   Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 23:40:42 -0400 (EDT)
   From: Motatumbo@aol.com
Subject: [gworld] The Yearly Trip to Mecca

I was speaking to a friend of mine today who has received his Gen Con book
already and it appears that there are actually 3 GW events planned for this
year.  This is suprising seeing that last year there was only 1 and none (i
believe) for a few years before it.
Figured some of you who do/can make it would be interested to know. I'll
probably see you there.
Matt

p.s. I dont remember who the Radioactivist-heads are in this bunch, but from
what I hear, one of the events involves playing the Legacy/Curse loving
fools.

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

   Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 22:27:44 -0500
   From: CdBd3rd <cdbd3rd@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: [gworld] finding my religion

James wrote:
> ...Still I'd be interested to read if anyone has developed some odd cults > of off-beat religions.

I've used two actual 'religions in past campaigns:  One I expanded from
minor encounters from GW modules [don't ask me to remember which
ones...] where the residents were wary of Rev'nuers and feared the
Terrible God Ploosh'n.  The other was a spin-off of one of the major
religions in my AD&D campaigns, worshippers are members of the Cult of
the Great Blue Oyster - the avatar of which is depicted as (of course) a
huge, steam-breathing T-rex. [bald vampire creatures, minor Death's, and
star-gazing subcults are also prevalent...]

      {who me?  Blue Oyster Cult?? Nope, never heard of 'um...}

Later,  Gary
--
                ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
		REVEL IN THE DIVINE RADIANT GLORY !!!
		   [Gary] CdBd3rd@Worldnet.ATT.Net
          -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

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

   Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 20:12:21 -0700
   From: john horton <hfoao122@email.csun.edu> (by way of John Horton <jhorton@admsvcs.csun.edu>)
Subject: [gworld] FYA - The GM as a character

Though it's more oriented to D&D or similar fantasy games, I thought you all
might appreciate this.  (Some typos corrected.)

John H.

CHARACTER CLASS : GM

A lighthearted look at the GM as a character class !!
Alternatively titled : "Revenge of the GM"

Fed up with your players pushing you around? Annoyed that you
have to play by the rules ? Do their dice always roll better
than yours? Do they never miss saving throws? Well no longer!
GM's can have the fun that they have always been missing out on!

Make Mister Powerful actually lose a combat round! Magic items
malfunction, or better still backfire at a single word! Yeah you
can do it. Here is the all new system to give GM's what they've
always wanted, but have never been allowed to have -- XP !!!
As things stand, you have only one character class open to you -
downtrodden sheetshuffler. Let's face it - you get no special
abilities, no levels and nothing else.

The Games Master is a mix of other classes. You can only play one
if the GM says so. Have you got permission ? I thought you might.
A Games Master needs the maximum in every score. What a coincidence
- you managed it. The Games Master has the attitude of a thief, the
abilities of a wizard and the character of a malicious sod who has
been ill treated by the rest of humanity. Not much roleplaying
needed in other words.

GM's can reach 10th level and can be of any race or sex. GM's have a
variety of abilities, linked to level and usable once per session
(see table):

XP		LVL		TITLE		1 2 3 4 5
00000-01500  1		Underdog	1
01501-03000	2		Victim		2 1
03001-06000	3		Sheaf-Shuffler	3 2 1
06001-09000	4		Dice-Fixer	4 3 2 1
09001-12000	5		Accident-Causer	5 4 3 2 1
12001-15000	6		Level-Dropper	6 5 4 3 2
15001-18000	7		Hero-Killer	6 6 5 4 3
18001-21000	8		Motivator	6 6 6 5 4
21001-24000	9		Diety		6 6 6 6 5
24001-30000	10	 Sonofabitch	6 6 6 6 6

Abilities

Level 1
Dice Fixing - There's a 1 in 20 chance that this clever and
  very annoying plan of the PC's won't work. But wouldn't it
  be funny if it didn't.

Loss of Paperwork - You accidently 'lose' all that awkward
  paperwork that clutters things up. Like current XP totals.
  Nothing Important

Change Detail - Any annoying detail of characters or your
  campaign. Just change them !

Misquote - Players will have to be careful of their statements
  of intent, but no need to worry, you know what they mean.

