HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mar@physics.su.OZ.AU (David Mar)
Subject: Re: OPIGS [was Re: Homemade Systems]
Organization: School of Physics, University of Sydney, Australia
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 00:07:00 GMT

In article <fudge> ericg@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (E. Chris Garrison) writes:
>Pretty silly.  Certainly can tell it is meant to be, anyway...  
>My big trouble was handling things like magic, psi powers, alien
>ablities, basically anything that was not a skill-like thing.
>How is this handled here?  Or is that for future installments?

It looks as though you've already worked that out, from reading the rest
of your post. But just in case:
All such abilities are handled with the Use roll mechanic. Want to cast
a spell? Make a Use roll to see if you can do it properly! Of course, this
gives absolutely no restrictions as to who may do what (except that people
with low Brains scores won't want to try too many things!). Proper
restriction is really up to the sensibilities of the players.

>>don't like happens - especially your own death - roll on your Luck chance
>>to see if you are lucky enough for something else to happen instead. Only
>What a concept!  Would that real life (tm) were this easy. :-)

Yes, and you need this Luck roll in this game! Otherwise you end up killing
yourself a lot when you try to do anything.  :-)

>>Look for OPIGS modules - out soon.
>>Any questions on this game will gladly be answered if sent to me.
>>Also look for game accessories, novels and game world and universe settings.
>Should be interesting.  I'll look for 'em.

Well, actually....
That part was written, like the rest of it, back in 1987. I haven't
produced any of that promised material yet... and I doubt if I ever will.
Of course, I might be persuaded if someone offers some inducement... :-)
Loyd? You guys looking for another staff writer?  :-)

David Mar.                              mar@astrop.physics.su.OZ.AU
Astrophysics Department, University of Sydney  NSW  2006, Australia.
From: dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Axly)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: SRun Re: Questions Galore (ok, only 4)
Date: 23 Jul 92 16:25:37 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.BruoAr.KL4
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

olds@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Angel) writes:


>	few more questions.....I know, what's new, right?  Well, bare
>	with us....it could be fun!  ;-)  ]<<<<< 
>					Quick Silver, the Indian Princess

*grin* "Bare" with an Indian Princess and a Minotaur...No comment.


>1. Area of Effect. Suppose you were to throw a beneficial area of effect
>   spell and then someone enterd the area, does it affect them then? I can
>   see how it would since the spell is still in effect, like those entering
>   the area of a Mob * Spell.  But then again, I can also see how the spell
>   permeates those who are there bestowing its effect, then simple recedes 
>   into a sustained nature. Kinda like, gee ya missed the Pennies From
>   Heaven concept...

Well, if you walk into the area of effect of a nonbenficial spell, they 
would take damage. I would say that this means that if they walk into a
area of effect beneficial spell, they get the benefit .       

>4.  How do you work totemic modifiers, as in, do you allow people to center
>    to get rid of totemic modifiers?  For example, can the snake shaman get
>    rid of her -1 die loss for casting spells during combat?  Or can you
>    get rid of +1 or +2 modifiers to do anything in combat for other
>    totems....basically, have you allowed things to affect totemic modifiers?

I would say no way 'cause the centering just isn't on the level of power
of your totem. A shaman is his totem in some sense, and derives his
spellcasting power from his totem. To become not your totem in order to
cast the spell without a penalty means you can't cast the spell at all.

 Axly
From: mkkuhner@phylo.genetics.washington.edu (Mary K. Kuhner)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Point or Random Systems, What about both?
Date: 26 Jul 92 15:44:44 GMT
Organization: University of Washington

Having both point and random generation for the same system is a
possibility, but one or the other is likely not to work well.  If you
design the system with random generation, you know that some characters
will have much higher attributes than others with no compensation, so
you know that you have to insure that even low-attribute characters will
be playable.  With point generation, this is not the case.  Conversely,
with point generation you have to worry a lot about the possibility that
two rare abilities will synergize overly well, since players are likely
to spot and exploit such a loophole.  In a random system it will be very
improbable to get such a character, so it's not as big a worry.

I'd settle on one or the other.  The current trend of the market is
towards points, though I'm not particularly happy with the idea myself.
If I were considering buying a new point-based system, I would look very
favorably on a discussion of its biases and vulnerabilities within the
rules, like the stop signs and magnifying glasses of Champions 4th
edition.  Too many game designers assume that new GMs and players will
somehow notice all the risks they've spent months or years learning....

