HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ins894r@aurora.cc.monash.edu.au (Aaron Wigley [Wigs])
Subject: Argh! "Cruel Doubt" downunder!
Organization: Monash University
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 06:46:10 GMT

Subject says it all, the show is now on down here. from the local newspaper:

"A psychological thriller as much as a whodunnit, Cruel Doubt 
 (Sunday, 8:30 pm) is a real-life story with a sting in the tale. * *"

[ * * in this case means 'very good' ]

"MY SON, THE MURDERER

Apart from that ome day in a year when your children make a fuss and 
say nice things, motherhood doesn't have a lot going for it.

  One of the most tragic mothers ever must be Bonnie Von Stein, whose 
story is arelated in Cruel Doubt, a two-part mini-series starting on 
Channel Seven on Sunday night.

  Bonnie and her second husband, Lieth, shared a lovely home and 
comfortable life in North Carolina with her two teenage children, Chris 
and Angela, until one midsummer night in 1988.

  Around three in the morning, an intruder entered their home and bashed 
and stabbed Bonnie to within an inch of her life and killed Lieth. From 
the outset of the investigation that followed, police suspected an inside 
job, for not the least reasons that Lieth had left a massive inheritance.

  When Bonnie herself was eliminated as a suspect because of the extent 
of her injuries, the spotlight of suspicion fell on her children.

  And for the next two years she stood by them totally ... until the 
awful truth became clear.

  Based on a best-selling book about true events, Cruel Doubt could 
easily have become bogged down in sentimentality as Bonnie at first 
demands police action, but then refuses to accept the results of their 
inquiries.
 
  Blythe Danner, who only last week played another tortured parent in 
Judgement, gives a virtuoso performance as Bonnie Von Stein, alongside 
a great supporting cast, including Ed Asner as her lawyer and Matt 
McGrath as her deeply disturbed son, Chris.

  Cruel Doubt is very long, but admirably maintains the tension. It 
also redefines the common but easily thrown away phrase 'long-suffering 
mothers'."

[ end of quote ]

At least there is no mention of role-playing in the blurb for the show.

The Wigs of Oz,
Aaron Wigley

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Subject: Re: GURPS: Armor (Basic vs. Advanced)
Reply-To: jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (John H Kim)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 20:25:31 GMT

bkoike@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Bryce Koike) writes:
>[On the subject of how unfair it is for martial artists to "destroy"
>armed opponents]
>You've got a handful of choices:
>
>	#1.  Run away  [preferable, really...least risk]
>	#2.  Stay in range of your enemy's weapon and die.
>	#3.  Close in to the point where your enemy's weapon is
>	     useless/you can get in the way of it, and attack.

>
>	The main problem is that the Fear of the Weapon doesn't seem
>to exist.  Isn't there a danger involved in closing with an enemy?

	Not that much. 
	He gets an attack which you can parry if he has used the Wait 
maneuver. Otherwise there is no opposition to your moving into his hex. 
You can beat away incoming weapons with your own, but there is nothing 
you can do about an entire person moving into your hex. 

	Even if you have used the Wait maneuver, this doesn't prevent the 
guy from charging. Even an unskilled attacker can accept a hit, and go on 
to Slam or Tackle the weaponed defender (Obviously, this works much better 
when you have armor and High Pain Threshold). 

>
>	The main problem seems to be with the GURPS Martial Arts
>parrying rules which I don't have with me.  If the swordsman and the
>martial artist are of equal points, though, then what I suspect the
>greatest problem, really, is that the martial artist is just a
>combat freak...

	Karate and Judo both give parries of 2/3's skill, even against 
swords. Add PD and Combat Reflexes, and it is not too tough to get a 
decent parry. 