Roll in Secret - Less Obvious than dice fixing, the GM can
  make any roll without the characters seeing. Either to kill
  off an arrogant character or to save one for a more gruesome
  death prepared.

Coincidence - Well what a coincidence! Any small bit of luck or
  unluck, mostly unluck, can be engineered by a GM using this
  power.

Twist Rule - That rule is far too soft on the party, so forget
  it and improvise a new one.

Level 2
Indirect GM Intervention - This can be used when the PCs are
  about to go off and avoid your stylish plotted thousand page
  senario. It guves your PCs a form of motivation and is an
  advanced form of the level 1 ability, Coincidence.

Reverse Decision - Heaven forbid that you could possibly make a
  mistake, but just in case

Ignore Player - Player X is always whining on about something or
  other, so just 'switchg off' when he tries to retreat from the
  hideously overbalanced combat you have in store for him.

Minor Aid - Give a nice co-operative players a little boost. Then
  use Reverse Decision.

Bad Luck - What a shame! Thieves stole all of character X's stuff
  did they?

Misinterpret - Accidentally 'get wrong' spell descriptions, weapon
  damage or just about anything else.

Level 3
Character Vicitmisation - This is the perfect way to 'get at' a
  character or player who gets on your nerves. The form of
  victimisation can be as warped as your imagination permits.
  Fun, eh?

Arch Enemy - A specific form of character victimisation. Break
  all the rules, create a mega character and make him hate a PC
  for no apparent reason.

Destroy Item - You should never have given character X that
  Bronze Bodkin of Everything Killing, should you? What a tragedy
  that it just blew up in his face! Shame.

Hold Score - Atrributes and XP totals never seem to change
  with this ability. Spot character X in the high-level party.
  Yup, he's second level one. Unfreeze the score when you feel
  up to it.

Level 4
Experience Loss - A conveniently placed ditch, a large dog, a
  bump of the head and hey presto! Instant amnesia!

Attribute Loss - Is 18/00 strength getting on top of you? Drop
  it to three and laugh yourself senseless when character X fails
  to hit his meal with a knife and fork.

Wish Finding - If character X gets a wish, you'd better give
  him what he's asking for. Not what he wants but what he's
  been asking for since the start of the campaign. He doesn't
  want a magic object. He really means "Get rid of all my magic
  items". Easy when you know how.

Retaliation - If a GM in another game is doing these things to
  you, here is your option to strike back and maintain some of
  your integrity. Well a bit. After all, being a good GM is so
  boring.

Level 5
Favour of the Gods - No, this isn't for being nice to character X.
  Its for getting rid of the nasty things you've done to him so
  that you can have the pleasure of doing them all over again.

Character Assasination
Character X has obviously pushed you too far. Don't use this
  ability too often. It's far better to use a combination of
  the other abilities until he wants to die. Then don't let
  him.

Direct DM Intervention - The PC's have sniffed at your excellent
  offer to walk into the heavily guarded castle/king's bedroom/
  demonic place/jaws of death. But it is in their best interests.
  They'll come round to your way of thinking after you force them
  to walk into the heavily guarded .....

Starting Level
There are three main ways of deciding on starting level
1) Start at level 1, 0 XP and work your way up becasue it's more
   of a challenge.
2) Index link your starting level to the level of the party
   because it means your abilities fit the party.
3) Start at level 10 and sod your players.

Gaining XP
The PCs obviously can't be relied on to award you XP, so decide it
yourself. Within reason of course. After all, 11 million is a bit
under the top.

Gwaredd
gtm100@minster.york.ac.uk

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

   Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 21:56:11 -0500
   From: CdBd3rd <cdbd3rd@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: [gworld] 4th Edition General questions

Reginald Blue wrote:
>  I'm thinking seriously of getting an encyclopedia and determining where
> all the interesting things fall (i.e. is Dynamite Tech III or Tech IV)

Yes. And possibly Tech II as well.  The Chinese came up with the
gunpowder idea a LONG time ago [almost as long ago as when I was in
school and actually had to know anything about the subject!!] but the
Tech level difference would come into play according to how effectively
the material was taken advantage of... eh?  Although it's true that
gunpowder would create more of a pipe-bomb or petard than actual
dynamite, the game mechanics would be about the same for both. Maybe.