Mary Kuhner mkkuhner@genetics.washington.edu
From: ratinox@splinter.coe.northeastern.edu (Richard Pieri/Stainless Steel Rat)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Champions
Date: 23 Jul 92 14:30:35 GMT
Organization: 3WA, Boston Office. Or Nu Meta Chi. Take your pick.
In-reply-to: jsalter@silver.ucs.indiana.edu's message of 23 Jul 92 13:48:09 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 23 Jul 92 13:48:09 GMT, jsalter@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (joshua
>>>>> salter) said:

js> 	This weekend I was considering buying Champions, it looks good to
js> me...  Is it a good investment? Flaws, Exceptional Parts?

Yes, a good investment if you enjoy cinematic, heroic gaming. If you're
looking for "reality," go someplace else.

Recommendations: if you do not plan on superheroic gaming, pick up the
Hero System Rulesbook. It's cheaper than the full-sized Champions and has
all the rules, it just omits the Champions Sourcebook (background and stuff
for superheroic gaming). It also has an index, something Champions is
missing. Oh, the HSR also has all the errata edited in.

If you want the whole thing, avoid the hardcover version; the binding
really rots and errata abounds. The new softback version supposedly has the
errata eddited in, but I haven't checked it out. It still doesn't have an
index, though.

--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: Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca (Nick Janow)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Point or Random Systems, What about both?
Date: 25 Jul 92 06:56:52 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

cstudly@athena.mit.edu (Todd Sterling Anderson) writes:

> point allocation because it encourages role playing  more.

Either method--point allocation or random generation--can be validly argued to
encourage role-playing more than the other system.  Point allocation, done
improperly, can be nothing more than min/maxing, creating a
killing/thieving/spellcasting/whatever machine with little if any real
personality.  Random generation, done properly, encourages a player to "stretch
his/her creativity" to see a character with real depth in those random numbers.
The opposite of these two examples are also true.

Different gamers think differently, and will be happier with one system or the
other, and create a deeper character personality with one or the other.  Each
technique is just as valid as the other.  Luckily, there are games using each
of the systems, so gamers have a choice.

> Additional points can go for additional nonweapon proficiencies or weapon
> proficiencies and even psionic wild talents.  I am very happy with this
> system to date.

Good role-players will usually spend the points to give their character depth;
roll-players will usually spend them to maximize some aspect that makes their
characters as powerful as possible.

--

Nick_Janow@mindlink.bc.ca
From: warmongr@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Krishgan)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: SRUN: Toning down mages
Date: 29 Jul 92 21:59:23 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center


Concerning the comment that Wordman made about spells and quickenings...

As so MANY people claimed when I through out the arguement of using a spell
to kill a spell, you CANNOT by the rules use a spell to "combat" a spell.
Personally, yes I allow, but the rules say you can't...

-Keith
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 13:58:40 -0400 
From: William Henry Timmins <wt0b+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Genres
	<3588@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP>

>I agree that the technology isn't available now, but Battletech takes place 
>in the far future.  Who is to say what technology in the future will be 
>like?  Do you think Ben Franklin could imagine a Cray II computer while
>he was experimenting with electricity?  Could the Wright brothers envision
>supersonic jets while they were experimenting with powered flight?  Who
>knows where technology will be in 100 years, let alone thousands of years in 
>the future?  It is all a matter of suspension of disbelief (as is any sf
>or fantasy game).

   You continually miss the point. The point is, with all that special
technology, it still doesn't make any sense to use mechs rather than
super tanks.
   Suspension of disbelief is something that must be carefully
maintained for a 'serious' game. (Toon and Paranoia don't require it)
Battletech has some basic problems that shatter suspension of disbelief.
Now, some people are less aware of technical flaws or care less about
them. Thus, for them, the suspension is maintained. Other people can't
stand obvious technical flaws in a technological setting.
    Ignoring the whole mech thing, problems consist of weapons, in this
'advanced' technology, functioning WORSE than they do in reality.

    The mech thing is just one point... and the problem is, it is NOT an
extrapolation! In fact, it is endemic of what you're talking about...

