Date: 28 Aug 92 05:55:08 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <1992Aug27.204727.5167@ncsu.edu> mrmarcel@eos.ncsu.edu (MICHAEL RONN MARCELAIS) writes:

>According to the rules, multi-class mages *can* wear any armor permitted by
>either class, BUT if they wear any armor the can't cast spells.  The only
>class that can cast mage spells in armor is a ranger.

This is what I had always thought, except the part about the ranger, that
makes no sense.  "Magic is so specialized, and requires such subtle movements,
that a mage cannot make these movements while wearing armor.  On the other
hand, a ranger, who's really just a dabbler in magic, can." :-)

Hey, I'm not complaining, I just think it's funny.  So much for logical
premises. :-)

>(BTW:  This source is from the boxed SSI games.  I haven't looked in a PH or
>DMG recently, but they follow the manual closely.)

Nope, doesn't count.  First, it's not 'canon'. Second, a mage/fighter wearing
plate can cast spells in those games.  I've done it.  Hey, I like the games
a lot (they are how I was introduced to AD&D), but they tend to break the
rules just a tad.


-- 
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."
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 17:46:03 -0400 
From: "Douglas F. DeJulio" <ddj+@CMU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Scrolls and spells
	<BtrBEL.9AJ@news.cso.uiuc.edu>

StarWatcher@uiuc.edu (StarWatcher) writes:
> Rannou@info.polymtl.ca (Patrick Rannou) writes:
>> So a scroll CAN'T be copied, but it can be used to gain INSIGHTS on a
>> spell, and thus helps spell reasearch. The rules say using "up" a spell
>> specifically to gain insight on it halves the time and cost used for spell
>> reasearch.
> 
> In your opinion.

Nope, according to the 2nd edition rules AS WRITTEN, you can't just
copy a spell into a spellbook.  People can modify this, but that's the
way it is in the books.
-- 
Doug DeJulio
From: spp@surf.cis.ufl.edu (Stephen P. Potter)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Origin of the 2nd ed. Ranger
Date: 3 Sep 92 01:13:09 GMT
Organization: Univ. of Florida CIS Dept.

In article <1992Aug29.102224.15207@husc3.harvard.edu> alvalent@husc9.harvard.edu (Alvin Valentine) writes:
>Michael Praed/Jason Connery Robin Hood episode).  In this episode, Nasir,
>our prototypical ranger is shown acting like a ginsu on Robin Hood who is
>barely ducking and dodging until.....
>
Except for the small problem that Nasir is not a ranger.  Robin in a ranger.
Nasir is a Saracen, an assassin.  Please reconcile that problem   ;)

Steve
-- 
"There are worlds out there where the sky is burning.  The sea's asleep, and
the rivers dream.  People made of smoke and cities made of sound.  Somewhere
there's danger.  Somewhere there's injustice.  Somewhere else the tea's getting 
cold. 	Come on Ace, we've got work to do." -Dr Who, spp@reef.cis.ufl.edu
From: ccoprdj@prism.gatech.EDU (Jorge Diaz)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Why are their level limits?
Date: 28 Aug 92 18:58:01 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <YebWCiu00VI8MJQ448@andrew.cmu.edu> ddj+@CMU.EDU (Douglas F. DeJulio) writes:

>In AD&Dv2, multiclassed wizards can't wear armor (with the special
>exception of elf wizards wearing elven chainmail).

This is very important for me, because I play a cleric/mage.  Right now,
my DM is letting me wear armor, but I can't cast spells while wearing it.

I want to know in what book and on what page it's written that multi-class
mages cannot wear armor.  I've looked for it throughout the PH, and couldn't
find it.

Do you remember where you read 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."