   Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 21:30:01 -0500
   From: GameMaster <dmovrich@execpc.com>
Subject: Re: [gworld] Espers, a new concept...

Craig Huber wrote:

>
> To me, psionics should be a matter of choosing one or more focal powers,
> and developing variations on that theme.  Learning a new discipline, or
> even a new twist, should take months of practice.  I think of mental
> mutations as similar to Wild Talents: powerful, but nearly impossible to
> truly master.  Psionic Disciplines, on the other hand...
> 
> I'd break disciplines down into
> Precognition:  anachronistic/temporal abilities
> Telepathy:     mental force sensitivity
> Teleportation: instantaneous movement to/from distance
> Telekinesis:   physical force projection
> Empathy:       emotional and instinctive sensitivity
> Metabolics:    control of bodily functions
> 

The more I read this the more I like it. I personally think an Esper
without telepathy is a sorry excuse for an Esper. I like the idea of
making it a attainable skill. Unlike most physical mutations, I think
mental ones would get better with practice. A sharpening of the mind so
to speak. Although when anyone refers to it as though it's like spell
casting I get REAL nervous.

> 
> Sorry about the delay, by the way.  I run about 2-3 days behind schedule
> as far as I can tell: I got messages apparently sent Saturday on Monday
> night.
> 

Don't feel bad, I'm on the same delay I think. Sometimes I get a new
letter and three people have responded to it already. Even before I've
had a chance to read the original I find myself occasionally reading the
responces, and thinking to myself "Wow this was nicely written I wish I
could remember this letter to which he's refering....oh there it is!!" I
personally think some people (not mentioing any names) must be on the
PRIORITY gworld mailing list!!!

> Am I on track here?  Should I call the nice men in white with the pretty
> white straitjacket to take me away?  Feedback appreciated.
> Craig

Now don't be silly !!!!......................... "Hello Bellview?"


										GameMaster

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 19:49:43 -0400
   From: Reginald Blue <rvb@trsvr.tr.unisys.com>
Subject: RE: [gworld] Espers, a new concept...

below...

----------
   From: 	Craig Huber[SMTP:cshuber@primenet.com]
Sent: 	Tuesday, June 03, 1997 9:03 AM
To: 	gworld
Subject: 	Re: [gworld] Espers, a new concept...

Reginald Blue wrote:

> It all came together, however, when I was reading the first Heiro book
> (Heiro's Journey?).
Great pair of books.  Wish he had written more.

-- I guess I'm lucky to have both of them to finish reading then?

> In short, I'm trying to add powers that are somewhere between spells
> and psionics to the character class (Note:  I just read Craig Huber's
> article, and HONEST, I was thinking of this before you posted!  :-).
Yeah, right. (big grin)  Actually, it's been one of my pet peeves with
TSR and GW for a long time.  They issued the game FOUR TIMES: no
cybernetics, no psionics.  Um, is anybody awake in there?

-- It especially was obvious to me when they sold the "Complete Psionic's 
Handbook", and I'm thinking to myself..."Wait a minute...it doesn't HAVE to 
be DnD..."  heh.

To me, psionics should be a matter of choosing one or more focal powers,
and developing variations on that theme.  Learning a new discipline, or
even a new twist, should take months of practice.  I think of mental
mutations as similar to Wild Talents: powerful, but nearly impossible to
truly master.

-- Yes...I agree here.

Psionic Disciplines, on the other hand...

I'd break disciplines down into
Precognition:  anachronistic/temporal abilities
Telepathy:     mental force sensitivity
Teleportation: instantaneous movement to/from distance
Telekinesis:   physical force projection
Empathy:       emotional and instinctive sensitivity
Metabolics:    control of bodily functions

With sub-specifications: Projective and Reflective (affects other, or
affects self.)

Most powers should be able to be classified within these categories:
TK Arm: Projective Telekinesis
Levitate Self: Reflective Telekinesis
Strength, Type I: Reflective Telekinesis (TK assist for every movement)
Strength, Type II: Reflective (or Projective) Metabolics/Empathy
(adrenaline boost via Empathic control, focussed into selected
musculature by metabolics)
Clairvoyance: Reflective Teleportation (light from other place is
teleported to eyes)
Clairvoyant Globe: Projective Teleportation (light from other place is
teleported to crystal, which is used to focus image so others can see.)
Time Shift, Self: Reflective Precog/Teleport
Mind Lance: Projective Telepathy (direct shot to pain center, in attempt
to knockout opponent)
Euphorics: Projective Telepathy (direct shot to pleasure center: leaves
target stunned, possibly unconscious, at least _distracted_)
Mind Shield: Reflective Telepathy (defends against mental attack, allows
Esper to attack as well)
Mind Wall: Reflective Telepathy (blocks mind from all external
influences: nothing gets in, precious little gets out)

You get the idea.

-- Yes...I do...I'm not sure, however, what the benefit is in breaking them 
down into the components this way...can you elaborate?  And by the way, my 
strongest motivation for this "project" of mine is KISS (Keep It Simple 
Stupid).  And it's hard...

My own idea of the way this stuff should work:

Espers should be asked to choose a Primary and Secondary Discipline at
the start of the campaign, and assumed to know 2 "powers" (I've always
liked the term "Psion")

-- Hmmm...I like that term...I have a different one, but...I'll think about 
it.

from the primary, 1 psion from the secondary.
Later in life, they can pick up additional Disciplines, as well as
learning and creating new psions, including ones combining concepts.

Psion casting should be fatiguing process.  No "x number of spells per
day" thing, but a subtraction from the esper's mental strength, let's
say.  I'd prefer using something like Power Points, but I don't want to
add another point total to the game

-- Oh god no...that's why I was thinking a straight X per 
day...simple...easy.  But while a point system would keep it all in one   
place, you'd have to know what every blasted power would use in points...no 
thanks.  But subtraction from MS...perhaps...personally, I liked the one 
aspect of Champions...an Endurance stat.  From which ALL your activities 
drew from.  Very nice.

, and don't remember exactly how
fourth ed was laid out (I WISH I could find my Fourth Edition
rulebook!!!!!!)

-- Worst part is, their hard to come by these days.  I keep looking, but...

I would definitely make psions less powerful than mutations of the same
cloth, though.

-- Hmmm...really?  I was thinking the other way around...why do you say 
this?

  The best Esper using his most powerful discipline at
full strength should equate to an average first level mutant with that
power, in my opinion.  Of course, the Esper will probably be more
creative, and should definitely have more flexibility.

-- True...perhaps the power is in the fexilbility...I'll think on that.

A comment regarding the Sleep spell dilemma: have it affect "X" hit
points worth of creatures, and make the total equal to about 4
low-average first level characters (200?).  This would have the
(desirable, to me) side effect of making injured characters easier to
send into dreamland... Allow higher level characters to multiply their
hit points by their level, or some such.  Or just dump the "fourth level
limit" rule altogether.  It's a psion, not a spell.

-- Actually, I think the player and I worked out a reasonable comprimise...
 More like the mental powers in the book already.

Also, in 1st ed. AD&D, creatures used hit dice, but characters used
levels.  For example, Rangers didn't get an immunity to sleep at 4th
because they had 2 hit dice to roll at first level.

-- I hated that...it was so inconsistent, IMHO.

Sorry about the delay, by the way.  I run about 2-3 days behind schedule
as far as I can tell: I got messages apparently sent Saturday on Monday
night.

-- Actually, yours was 1st into my inbox...

Am I on track here?  Should I call the nice men in white with the pretty
white straitjacket to take me away?  Feedback appreciated.

-- Yes, and no...unless you like that sort of thing...but that's not any of
MY business.  :-)

Reggie

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 19:40:02 -0400
   From: Reginald Blue <rvb@trsvr.tr.unisys.com>
Subject: RE: [gworld] Telepathy

below...

----------
   From: 	GameMaster[SMTP:dmovrich@execpc.com]
Sent: 	Monday, June 02, 1997 11:22 PM
To: 	gworld
Subject: 	[gworld] Telepathy

Hello All,
   Just a general question for you all today.

-- I love questions...

 What types of information
do allow available to a character using telepathy? How do you make him
go about getting the info? One question per round? 10 questions?

-- Well, your system is quite interesting, but I've taken a different tack 
(sp?).  I basically only allow them to read surface thoughts...not probe 
the mind.  So, if the person HAPPENS to be thinking about his stash of cool 
weapons in the desert, it's exact location, coordinates, directions, booby 
traps, etc.  Then the players have it made, but as most people aren't going 
over such details in their minds (unless trying to recall them for some 
reason), it's not available.

-- I give the players more a "play by play" view of what's going on.  It's 
not terribly over balancing that way.

-- Also, I've given NPCs the ability to learn a "Telepathy Blocking" skill, 
which basically amounts to "resisting a lie detector test" in current day
terms.  It just requires some concentration on some solid thought (the
players especially loved the one thinking about "potted plants"...."He's
thinking about WHAT?"  "Potted plants"  "All the time?!?"  "Well, you do
see glimpses of other things, but not enough to grasp onto")  Of course,
it's OBVIOUS that the person is hiding something...but NOT obvious what it
is.

-- Keeps the PC's on their toes.

Reggie

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 19:33:55 -0400
   From: Reginald Blue <rvb@trsvr.tr.unisys.com>
Subject: RE: [gworld] Espers, a new concept...

below...

----------
   From: 	GameMaster[SMTP:dmovrich@execpc.com]
   Sent: 	Monday, June 02, 1997 11:12 PM
Subject: 	Re: [gworld] Espers, a new concept...

Reginald Blue wrote:
>
> Gang,
>
>         I've been struggling with Espers now since the introduction of 
4th ed.
>  Basically, when you really look at them, no one should want to play 
them.
>  They have the lowest (IMHO) survivability ratio of any of the character
> classes.


I believe (IMHO) that the character with the lowest chance of survival
is an Examiner who does not aquire a tech V weapon to start off with.

-- Ooops...mea culpa.  I said "survivability", I meant 'usefulness'.  That 
was dumb of me.

 If
anyone needs party protection in the first level it is the examiner.
Only AFTER the battle does he show his worth. (ie: deciphering
instruction manuals, repairing broken artifacts, or figuring out the
artifacts.) All of these skills only benifit the party AFTER someone
else is killed and their weapons or items are found. In the event he is
killed before any higher tech weapons are found, he has been completely
worthless. Now once he aquires a decent weapon he becomes a formitable
ally; but then again any party member with a good weapon would be.

-- Agreed, completely.


>         The problem is they never really advance beyond this.  (By the
way, my
> view on this requires levels for the characters.  Several of you don't 
use
> them, so this isn't for you, I'm sure.)  At 20th level (and I've done 
this)
> an Esper is just about as useless as he is at 1st level, UNLESS he has 
some
> very nice mutations (and even then, it's not as dramatic as an Examiner 
or
> an Enforcer).  Which means most of the PC Espers are a waste of paper.


I think it is unfair to call Espers who don't have any good mutations
Espers.

-- On this point, we are agreed.  ;-)

It's absolutly pointless to create a character and make him an
Esper if he only has the Levitation mutation. Mutations which have no
destructive or preventative properties (ie: Confusion or Mental
Paraylasis for "preventative") but still have a "power score" do not an
Esper make. If I had a character who had only the Levitation mutation
I'd make him anything else before I'd make him an Esper. Have you ever
seen the destructive properties of molecular disruption with a power
score of 32[start # of 12 + 20 (per 20th level)]!?! 15d8 in one round!!!

-- On this I won't quibble (as I can't recall the exact power...)

An Esper at the 20th level with Displacement.... Just when you think
you've got him licked POOF!! he's now 150m away... if you can find him.

-- On this, I will, however.  To me, it would seem that the progression 
here is a good example.  Yes, at 20th, he can go 150m.  But at 1st he could 
go (assuming averages) 25 m.  Wait...(25 m + 5m /mp mod...20th 
level...11+19...30...+10 mp mod?  That can't be right...must be around 75 
m.)  Yet, in DnD, Dimension Door (closes approximation) would be (from
memory...6" + 1"/level?)  at 20th approximately 260 meters (yards). 
 Compared to it's start of (if it could be gotten at 1st) 70 yards.  The 
difference is greater, PLUS the MU has a MASSIVE spell database to add to! 
 Yet the poor esper, IF he got this skill, only has this!

Telepathy (something no self-respecting Esper should be without)

-- And here, I agree too!  Or at least, he should have it EVENTUALLY!

the
ability to read an opponant's mind, worth its' weight 10 fold in gold
(or in this case domars), and with a score of +10 to any roll virtually
a gimmee.

-- hmmm...nope, I disagree.  if he rolls a 1 through a 9, he'd never affect 
a Hisser which is a (mere?) 9th level opponent (and has an MD of 
19)...versus a 20th level Esper?!  Come on!  I'd expect him to blast his 
mind to pieces at 20th!

Density control others......death field
generation....photokenisis (god I hate that one)

-- Ditto.

......Stunning force
(god I REALLY hate that one)

-- Hmmm...can't recall it.  (Which means I haven't run into it...)

...need I go on?? Beguiling... What are you
gonna do if a high level Esper uses this on you?

-- How about versus another "high level Esper"?  At least in this ONE area 
(defense) they are truly awesome.  A 20th level esper as an astounding 30 
MD...(am I remembering this right?)

You can't fight him
anymore you have to wait until he attacks you again, and by that time
it's too late.

-- But ALL of this presumes that he has any ONE of these abilities to start 
with, AND, mind you, the law of averages indicates that he's likely ONLY to 
have one (good one).  Which means, after he's used his stunning 
force/beguiling/density control one ONE opponent (I believe all of these
are once per some lenght of time, right?)  THEN what does he do?!?!

-- All in all, it leaves MANY potential espers completely (pardon my 
expletives) Screwed.  They have, perhaps, ONE good ability FOREVER.  Beyond 
that ONE thing, their ability to affect the flow of the game is right near 
zero.  To me, at least, that leaves one's livelyhood far too much to 
chance.  I'd like to think that (and this is why I'm suggesting this 
system) espers are taught to become much more than what chance has given 
them.  I think that more accurately reflects reality (of course, this is
GW, and what right have I to ask for reality, right?  :-)  But it also, I 
think, provides some fairness too.  Many of the other classes have alot 
more lattitude to affect game play than Espers do.  (Examiners, IMHO, have 
the highest ability to affect game play, but maybe that's just me.)


Not one for EASY systems huh?  ha ha ha

-- Darn.  Actually, I was trying to make it easy.  Didn't succeed?  Rats. 
 I'm open to suggestions though....

> Now this is all well and good, but my big problem is: What should these
> powers be?  I know for certain that I want them to be about the power 
level
> of D&D wizard spells of appropriate level, BUT I don't want them to be
> wizard spells per se.  I want them to have a more Psionic flavor

I whole heartedly agree !!! I really (no offence anyone) HATE the idea
of "wizards" or their spells.

-- Well, that's another debate.  ;-)

< big snip>

> Reggie


	Reggie and all,
   Well we can't always agree huh?

-- Nope, but that's what makes this fun!  :-)

 While I generally disagree with your
letter, I think it's primarily because you generalized.

-- or I misspoke...again, mea culpa.

 But recently I
did have a similar thought about "boosting" the powers of the Esper.
Only because I have really "boosted" the powers of the other classes so
much with the use of called shots. I use James' system of called shots
to vital areas doing 1d4x normal damage. (I think it was James anyway)
   I think where I had ended was really where it started to get
difficult... I was thinking of "mapping" the brain. Teadious I know, but
it was the only way I could see to give the called shot advantages to
Espers. How it would go is something like this: A called Mental Blast to
the whatchamacallit lobe... the attacker's roll is successful... the
defender looses his sence of balance or his ability to control his
bodily functions or whatever. (the bodily functions thing was a joke)
but I hope you get what I mean. Anyway what do ya think?

-- Actually, it sounds more like a "critical hit" system for mental 
abilities would provide a more useful balance for you...perhaps "Oh 
my...you rolled a 20 on your Mental Control.  Well, you've blasted all of 
his intellect away, and now he's your permanent slave".  Or some such. 
 Hey...now THERE's an idea....heh heh heh...  >:-)

 My system is
probably as complicated as yours, although it looks like your actually
had some intellegent thought added to it...lol

-- Well, I'm still working on it, and to be honest, at the moment it's 
mostly inspiration...not persperation...

   Anyway I fealt obligated to defend the Esper, however with the
current system of called shots I'm using they need a little help. I'll
be curious to hear your or anyone elses' response. Since my gaming is
down for the summer and will resume in the winter again, I've got alot
of time to work out the details.

-- I wish I could say the same...  *sigh*

							God I LOVE this game!!!

-- So do I, friend...so do I.  :-)

Reggie

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 19:08:43 -0400
   From: Reginald Blue <rvb@trsvr.tr.unisys.com>
Subject: RE: [gworld] 4th Edition General questions

below...

----------
   From: 	James[SMTP:James@jpb-s.demon.co.uk]
Sent: 	Sunday, June 01, 1997 2:16 PM
To: 	gworld
Subject: 	Re: [gworld] 4th Edition General questions


That's a nice idea, but it doesn't really solve the problem. From what I
understand of the 4th ed world, the weapons people commonly carry are
not artifacts but build by the local gunsmiths, hence the prevalence of
flintlocks.

-- Depends on where you are, I'd say.  If you "believe" the rules, 
Ascension and Bonpar are at Tech IV which means they have better than 
flintlocks for "the common man".

I don't question that the average GW sentient is meant to be a lot tougher
than folks nowadays. What is wrong is that the  weapons technology  has not
compensated for that. If everyone has conceptually taken the Captain
America serum,
surely the military would have to adopt higher caliber ordinance or perhaps
use poison
on their melee weapons or something. The fact is we are meant to believe
that the
average Bonparr solider is armed with a sword and a flintlock rifle which
would
be roughly equivalent to a screwdriver and a rolled up newspaper in our
world.
Their battle must last forever!

-- Oddly enough, I agree.  The battle must last forever.  I take it akin to 
two cave men beating each other up with fists...it took forever...until 
they discovered the CLUB.  Then it was over in 2 seconds, IF one of them 
could land a solid hit.


Reggie

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 22:37:21 +0100
   From: James <James@jpb-s.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [gworld] Espers, a new concept...

[snip]
>
> 							God I LOVE this game!!!
> 								GameMaster

	Amen bro'

	--- James ---

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 22:35:26 +0100
   From: James <James@jpb-s.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [gworld] Espers, a new concept...

> Gang,
> 
> 	I've been struggling with Espers now since the introduction of 4th ed. 
>  Basically, when you really look at them, no one should want to play
them. 
>  They have the lowest (IMHO) survivability ratio of any of the character 
> classes.
> 

Well I'm not sure survivability is really the issue. In my experience its
the mutations
 define the character far more than the class. Certainly at low levels, it
is easy to
imagine a randomly rolled examiner who is also a much more competent
fighter 
than an equal level enforcer. 

But I think you are on to something. Scouts, examiners and enforcers all
seem
to have well defined roles. The Esper however can easily fail to have any 
remarkable mental powers, leaving him only with a few silly skills like
photographic memory or hypnotism set him apart.  

I think something  ought to be done, though I am not sure I understand
what you are suggesting. Perhaps they should get a package of the
more traditional mental mutations for free (telepathy, psychometry,
empathy, whatever) at very modest power ratings.  I dunno.

Regards,

--- James ---

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 22:13:14 +0100
   From: James <James@jpb-s.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [gworld] 4th Edition General questions


> -- Hmmm...now this is interesting.  To me, it seems that this is one of
the 
> MANY examples in role playing when it's difficult for the players to see 
> things from the CHARACTER'S perspective.  I've seen similar problems in
DnD 
> where (for example) the GM would passingly point out a beggar on the 
> street, and the PCs (or players, actually) would get all bent out of 
> shape...like "How could this happen?!?" when, in point of fact, such
things 
> were COMMON in that time period (perhaps this is a bit of a bad example, 
> but you get the idea.)  Unfortunately, I'm NOT sure how to fix this
generic 
> problem.
> 
> -- In this case, I believe you were absolutely 100% correct in doing what

> you did (using shotguns to get the player's attention), but how to get
the 
> players to look at it from the right perspective?  That's hard.

[snip]

> -- Depends, I'd say.  If we continue the perspective problem from above, 
> and the players believe that they can threaten npc's (seriously threaten 
> them, at least) with fists, chains, clubs or even shotguns, then they're 
> sadly mistaken.

You are right. If the GM consistently projects a world of superman, being
attacked by "mere" shotguns would be interpreted
by the players not as a serious attempt on ones life but the kind of thing
one might expect should they fail to pay your bookie on time. 

I guess the failing is on my part. I don't feel comfortable running a game
at that level of power. I find that in process of  upping the scales
some of the subtlety is lost in the translation. Instinctively I cannot see
a shot gun as anything but a horribly lethal weapon, and I'd much rather
use
clubs and chains when the intention is just to rough up the party.
The message is that much clearer because we have seen this scene
100 times before at the cinema or on tv.

In a sense this echoes the short discussion we had few months ago
regarding brawling in GW. Someone remarked that the rules were not
very developed because it rarely happened. In his version of GW,
life was cheap and people (sentients!) played for keeps. 

I obviously go for a much gentler game which to me fits relatively
well in the fairly settled background of GW 4th ed. It is wild in the
way the (mythical) Wild West was wild, not in a Mad Max, dog-eat-dog,
kill-you-for-your-boots sort of way. As such I treasure the concept
that there are different degrees of violence appropriate to different
sorts of problems with mortal combat being reserved for the more
extreme (but by no means rare) cases.  

Linking this all with the original point, I find that the current hit point
system which is geared towards lethal combat  with heavy
weapons, is not very good at expressing more moderate forms
of violence.  It's not a problem in my current game which plays
very much like a supers game. But it certainly got in the 
way in some of my previous GW campaigns.


> -- If, however, the players REALIZE that in GW the ante has been upped,
and 
> that if they want to threaten somebody, it's going to take something 
> significant (like a VibroBlade...or a Torc Grenade...or a Black Ray 
> pistol...now THAT would be something).  Of course, one could say "yes,
but 
> now you've got to hand out these powerful weapons to do that", to which I

> respond, yes and no.  Yes, you should hand out something more than just 
> shotguns, but no, you don't have to hand out black ray pistols.  The mere

> fact that someone recognizes what a black ray pistol IS is far more
useful
> than having one.  Just PRETEND!  (and this works both ways).  It's like
the
> new trick the police are pulling:  Putting blow-up dummies in police cars

> to make it look like there's a cop up ahead.  Great trick.  Cheap.  And
> EFFECTIVE.

Its always a joy when players come up with clever solutions. But bluffing
isn't really a long term solution. You can pull it off a few times
but after that it'll start getting a bit stale while depending on the
circumstances and
the scenario, the basic "Freeze" situation can occur and reoccur many
times.

Regards,

--- James ---

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 15:33:49 -0400 (EDT)
   From: HawkLord@aol.com
Subject: Re: [gworld] Request: Looking for a copy of GW 4th edition

Rob Mohr,

Over this weekend, I checked out the biggest gaming store in my area.  They
had a few GW 4th edition accessories (including Gamma Knights) but no 4th
edition rulebooks.  I apologize, I thought they had at least one in stock.

However, I finally broke down and bought a copy of Metamorphosis Alpha to
Omega for Amazing Engine.  It is not so bad really, as long as you ignore the
half of the book that is Amazing Engine rules.  There is still good
information on the Starship Warden, just not much space to fit it all, so
there is a lot of room for the GM to "develop the starship as he/she sees
best."  In other words, "we didn't have the room to include any details about
the starship, so you'll have to take it from here."

Tony

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Date: Wed, 4 Jun 1997 12:49:24 -0500 (CDT)
   From: "Kerry D. Jordan" <kdj1@Ra.MsState.Edu>
Subject: Re: [gworld] New GW site: Impressions of GW over time...

On Tue, 3 Jun 1997, Craig Huber wrote:

> > BTW, if you feel the let down by the 4th ed skill system
> > (who doesn't?), I really to encourage you to try Kerry's
> > AD&D ported skill system. It is really easy to incorporate
> > and it makes a big difference.
> Where would I find it?  In previous posts?  I've ported some of my
> SpaceMaster and Third Edition GW work, but since I can't find anyone
> around here willing to play, it's all academic, anyway.

At my web page - http://www2.msstate.edu/~kdj1

Kerry

Kerry Jordan
kdj1@Ra.MsState.Edu
http://www2.msstate.edu/~kdj1

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

   Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 06:47:33 -0500
   From: Craig Huber <cshuber@primenet.com>
Subject: Re: [gworld] New GW site: Impressions of GW over time...

A change to my previous message on this subject:

I was looking through 1st ed. Gamma World last night, and discovered my
memory was faulty.  They did have plant mutations, and suggested plants
only be NPCs due to short lifespans and other complications.

Sorry about that.  Later!

Craig