'Ok, this really technological society uses mechanical suits of armor,
GIANT suits of mechanical armor! And they fight each other.'

This isn't anything new, this is like steam-powered leviathans from
Gulliver's travels.

-Me
From: Les_Jenkins@lppl.mi.org (Les Jenkins)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Anyone Heard of Rifts
Distribution: world
Date: 30 Jul 92 02:32:33 EST
Organization: Les's Place BBS

In a message dated Wed 29 Jul 92 21:15, coult@julia.geom.umn.edu (Nicholas
Coult) wrote:

 NC> Ummm, about this whole Rifts issue: it seems that lots of people don't
 NC> like the mass-destruction capabilities of mega-damage weapons because
it
 NC> makes the characters too powerful (or something like that).  My GM's
 NC> version of the Rifts world has a nice way of handling this.

 NC> Most big cities in the Rifts world don't allow mega-damage
armor/weapons
 NC> in. Entrants to the city are _required_ to deposit their armor/weapons
 NC> in the armory, where they will be watched over by the militia (for a
 NC> fee, of course). This isn't that much of a hassle for the militia
since
 NC> most of the entrants to a city don't have such equipment anyway.

Thats nothing novel on your GM's part, it is stated many times throughout
the background material that most towns, and especially any under Coalition
control, will not allow MDC capable weapons and armor in their limits. Even
cybernetic weapons must be de-activated before entrance is allowed. Many
cities won't let Psychics in either. All of that is in the background info.
It's up to the GM to use it.

 NC> Anyone caught with MDC weapons/armor inside the city is thrown in jail
 NC> and their stuff is confiscated.  Sneaking stuff in might be possible
if
 NC> its a small laser pistol or something, but power armor isn't exactly
 NC> stealthy.  Forcing your way in would accomplish nothing if all you
want
 NC> to do is go into town for a bite to eat and a place to stay.

Like I say, this is in the books.

 NC> More often than not, however, the "bad guys" usually DO have MDC
weapons
 NC> in the city.  This makes for quite a challenge.

I've used this same cheesy plot dozens of times. :-)

 NC> There are other issues I would like to address about Rifts, but I'll
 NC> stop taking up your time now. -- Nick Coult internet:
coult@geom.umn.edu
 NC>  or  coultn@carleton.edu

Either way, I've got the time... ;-)


 -- AEd V1.36f/EvaA

-- Via DLG Pro v0.992

======================================================================
E-Mail to:      | "Stimpy, sometimes your wealth of ignorance simply |
Les@lppl.mi.org |  astounds me." - Ren Hoek                          |
----------------+-----------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: New Name for Flesh Golem wanted!
From: steiner@jupiter.cse.utoledo.edu (jason steiner)
Date: 29 Jul 92 17:10:21 EST
Distribution: world

jonathan@mantis.co.uk (Jonathan Egre') writes:
> 
> The name "golem" does indeed come from an Eastern European/Jewish myth.
> The original "golem" was made from clay, and animated by writing "golem"
> (in Hebrew) on the clay, I believe.

the story i read mentioned a ghetto's holy man writing something
on a piece of paper and placing it in the golem's mouth. the golem
then protected the people from their oppressors or somesuch typical
thing. just as typical, when the paper was taken from its mouth
it collapsed on its creator.

jason
--
would you could you should you cross thru if i could wipe my eyes a blinding
compromise another pinky shave enlightens the brow now cow to die another day
if you prefer outside be blessed sir ostracize better bastard now forgotten
well instead of favored son of hell in hopes to open eyes - scaterd few, U
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,` steiner@jupiter.cse.utoledo.edu `,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: cpbeaure@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu (Chris Beauregard)
Subject: Re: Anyone Heard of Rifts
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 19:05:12 GMT

In article <1992Jul26.041432.5461@cam.compserv.utas.edu.au> cjudd@esk (Craig Thomas Judd) writes:
>The Palladium system IS related to D&D. Who cares? :-) What us isolated RIFTS
>players want to know is what people thought of the setting, more than the
>game system. At least, I do!

I played RIFTS a few times.  My impression:
	- Awesome background.  They did a really thorough job on that part of
	things.