	My suggestions would be to use the -3 penalty for parrying weapons 
with your bare hands for Karate and Judo. (Perhaps for GURPS Martial Arts 
there could be a maneuver 'Parry Weapons', Hard, Max of normal parry). 
	Further, one should be allowed a 'parry' against someone entering 
your hex, which does damage if successful and may prevent the clown from 
entering your hex - Contest of ST, perhaps. I don't have any clear idea at 
this point - that's why I was asking for suggestions. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Kim                    | "You don't need a weatherman to know which way
jhk6@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu | the wind blows."
Columbia University         |                             - Bob Dylan
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: rcashman@cs.ulowell.edu (The Jester)
Subject: Re: Shadowrun query
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Lowell Computer Science
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 23:01:39 GMT


Patrick Menard divulges:
>>The rules are very specific: you allocate dice for spell defense at no action
>>cost ON YOUR ACTION.  The pools refresh and are reallocated on your next
>>action.  You may choose when and if you wish to use dice allocated to spell
>>defense for that purpose when hostile magic is cast upon you/your teammates.
>
>a mage could keep allocating dice for spell defense until the need arises to
>use them for something else.  Then, on their next action they could use the
>pool again. (this is similar to keeping a gun ready when you know trouble is
>near)  a mage probably would not be able to do this too long, as it does take
>SOME concentration, so every hour they would have to make a check for fatigue.
>resisting a (#dice in pool)+1(for every hour) L stun attack.(just willpower)


You reallocate dice on your action after the dice pools refresh.  Period.  
Furthermore, I contest your claim that it takes concentration, since no 
concentration is required for the use of any other dice pool (i.e. Combat, 
Control, Hacking).  Therefore, there's no need for your wifty little mechanic.


>or, if you just wanted to make things simple, when in a combat type situation
>where everyone is on edge, they can keep it up(including just sneaking aroung
>some joint)  and just give them stun wounds if they try and keep it up all the
>time.


I allow players to simply tell me how their dice pools are allocated until
they tell me otherwise.  It works much easier and better than giving them 
Light Fatigue for being smart and cautious.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brett Cashman (The Jester)			    	rcashman@cs.ulowell.edu

"There's a place I like to hide,
 A doorway that I run through in the night."		- Geoff Tate
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Carrying weapons around (was Re: META:  Swords, etc)
From: seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp)
Date: 13 Nov 92 18:25:53 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
Originator: seawasp@unixd2.cis.pitt.edu




In article <1992Nov13.143140.28364@news2.cis.umn.edu> thornley@milli.cs.umn.edu (David H. Thornley) writes:
>OK, here's where I have problems.  First, who pays the Justiciars?

	Generally, residents of the city, people who think the Lords 
Justiciar are a good idea, and so on. A lot of the Lords Justiciar do the
job for no pay -- it's part of their social responsibility. Often they
get paid by those they help, too.

>If Zarathanton were to be peaceful for six months, would they go bankrupt
>and disband?

	Very, very doubtful. There are a lot of very rich beings who 
believe in financing justice ( not to mention all the people paying to
maintain their titles, a VERY large source of income considering that
a Knighthood [purchased] can be close to 100,000 gp or more per year.),
including people such as the Sauran King and the Council.

	And Zarathanton (and its surrounding environs on Zarathan) haven't
been "peaceful" in the sense you're talking about (i.e., no crime, no
plots, no nasties running around) in the million+ years of the city's
history.

  Second, why is it that the Justiciars protect anybody but
>adventurers?  If a heavily armed fighter comes into town, he's safe to be
>around because the Justiciars will protect everybody else, but an unarmed
>fighter is in dire danger because nobody will protect him or her?

	You're making the mistake of assuming Justiciar means protection.
It doesn't. It means JUSTICE. (it's no coincidence that many of the 
Lords are adherents of Myrionar, god of justice and vengeance).

	Like the police, under most situations a Lord Justiciar simply
won't KNOW about a situation UNTIL it happens (precognitive magics are
very rare), so their job isn't direct protection, but justice and 
administration of appropriate penalties/punishments.

	If an Adventurer is dealt an injustice and can't put it to
rights himself (the State of Elbon, of which Zarathanton is the capital,
is very individual-oriented, so the injured is generally expected,
if able, to set in motion the proper corrective measures), THEN the Lords
step in. They show no favoritism towards anyone (they'll administer
justice in favor of an Evil being with the same swiftness and readiness
that they will for Good).

>BTW, I do like the concept of a king that is sufficiently powerful and
>secure to require (legally or socially) that those who come before him
>do so armed.  It's never worked that way in this world, of course.