And now that I've scratched on your example a little, let me know when
you start the Tech project.  Maybe we can bounce ideas back & forth.

Later,  Gary
--
                ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
		REVEL IN THE DIVINE RADIANT GLORY !!!
		   [Gary] CdBd3rd@Worldnet.ATT.Net
          -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -

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

   Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 19:51:11 -0700
   From: John Horton <jhorton@admsvcs.csun.edu>
Subject: Re: [gworld] losing my religion

At 09:00 PM 6/10/97 -0500, GameMaster wrote:
>Tom Foster wrote:
>>
>> Hey now,
>>
>> Another interesting issue came up last game we had.  Where have all the
>> religions gone?  The only ones left are the ones that worship the
>> technology of the ancients. This doesn't seem quite right to me. The
>> worship of something intangible has been with the human race since the
>> first recorded history, with the worship of the forces of nature. From
>> there, the progression went to a more intagible god/gods/godesses, and
>> eventually monotheism. So where is this progression in Gamma World? It
>> doesn't make sense that the -only- religions practiced would be the ones
>> that involve the worship of artifacts and such. I can see how those can
>> exist, but I also think it would be natural that others, if they didn't
>> survive in some bizarre form, would rise also. It's almost like they're
>> making people unable to think in the abstract, which is pretty odd to
>> me. There could be a plethora of religions that could have developed,
>> especially considering the sentiency of animals and plants. But nothing
>> is detailed in the books on this. So, what do you all think? Does anyone
>> else run campaigns with other religions in it?
>>
>> Tom
>>
>	Tom,
>   I'm glad you asked this question. I believe the quote is "those who
>don't know history are doomed to repeat it" or something like that. And
>since for some reason, noone knows how to read or most likly the general
>lack of books available, the creaters of Gamma World have doomed it's
>people to repeat history IMHO.
>   I think religion would very much be apart of Gamma World. Zues, Odin,
>Ra all of these figures would be duplicated in some form. It's hard to
>imagine that most people run tech II or III campaigns without having the
>Ugg tribe who worships the sun-god Uggu. Along these lines I think
>Castles would have made a come-back. Strickly archetually(??) speaking,
>castles were great fortresses designed to protect from sieges (knights
>invading from the north). Anyway you see what I mean....
>						GameMaster

Like tpr, I get a little nervous about introducing religions as a major
aspect of GW.  However, I see an obvious parallel between the Dark Ages of
the Western World and the setting of Gamma Terra.  In our Dark Ages, the
Church was the only repository of knowledge and pretty much the only way
news got around was through travelling priests.  "A Canticle for Leibowitz"
has pretty much the same setting, post-holocaust.  I can see a place for
churches, priests, etc., but I wouldn't want any divine intervention (other
than that of the almighty GM, of course).

John H.

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

   Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 19:20:14 -0700
   From: John Horton <jhorton@admsvcs.csun.edu>
Subject: Re: [gworld] hit point thing.

At 10:33 AM 6/11/97 -0400, TimC27@aol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 97-06-10 23:59:28 EDT, you write:
>
>> Simulating this via hit points is sheer madness and is a consequence
>>  of the D&D's uninspired treatment of armor which makes the target
>>  harder to hit instead of simply absorbing damage.
>
>Not madness... just a way of trying to make it make sense.  But to say D&D is
>'uninspired' is ludicrous on its face.  It is the progenitor for ALL other
>role-playing games.  It may stretch credibilty, lack flexibility, or fail to
>be realistic, but its very existence is the definition of 'inspired'.
>
>It still works for a lot of people, and is a very playable, simple approach.
> For those of us who want to have RPG's describe reality a bit better, it
>needs some refinements.  You can devise a complex system or simply say,
>'damn, another hit grazed you', but they amount to the same thing.
>
>Tim
>
Tim,

Sounds like we were on the same wavelength.  (See my message on this topic,
sent before I received this one.)

In defense of James, though, he only said that D&D's treatment of armor is
uninspired, not the game itself.  I think I would have just left out the
adjective and said "D&D's treatment of armor," myself.  As we all know,
though, it sure feels good when you're on a roll and the hyperbole starts
flying.  ;-)

John H.

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

   Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 22:08:08 +0100
   From: James <James@jpb-s.demon.co.uk>
Subject: [gworld] GW History

Hello folks,

If written this article on Gamma Worlds evolution over time for my web
site.
Thanks to all who contributed without which it could not have been written
( and I mean it, I having only played the 4th ed, I'm not exactly the right
person
to do the job). If I've got the facts wrong, or you simply wish to add to
it,
drop me a line. Hopefully it'll be up on my website before long, together
with
a few other updates.

Regards,

--- James ---


********************************************************
Gamma World Through the Ages

Gamma World has existed under numerous incarnations. It all started in 1976
with Metamorphosis Alpha. The setting was the starship Warden. The Warden
was a huge colony ship (some 30 miles long with multiple levels - the
perfect  dungeon in space). A radiation storm causes mutations to occur to
its occupants creating the altered humans and new animals which were to
form the basic genotypes of Gamma World. The game also established the
special relationship between  PSH and robots. 

Says Reggie:
"Metamorphosis Alpha had a gritty feel that definitely reflected the
dog-eat-dog world... There was definitely a feel of "it doesn't matter what
the PC's do in the long run" by one comment of "The vessel traveled on past
its assigned planet with its safety systems preventing the ship's
destruction by crashing into a planet or burning up in the sun.  It is only
a matter of time until even 
those almost perfect systems fail and the starship dies."  Also, and this I

found the most interesting, was the sample role playing session in the 
book.  (Many of the first games from TSR had a sample like this.)  The 
sample shows the GM killing a PC pretty much with no way the PC could have
avoided it.  Very disturbing in my mind." 


MA became the basis for The first edition of Gamma World (1978)  both in
terms of  concepts and mechanics. Some things were lost while others some
made it in with minor changes (Wolfoids became Arks, etc). The first
edition also brought the Cryptic Alliances and featured "The Legion of
Gold", possibly the best loved GW module of all times.

Says Craig:
"First Edition had a gritty feel that I liked, the black and white look
with the hex grid for a back cover, basic typewritten layout: that's the
feel I've always tried to bring to the campaign.

and Tim:
"Never forget James M. Ward, who authored the game and who, with
Metamorphosis Alpha, invented Sci Fi/Sci Fantasy RPG's.  His first edition
of Gamma World was genius.   Nothing will ever beat that image of Hoops
yukking it up, or the cover of that game with the explorers finding the
lost city.  As for his rules... they are, in many ways, the cleanest and
best expression.  The only real addition has been the introduction of
skills, but the game was still perfectly serviceable without them."

In 1983 TSR issued the second edition of Gamma World. It contained mostly
refinements on the previous edition.

Craig again explains:
"Second Edition went a long ways towards making the game actually
playable_.  The mechanics were better defined and presented, and the  game
had a gleaming sci-fi feel: which has since been done to death in
cyber-punk.  A glaring omission in my opinion, given the "cyber-chrome"
tactic, were the lack of rules for cybernetic enhancements.  If GW had went
that direction in 1983, where would TSR be today? "

The third edition of Gamma World (1986) revolutionized the games mechanics.
It used a series of colour coded tables (like Marvel Super Heroes).  It
also contained an extensive skill system and rules for sentient plant
player characters.  For many people the third edition remains the most
playable.  To others it is needlessly complicated.

Says Craig:
"Third Edition was the most frustrating for me.  More rules for mutated
animal genotypes, ratings for mutation potency: _by mutation_ , effects
of various types of damage, optional skills and talents, even some
rudimentary cybernetics guidelines in GW10-Epsilon Cyborgs... and the
color bar system from Marvel Superheroes. Ouch.  The game had the
superheroic feel, too: great art, glitzy layout, less concern for
scientific validity.  Much of what I had always wanted to see: all mixed
up, nearly inextricably, with the color bars.  Oh well."

And from Sarah:
"I personally rely almost entirely on the 3rd edition rules - they just
feel so much more complete."

With the fourth edition of 1992, Gamma World returned to the its more
traditional style of mechanics. It added a lot of detail to the animal
stocks. It also introduced a half-backed class system. The background feels
a little more settled then previous editions. Civilisation is on its way
back with Bonaparr building a railway. Battles are fought with flintlocks
and swords rather than scavenged lasers pistols and golf clubs.

Says Craig:
"Fourth Edition made the transition from super-science back to
weird-science: of all the logos, I liked this one best (with the
entwined eyeball plant: they should have kept the metallic letters,
though.)  Somewhat grittier feel to the art and layout, which I also
liked.  Great detail for mutated animal and plant genotypes, and the
return to more traditional task resolution mechanics was nice.  However,
a change I personally liked less was the introduction of D&D's
class/level system."

While for Dan:
"I think the 4th edition is possibly the best role playing game
(mechanically & playing) that has ever been introduced."


The final incarnation of Gamma World, Metamorphosis Alpha to Omega (1994),
returns fittingly  to the starship Warden. Originally planned as a fourth
edition Gamma World module, it was converted into a world book for the
short lived Amazing Engine system.  Indeed much of the internal artwork is
the same as in the Gamma World rule book. 

Says Reggie:
"The rules aside, the flavour of this game is almost identical 
to 4th edition GW, except that the premise is different.  MAtoO has the 
same premise that Metamorphosis Alpha had, in that the players are on a 
ship.  About the only interesting thing that was different from either GW 
or MA was the fact that they suggested letting the PC's discover they are 
on a ship instead of knowing it from the start.  Very intriguing...I almost

wish I could have played a game without that knowledge."

As a foot note, a couple of Endless Quest books were released in the mid
90's with the Gamma World logo. These very silly books filled with vampire
dentists and biker librarians have little to do with Gamma World ( I can't
comment on the 1980's Endless
Quest books)
********************************************************

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

   Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 21:32:50 +0100
   From: James <James@jpb-s.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [gworld] 4th Edition General questions

> All I was saying is that these standard weapons are not
> fit for their purpose. And it's not because there isn't the
> know-how to build more deadly low tech weapons ( a buffalo
> gun is not substantially more complex than a .38 carbine),
> it's just sheer sloppiness by the game designer.
>
> -- And good point.  You're right.  They should all be carrying around the

> equivalent of "cannons" which WERE available in "Tech III" society.  Very

> early on, if I remember correctly.  So, what's the damage for an old
style 
> (Tech III) cannon?

Well cannons might be a bit awkward, but I see no reason why
the standard Bonparr issue rifle might not be the equivalent of an
elephant gun. After all some of them *are* elephants. In CoC
elephant guns do roughly the same damage as shotguns
which in GW terms is a respectable 4d6.  The real problem
are melee weapons. I can imagine a glorious Bonparr charge,
sabers flashing and at, but sadly due to the mechanics , without
my regular folk rule or some other fudge, might as well be brandishing
pillows
> 
> -- By the way, while we're on this point, it seems to me that there
should 
> be some better examples as to where things fall in the Tech categories. 
>  I'm thinking seriously of getting an encyclopedia and determining where 
> all the interesting things fall (i.e. is Dynamite Tech III or Tech IV)

What I try to do is draw inspiration for the setting from a specific
period, usually as represented by a film or book. Most of my GW 
campaign is based on ante-bellum America, a bit like the
Hawkeye series without the British. So even without knowing much about the
period, I can still visualize long muzzled hunting rifles and perhaps a
spinet in the more
well to do houses.It doesn't rule out prototypes of dynamite sticks or
gattling guns
or a custom made repeating rifle, but it gives me a instinctive feel
for what is appropriate and what is out of place.

Regards,

--- James ---

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

   Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 20:49:21 +0100
   From: James <James@jpb-s.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [gworld] hit point thing.

> I've got a question about the hit points debate:  Why?

Well, I while I think the subject might be getting a little
stale, I thought there was a valid point to be made
and a lot of ideas were thrown about. I think I've exhausted
ways to express how for me tech III weapons and the given level
of hit points are mismatched. For some this mismatch is irrelevant because
the real fights involve warbots and blasters. Others have tweaking with
the rules somehow.