	- Usual Pallidium game system.  Yawn.  As usual, it turns into a
	points war, as players try to extract every bit of skills, armor,
	weapons, etc, that they possibly can.  The sheer destructive
	capabilities of the hardware in the game didn't help all that much.
	Full conversion Borgs should not be PCs, IMHO.  Ditto for Glitter
	Boys.  My personal suggestion was to ignore the MDC/SDC distinction,
	and have all weapons in the same damage system.  Not _really_
	realistic (although not much father out that a guy in MDC chain mail
	being immune to a 20mm cannon, or whatever) but much, much more fun.
	The again, I'm a fan of _The_Last_Stand_of_the_DNA_Cowboys_, so I was
	wanting to capture the spirit of the book...which I find the game
	really ressembles...

In summary, great game, lends itself to munchkinism _really_ well.

>      \/\   cjudd@esk.compserv.utas.edu.au      a.k.a. Kuroto Shiro   /\/

Chris Beauregard                                cpbeaure@cayley.waterloo.edu
Differently Expressed:  The politically correct term for politically
correct people.
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: 10726446@eng2.eng.monash.edu.au (LAU WAI KUEN)
Subject: Re: Dark games
Summary: the darker, the better
Keywords: dark dark dark spam & dark
Organization: Faculty of Engineering, Monash University 
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 07:05:33 GMT

In article <1992Jul20.143407.12806@midway.uchicago.edu> grendel@uhuru.uchicago.edu (Cliff Winnig) writes:
>From: grendel@uhuru.uchicago.edu (Cliff Winnig)
>Subject: Dark games
>Summary:  the darker, the better
>Keywords: dark dark dark spam & dark
>Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 14:34:07 GMT

>I've noticed a trend in the gaming industry, perhaps a reflection of the  
>depressed economic conditions of the 90's, or maybe just an interest in  
>fantasy evil to fill the gap left by the Evil Empire's rusted out Iron  
>Curtain.

>Games & supplements have been appearing lately whose very titles hint at  
>that trend:  Shadowrun, TSR's Dark Sun world, Dark Conspiracy, etc.  Even  
>the new, 3rd edition of Ars Magica, which is pretty much the same game it's  
>always been, is billed as "a dark vision of the medieval world" on its back  
>cover.  And inside, there's lots more pictures of demons than in earlier  
>editions.  But let's face it:  the Middle Ages may have been a bit harsh and  
>devoid of adequate plumbing, but that doesn't make them "dark."  Neverthe-  
>less, the manufacturers apparently think darkness will help sell their  
>product.

>I agree.

>In fact, I'd like to capitalize on this trend by taking it to it's logical  
>conclusion:  Dark Darkness Role-Playing (TM, MBA, QED), a game in which the  
>query "Have you got a light?" is sacrilegious, a game in which all the  
>player characters are dark Demons of Darkness who spend their days  
>masqerading as humans working in darkrooms and their nights in dark taverns  
>drinking only imported dark beer, a game so dark the rules are printed in  
>black ink on black paper.

>(And I even got Spinal Tap's record sleeve designer to do the cover art.)

>--
>Cliff "Anybody got a light?" Winnig    ||        ,     ___     .    -------_
>cliff@uchicago.edu                     ||        \_|__/_ _\__|_/     \    //
>or, for mail with NeXT attachments:    ||            /  >  \          \  //
>grendel@uhuru.uchicago.edu             ||            \^-^- /           \//


   Yep.  I can just picture the companies cashing in with Dark Supplements 
(TM)

 Dark AD&D (DAD&D); Paladin 'Where's my Flame Sword ' 
                    peasants [screaming] 'heretic!'
                    Paladin 'OdsBods! 3000 peasants! Tis a tough ten minutes 
                             ahead for me!'

 Dark SR; Samurai 'How am I supposed to see a black laser sight?'

 Dark Gurps; Player 'What's religious intolerance: Light worth?'

 Dark Toon;  'Kiiiillllllllllll!'

 Dark Paranoia; Clone 'This rifle isn't heavy; it's light'
                Computer "Please report to the nearest termination centre.
                          Thank you.  Have a nice day."
 
 Dark CoC; Investigator 'Eh?  No, I didn't notice it was getting darker in 
                         here.'
From: gdavis@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Grant R. Davis)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: How many gadgest are too many?...
Date: 23 Jul 92 00:42:25 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

In article <54659@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> warmongr@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Krishgan) writes:
>
>In regards to Grant Davis' questions on weapons, availability and what not...
>
>
>  Grant,
>
>     I think I personally would rather have the guns and the rules for them
>  made out and given to the general -SR- community. 

Well, I wasn't exactly talking about Shadowrun. I'm designing a cyberpunk-ish
game, and from the response so far, I think I'll just make up enough weapons
for the pregenerated characters and the beginning adventure. This suits me
just fine, as I have plenty else to do to get it ready in time for Gencon.

Grant Davis
gdavis@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu

"This is good[beer]. Remind me to take this world."-Lost Destiny
From: praxis@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Laura L Perkinson)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: SR: Bone Lacing
Date: 24 Jul 92 22:34:43 GMT
Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore


	Disclaimer: I'm no physicist.
	But...

	Something seems amiss w. the concept of partial bone lacing. 
	Ex: doing just the arms to increase damage done by spurs (or what
have you.) Sure your arm's tougher - but doesn't this create problems when
it's a lot tougher than the shoulder it's attached to?
	Am I making any sense? (Am I?)
		Praxis
From: durrell@chop.isca.uiowa.edu (Bryant Durrell)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Anyone Heard of Rifts
Date: 29 Jul 92 01:24:41 GMT
Organization: University of Iowa

In article <0095E415.A25AE600@abby.chem.ucla.edu> doug@abby.chem.ucla.edu writes:
>Just for accuracy, I'd like to point out that I did not merely say that the
>Palladium system was related to *D&D.  I said that it seemed like an
>*EVOLUTIONARY PREDECESSOR* of *D&D, which, in my opinion (and that of many
>others on the net) is a much stronger statement and best conveys the true
>odor of the system.

A polite pfeh.  It's clearly a slightly warped successor, given
that it's got that nifty percentile-based skill system.  AD&D with
some RuneQuest tacked on in odd ways.  In my opinion, of course, 
sans any appeals to the masses.  <grin>

Bryant
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
Subject: Re: Military Mechs?
From: steiner@jupiter.cse.utoledo.edu (jason steiner)
Date: 26 Jul 92 20:57:50 EST

cjudd@esk (Craig Thomas Judd) writes:
> In article <Brxso7.5y2@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, dv52151@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Axly) writes:
> >Well, the big problem I have with future tanks being big robots is that they
> >would just be too damn easy to hit. Missles are already very effective if 
> >used against modern tanks correctly. Most of the big robots in the games
> >can't move very fast and are as big as a house. I'd say it would be damn
> >easy to slam missles into those robots all day long from fast hover vehicles.
> >Future combat means either missles or a very good explanation why no one
> >uses them. 
> 
> Missiles are a major problem, and are the best weapons to use in Robotech. 
> But if you look at the Mekton II rulebook, it points out that being large 
> doesn't make you easier to hit, if you move fast. 

eh? here we've got that disregard for reality again. in a different
system but that doesn't make it any better. vehicle profile is -very-
important. the Swedes have a tank that is turretless for just this
reason. BattleTech is a very fun game, but arguing the viability
of huge, slow, complex machines that are also pumping out massive 
amounts of heat is a dead end.

at least FASA isn't completely dumb. they -did- make Centurion.
sure, grav tanks are just as non-existant, but assuming that level
of technology they are a lot more believable.

jason

--
would you could you should you cross thru if i could wipe my eyes a blinding
compromise another pinky shave enlightens the brow now cow to die another day
if you prefer outside be blessed sir ostracize better bastard now forgotten
well instead of favored son of hell in hopes to open eyes - scaterd few, U
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,` steiner@jupiter.cse.utoledo.edu `,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.misc
From: jefft@athena.mit.edu (Jeff Tang)
Subject: Re: Military Mechs?
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
	<55239@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> <27JUL199217362646@elroy.uh.edu>
	<1992Jul28.161435.89577@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au>
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 00:21:09 GMT


In converting muscle energy to "wheel" energy, consider how much more
efficient a human on a bicycle is, than a human on foot, in terms of energy
used/distance travelled.  True on foot is better for squishy terrains, but
the effect is lessened between mechs/tanks.  Mechs would be a lot more
stuck in mud or really soft deep terrain than tanks.
--
Jeff Tang
jefft@athena.mit.edu