	True. Glad you like it. The power behind ALL the structure of the
State of Elbon (and the final power that protects the Sauran King) is
that of the Dragon Gods... so you've got some serious protection there.

                                 Sea Wasp
                                   /^\
                                   ;;;
From: mathers@sibelius.trl.oz.au (Steven Mathers)
Subject: Re: META:  Swords, etc
Reply-To: s.mathers@trl.oz.au
Organization: Telecom Research Labs, Melbourne, Australia
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 21:33:10 GMT

|> >
|> >Seven foot? Excuse me for a second here. Take a reality check. Claymores
|> >are not seven feet long. Two-handed swords in general go up to *maybe* four
|> >feet.
|> 
|> Correct. Claymores do NOT go up to 7ft long. Because they are hand-a-half
|> swords, not two-handers. German two-handed swords did go up to 7ft and 
|> BEYOND. Go to a museum in Germany and take a look. Some of these swords
|> were longer than the suits of armour were. Knights just sat the things on 
|> their laps and swung them at people's heads as they rode by...

Are you sure youre not getting cerimonial swords and battle swords mixed
up?
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: jacobus@symphony.cc.purdue.edu (Bryan J. Maloney)
Subject: Generating Characters during play.
Organization: Purdue University
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 17:45:37 GMT




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
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
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.)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: mppc3@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Duncan White)
Subject: Re: Solution to Classic Problem: Forget Character Generation
Organization: University of Sussex
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 11:47:54 GMT

clanti55@ursa.calvin.edu (Christopher Lantinga) writes: (with some deletions)
: Fellows, here's (to my knowledge) a radical idea in roleplaying games;
: I came up with it after reading Umberto Eco's "The Role Of The
: Reader".
: 
: The problem: players very often design characters which look great on
: the character sheet but are unrecognizable in play.
: 
: Here's a solution I've tried...  Don't generate the character before
: you start playing.  Just start playing, and define who the character
: is by what the player claims he is during play, and makes him do.
: 
: It works very well for me. I think I'd like to write an article on it
: eventually and send it to some magazine...  Comments? Questions?
: 

I use a vaguely similar idea a lot of the time - generate the character
before play but everything remains flexible until the second game
session. Most people will get their character "almost right" from the
outset, and just need an oppurtunity to "fine-tune" it. I've found it
very rare that somebody creates a character they are completely incapable
roleplaying, so one session of fine-tuning is usually enough.
From: craa27@ccsun.strath.ac.uk ( Steve Holmes, Computer Centre )
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Claymores
Date: 12 Nov 92 13:54:08 GMT
Reply-To: craa27@ccsun.strath.ac.uk
Organization: Strathclyde University Computer Centre.

To the poster who said (approx) that the scots are only good
in home (rough) territory. I address the following.

While what you say may have been true for small bunches of
Highlanders, the Ancient / medieval scots army was a predominantly lowland force, often known as the scots
common army. It's main weapon was the pike formation known
as a schilthron which proved very effective on flat land.

Highland warbands would have featured a mixture of weapons
including Claymore, Lochaber axe (A poleaxe which I'll not
draw here), swords, javelins, shields and bows.

Neither type was strong in horsemen, though the pikemen
could withstand their charges on most occasions. However in
mixed terrain, the two types could complement each other 
well.

It is probably significant that Scots armies were strong when
low and highlander was united. But much less effective
when the two were opposed. The English were the traditional
enemy, and their most feared troops were the archers.

Many people suffer the delusion that the only scots army
was that which followed Bonny Prince Charlie.
From: bkoike@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Bryce Koike)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Names of non-players / monsters / towns
Date: 8 Nov 92 20:29:00 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego

In article <16897AC8C.M17257@mwvm.mitre.org> M17257@mwvm.mitre.org writes:
>In article <Bx9LyA.6Gp@rice.edu>
>amitp@owlnet.rice.edu (Amit J Patel) writes:
> 
>>
>>Hi everyone!
>>
>>I'm new to this group, so if this question has been asked before,
>>please forgive me.
>>
>>I was just wondering how you come up with names for towns, places,
>>people, etc.  Do you mainly use those from other games (with small
>>mutations) or use a program to make up 'random' names and pick some,
>>or do some people have a talent I don't?  :)