The broader issue of hit points in general is academic unless one wants
to convert to a different system. I agree with your general point that
games which are too deadly are no fun and really don't allow for much
roleplaying and I too dislike like complex systems. But you can get
simple, fast and fun damage systems which at the same time do
not have the limitations of hit points. Take a look at Fudge (you
can get it from my Mutant Bikers site). But, as I said in the context
of GW this is academic because hit points is what what we have.

As for healing I fully agree GW doesn't cater for it very well. What I do
is after each fight, I give the party half of the lost hit points back
(technically
on the grounds that its "stun" though its really just to keep things
going).
More details on my healing rule are up on my site.

And finally, yes, I don't think anyone who runs GW will be too hung up
on realism.

Regards,

--- James ---

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

   Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 14:36:37 -0500
   From: GameMaster <dmovrich@execpc.com>
Subject: Re: [gworld] Request: Looking for a copy of GW 4th edition

Reginald Blue wrote:
>
> James,
>
>         I think that you can still get them...have you tried some of the various...oh wait...England.
>
>         Still, give it a try, I'm certain you can still track down a copy.  I did, just recently.  And so did someone else on the list.
>
>         I got it at a discount off the cover price too!
>
> Reggie
>
> ----------
> From:   James[SMTP:James@jpb-s.demon.co.uk]
> Sent:   Sunday, June 08, 1997 2:15 PM
> To:     gworld
> Subject:        Re: [gworld] Request: Looking for a copy of GW 4th edition
>
> I still kick myself for not having picked up MAO when I
> had a chance.


	Reggie,
   You need a copy of Metamorphasis Alpha? My local store had 2 of them
last week. Give a hollar if you'd like me to get you one
							GameMaster

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

   Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 20:06:47 +0100
   From: James <James@jpb-s.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [gworld] hit point thing.

Sorry, this wasn't meant to sound like the usual D&D bashing.
I am actually kind of fond of the original D&D.
But even the fans generally admit that the concept of
AC making the target harder to hit is poor.  You can
get a more intuitive system without adding complexity
in the same way that GW THAC is greatly improves on
the D&D THAC0 as it removes all that subtracting mess.
I think many of us consider D&D simple because
we are so used to it. But it really isn't.

Regards,

--- James ---

>
> > Simulating this via hit points is sheer madness and is a consequence
> >  of the D&D's uninspired treatment of armor which makes the target
> >  harder to hit instead of simply absorbing damage.
>
> Not madness... just a way of trying to make it make sense.  But to say
D&D is
> 'uninspired' is ludicrous on its face.  It is the progenitor for ALL
other
> role-playing games.  It may stretch credibilty, lack flexibility, or fail
to
> be realistic, but its very existence is the definition of 'inspired'.
>
> It still works for a lot of people, and is a very playable, simple
approach.
>  For those of us who want to have RPG's describe reality a bit better, it
> needs some refinements.  You can devise a complex system or simply say,
> 'damn, another hit grazed you', but they amount to the same thing.
>
> Tim

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

   Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 19:53:38 +0100
   From: James <James@jpb-s.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [gworld] losing my religion


> Check out GW9 City of Dollar for more on some realistic, and some very
> bizzarre religions. I use most of them still.  But this brings to mind a
point
> that I've been wanting to bring up to the group. Has anyone thought out
the
> implications and connections between religion, politics and cryptic
alliances.
> Some cryptics are one or the other or both and some are neither, then you
have
> standalone religions and governments. what a mess when you stop to think
about
> it.   Wolfy

Hey Wolfy,

Would you mind posting some of those religions. Getting hold of old GW
mod isn't that easy.

As for your other point, you are quite right. But that's what makes the
Cryptic
Alliances so interesting. Still at the end of the day, things usually get
simplified
in games. So in all but the most important of cities, there will usually be
one
power block in charge, a bit like you get one culture, one climate planets
in Star Wars.

Regards,

--- James ---

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

   Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 11:16:15 -0700 (PDT)
   From: Donovan Colbert <dcolbert@campus.mci.net>
Subject: Re: [gworld] losing my religion

 I'm working on a concept. Imagine what the sentient beasts would make of
the Christian bible in a cruel post-apocolyptic world that was *caused* by
the Pure Strains. "Man shall have dominion over the beasts", "The Meek Shall
Inheiret the World", and of course, "The Beast is the servant of the Devil,
the opposer of all things good." So some earlier sentient animal does some
research on the bible and maybe finds some historical footage of how our
civillization treats animals, something preferably real biased and one
sided, like a P.E.T.A. expose on animal testing... Imagine where a sentient
animal could run with that combonation.

 "A 7 foot tall mutated Bipedal goat stands at a makeshift woden pulpit,
orating to a crowd of gathered sentient beasts. Behind him is an ancient
artifact that projects moving images onto the sandwashed wall behind him.
"This is what the ancients did to us, at the bequest of their god, my
brothers, look upon this, and tell me, who was the great deceiver, their
Jehova or OUR Beast," asks the Goatman, his robes waving as he gestures
emphatically. Images of animals penned and restrained, their skin peeled
back, their internal organs exposed, probes and tubes inserted into their
bodies flash on the screen. A Hoop begins to wretch as an image of a rabbit
is displayed, the animal's ears stiched down to its body and its eyes a
moltent mass of pink fleshy liquid running from its eyesockets."
 
 "Their God told them that the meek would inherient the earth after
armmegeddeon. We know now that He lied, he deceived the ancients. The Strong
rule Gamma Terra, and the beasts are strong!"

 I love it, I can't wait to do a sub-campaign based around these guys *and*
the Knights of Genetic Purity. Maybe throw in some of the Ranks of the Fit,
too... But, instead of being "Racially" or "Militant" oriented, the idea of
a bunch of religious zealout mutated animals with a warped view on Christian
theology sounds like a blast to play.

At 01:00 AM 6/11/97 +0100, you wrote:
>> 
>> Another interesting issue came up last game we had.  Where have all the 
>> religions gone?  The only ones left are the ones that worship the 
>> technology of the ancients. This doesn't seem quite right to me. 
>[snip]
>
>I agree it is a strange omission. In my campaign while religion does not
>play any
>big role but the typical small town will have its church or temple.  I
>imagine
>these towns very much like those in Western movies. As such it seems
>fitting
>to me that the hard working farmers should once a week don their best
>clothes 
>and go to church. But I haven't developed the religion itself beyond the
>usual generic
>Christianish derivative.  The closest I ever came to having religion taking
>a major
>role in the plot was via a traveling preacher/con man npc vaguely modeled
>on Steve Martin in "Leap of Faith".
>
>Still I'd be interested to read if anyone has developed some odd cults of
>off-beat
>religions.
>
>Regards,
>
>--- James ---

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

   Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 11:01:31 -0700 (PDT)
   From: Donovan Colbert <dcolbert@campus.mci.net>
Subject: Re: [gworld] losing my religion

 While it may not be an appropriate topic for the campaign of 12-16 year
olds, I think that adult players shouldn't have any problem with religion,
and it would certain add a degree of reality to the game. There is no way
that in a post apocolyptic world living on a primitive level that religious
sects would not pop up all over the place. Imagine the field day the radical
fundementalist survivalists would have if they found that they were the best
equipped post-holocaust group of individuals? You've got a making for a
campaign right there. 
 
 And the *real* fundementalist fanatics are going to find something wrong
with this type of escapisim regardless of how far it distances itself from
their theology. The idea of sentient animals that are equal to humans can be
enough to set off their hair-triggers. The idea of creatures *evolving* into
higher life forms plays against their theology. What are you gonna do? My
personal philosophy has always been if you can't avoid pissing someone off a
little bit, you might as well go ahead and piss them off a *whole lot* and
get it over with.

:)
 
>My personal experience is that religion breeds fanaticism,
>intolerance and worried parents. There's a reason PC's can't
>join the KGP and Iron Society right?
>
>When playing D&D a couple of guys tried to introduce Jesus
>Christ as a deity. Great, what happens he doesn't answer
>your prayer for help or he gets his butt kicked by Loki?
>No thanks. If you kept the religion to imaginary maybe,
>but I'm uncomfortable with it. I use the alliances to fill
>the void. Just my opinion....
>
>tpr

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

   Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 11:59:52 -0500
   From: Craig Huber <cshuber@primenet.com>
Subject: Re: [gworld] hit point thing.

Reginald Blue wrote:
>
> I've got a question about the hit points debate:  Why?
> 
Because it's an abstraction which works for some people, and not for
others.  Like any rules system or other simulation, there are people who
can identify with the basis of the sim, and those who can't.

The discussion regarding the ineffectiveness of the dagger given the
higher hit point totals of GW is just a case in point.  Some people
don't like classes because they are too limiting, some people don't like
levels because they're too "unrealistic", some people don't like skills
because they're too "complex", etc.

It boils down to every campaign finding it's own happy medium, and
running with it.  That's why I'm finding I love this e-mail list more
than any other I've ever been involved with.  People seem to be very
active, and willing to discuss optional ways of doing things without
needing to feel that "their" way is the "only" way.

I can see where you're coming from: and I agree with most of your
points.  I prefer a more detailed style of play, that's all: and I tried
to aim my input at those who fall into that category.  If you're group
is happy with damage resolution as it is: more power to you.  It means
you can develop other portions of the game to a greater extent than
would otherwise be possible (like, Psionics, wink wink.)

The one point you raise that I have to disagree with is the "emphasizes
combat and de-emphasizes role playing".  Any system which makes combat
_deadly_ to undergo on a regular basis is going to have any vaguely
intelligent player looking for ways to _avoid_ combat: not rushing out
to get into every brawl that comes up because "I've got 75 hit points:
they'll never do enough to actually _kill_ me."

Also, to be honest, I don't think a system has to go into Arm Broken,
etc. to feel more "real".  It simply has to make it obvious that combat
is _dangerous_, and that you don't "stand and deliver" without being
ready to start the _final_ adventure.

Lunch break's over. Later!

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

   Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 10:01:50 -0400 (EDT)
   From: TimC27@aol.com
Subject: Re: [gworld] campaigns

In a message dated 97-06-11 14:24:46 EDT, you write:

> Ok, I'm willing to show my ignorance.  I don't recognize that last one (or
>  am I just missing the joke?)  BTW I've found "Odyssey"-type adventures to
be
>  the best for D&D, but my GW stuff has tended to be more like the Labors of
>  Hercules (probably because GW characters tend to be more like Hercules,
both
>  in power and temperament.  Or maybe it's just the players... :-).
>  

Sorry, I was mixing my game systems.  Eleanor Moraes was my favorite module
from Star Frontiers... Not Gamma World.  My favorite GW is I believe
everyone's favorite, the Legion of Gold.  While thin on plot, my GM made it
into a complete world, full of political intrigues and heroic potential.

Tim

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

   Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 00:38:03 -0400 (EDT)
   From: Motatumbo@aol.com
Subject: Re: [gworld] thirtysomething

All bow to the TRUE "Ancients" of Gamma World
[though I'm close enough to be in the club, but still younger than you ;) ]

Matt

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

   Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 00:34:03 -0400 (EDT)
   From: Motatumbo@aol.com
Subject: Re: [gworld] losing my religion

In a message dated 97-06-10 17:25:45 EDT, you write:

>The only ones left are the ones that worship the 
>technology of the ancients.

Not necessarily, Tom, look at the Radioactivists, they worship something
invisible and intangable.  But, unlike most "religions", they actually get
results, for better or worse, from what they worship. How many religions can
say that?  
Also, there was a 3rd edition module, "Delta Fragment" (I believe - I'm sure
someone will correct me if I'm wrong) which is also a psuedo-supplement that
has a GW city. In it, there are several churches based on past religions as
well as the old Dieties and Demigods manual (as their actual "bible").
The reason, though, that TSR didnt incorporate religion is probably due to
the bad rep they were getting in the 70's and 80's thanks to AD&D and the,
um..........religiously overzealous (the nicest way I can put it). So, they
probably just left the whole religious thing out so they wouldn't get more
flack.
So, just make up your own evolution of current religions and make up your own
or rip off other systems.
And, though they may worship tangible items, The Followers of the Voice have
made some good adversaries for my PC's in the past. Especially when theirs a
malignant computer "god" controlling their actions and aiding its followers.
Matt