	I hate programs.  Most of the names they generate end up
being fairly useless to me.  I tend to prefer making up my own.
There's a variety of ways of doing this, of course.  I have a list
in my head of names that I happen to like and sometimes I just paste
a few together to get a name.  Or you can use the Mark Twain method
and just use people's names you know (grin)...
	or...
	or...
	Well, yeah.  Sometimes someone has a name I like and while I
don't want to just steal it (for obvious reasons), I do want to use
something that strikes me similarly.  It doesn't always work, but
sometimes it does.
	Or you can use the Generic Fantasy Naming system:  Harpspear
Wonderluck, Butterknife Orkhater, Heavensearer, etc, blah blah blah.
(My friends actually call this the Stephen Donaldson system from his
Thomas Covenant the Unbeliever chronicles...)
	The latter method strikes me as somewhat lame, but I haven't
been running a heroic fantasy-style game for a long time now...
	[And then there's the silly names.  TPO = The Perfect One...
etc.]

>>                        Amit
> 
>Well, I know of a couple easy ways.
> 
>1) try the local phone books, you'd be amazed at some peoples names.  You can
>also mutate them to your satisfaction.

	Although I'd think twice about using some of them!  :)

>2) try baby name books-available in libraries and bookstores near you!
>   again mutations are always possible.

	Great idea.  I personally use the back of my Random House
dictionary because it has basically the same thing in the back of
it!


>3) the dictionary and encyclopedia are also great for this--pick a place any pl
>ace, find an island somewhere-or maybe a city on some island somewhere.
> 
>4) Take parts of other words and make that your name (example, original word-
>persecution, new word--Ersecuti)
> 
>Any others?
> 
>Ellie Blackwell

	I find it useful to read examples of one language or another
and take parts of words I like and stick 'em together.  (Frank
Herbert's Dune is an excellent example of made-up words being used
to create a very specific feel.  On the other hand, so's the
"cyberlingo" [eeyargh] that's getting thrown around these days)
	Sometimes I even steal names that I've heard other people
use for characters.  I need to REALLY like them, though.  I feel
guilty about stealing names!
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: u894793@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (Timothy D Little)
Subject: Re: Role Master Physics question
Organization: University of Tasmania, Australia.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 04:05:43 GMT

bcash@crchh410.BNR.CA (Brian Cash) writes:

>(RedSwordTarga) writes:
>>jtaylor@seq.uncwil.edu (J.T.) writes:
>>
>>>The debate came over a metal object in flight.  If a metal object
>>>(3lbs. we'll say) in flight were hit with this medallion, what would
>>>happen?....the players where hoping it would continue on its way,
>>>but weigh 300lbs.  I said it would drop in a near vertical line.

Using the 'least distortion' of physics, I agree - see below.
[...]

>>What is really happening is you are changing the M in the statement
>>F(y) = mg = ma(y). That means that the more something weighs, the
>>faster it accelerates toward the earth. The forward velocity wouldn't

No, if you change 'm' in the above equation, there isn't enough information
to determine whether 'a' changes.  If 'F' increases linearly with 'm'
(as is true normally for a constant gravitational field), then 'a' remains
the same.

I reach much the same conclusion, but the reasoning (and side-effects) are
very different.

>Two bodies of different masses fall to the earth AT THE SAME ACCELERATION!
>Basic physics!  In F=ma, the F changes with the m: a is a constant (for 
>this situation).  What he was talking about is conservation of momentum:
>mv = constant, so increase m means decrease v (forward velocity).
>Sign up for physics 101 NOW!

What about 'conservation of energy', where T=1/2 mv^2 is constant?
Combining this with 'conservation of momentum', p=mv is constant;
and you get the result that neither 'm' nor 'v' can change at all!

Nevertheless, this *does not* contradict the spell description (as given)
since it said that weight, not mass, is increased.

In this case, Axly is right, since the acceleration downward will increase.
Kinetic energy and momentum will be conserved, and even the Principle of
Equivalence can be preserved by an appropriately sculpted gravitational 
field (including only the affected object).  (The energy to create the
field must be presumed to come from the magic)

If this route is taken, the affected object will fall short, and do pretty 
nasty damage upon impact (in fact, even worse than other 300lb objects from 
the same height, due to more concentrated force, and higher impact velocity).

--
Timothy D Little   a.k.a.   u894793@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: rcashman@cs.ulowell.edu (The Jester)
Subject: Re: SRUN: Question?
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Lowell Computer Science
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 22:53:50 GMT

Lester Ward divulges:

>mason writes:
>>In article <Bx92w5.BwJ@jabba.ess.harris.com>
>>jcarl@jabba.ess.harris.com (Joe Carl Jr.) writes:
>> 
>>Srun 2, p. 216: "Alienation power gives the being the ability to enshroud
>>its victim(s) in an aura that makes the victim invisible to others.  Treat
>>this as an invisibility spell, with a Force Rating equal to the being's
>>Essence ... The alienation power is not intended as the kind of beneficial
>>power of invisibility.  Victims of alienation are invisible, intangible,
>>and inaudible to those around them.  It is as if those affected by this
>>power do not exist at all.  Drivers will not stop for them, no one talks
>>to them, their friends shoot through them to hit targets."
>
>I don't think "intangible" is misleading at all.  It says that they DO
>become ghostly, in very specific terms, and no other line in the quoted
>descriptions .directly. challenges this.  At best only inference is made
>to support mason's case.


I am forced to disagree.  The rules quote is "intangible...to those around
them."  That is, a person affected by alienation cannot be seen, heard, or
felt by any other being, but is still subject to real-world effects (i.e.
being run over by a truck, being shot, etc.).  It's like being invisible 
and unable to interact with other people while nobody knows you're around.

Wordman, what would the point of alienation, an "attack" power, be if, in
fact, it did as you suggest (i.e. making the affected individual entirely
incapable of any interaction with the real world, and making that person
unaffected by real-world problems)?

For a specific reference, in one of the published Shadowrun novels/short
stories (I'm not sure which), a character is alienated by a spirit.  The
victim walkes outside and is stepped on by passers-by and almost run over
trying to cross the street.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brett Cashman (The Jester)			    	rcashman@cs.ulowell.edu

"There's a place I like to hide,
 A doorway that I run through in the night."		- Geoff Tate
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: snewton@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Steven E. Newton)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: GURPS: Armor (Basic vs. Advanced)
Date: 6 Nov 1992 16:50:41 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <betel.720940106@camelot> betel@camelot.bradley.edu (Robert Crawford) writes:
>CX6L@MUSICA.MCGILL.CA (CX6L) writes:
>>     On the ground, or in close, a weapon user is in
>>the territory of the unarmed fighter, and that weapon is
>>not going to help much. Nor is a shield: why do you think
>>there are PD penalties to DX for shields in close combat?
>>Why do you think shields cannot block, and one hex and
>>longer weapons cannot parry, in close-combat? Answer: in
>>real-life, *they can't*!
>
>	Well, since close combat is defined as both combatants inside
>the same 1-yard hex, I'll say unequivocably that GURPS got this one
>wrong. I've seen fighters standing toes-to-knees, or even
>knees-to-knees parry and block with great effect.
>

On the other hand, I've seen what a skilled master of Shotokan Karate
can do in a similar situation.  He and his opponent were standing
nose-to-nose, grappling the sleeves of each other's clothing (they were
wearing the traditional loose-fitting white robes).  The master then
proceeded to kick his opponent, with his right foot, in the side of the
head.

S.
-- 
+      +      +      +      +      +      +    |snewton@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu
            I can hear you well,               |Nobody else speaks for me,
            George Orwell.                     |and I speak for no one else.
                                               |     +     +     +     +     +
From: john@porta.b24a.ingr.com (John Nolin)
Subject: Journeys Magazine
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL.
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 15:24:04 GMT

What does everyone think about the Journeys Magazine that GDW is
publishing for Dangerous Journeys?  I thought it was pretty good, but
found the adventure that was included in the mag to be pretty weak.

-John-

Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc