   Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 21:25:28 -0700
   From: John Horton <jhorton@admsvcs.csun.edu>
Subject: Re: [gworld] hit point thing.

At 05:43 PM 6/15/97 -0400, TimC27@aol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 97-06-14 11:08:37 EDT, you write:
>
>> Well, I've gone on long enough.  When it comes right down to it, I'm happy
>>  with any system that works ok, as long as the company's good and the games
>>  are frequent.  Now if I can just convince my players to start a GW
>campaign..
>> .
>>  :-)
>
>I am not advocating any big changes in the play of game, but several of your
>points about the 'reliability' factor don't hold up when you consider the
>MANY ways in GW that are already instantly lethal (poison, radiation,
>artifacts, black rays, death field generation, etc.).  To say a snake bite
>can bring a character down but it would take 10-15 solid blows with a dagger
>won't, is not justifiable simply by saying its 'more playable'.  If so, then
>why not have poison just do damage.  Why not have black rays just do damage.
> Radiation.  Why have any special or unusual results whatsoever.  That would
>be playable, but utterly flavorless.
>
>Tim
>
Tim,

Well, there's no arguing about tastes.  To me, much of the flavor comes from
character development, so I am loath to kill off characters so easily.  I
don't use black rays, and although I do sometimes use lethal poison, mostly
I have it do damage (I figure, the dealier the poison, the more damage - you
can get killed that way, too).  Radiation I leave alone - there, I agree
that the flavor of the game would be changed.

A question for the group as a whole - have you ever had a PC die from trying
to figure out an artifact?  I don't recall an instance of that in the games
I've been involved with.  It might have some humor value, but it seems
awfully random and arbitrary.

John

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

   Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 20:32:16 -0700
   From: John Horton <jhorton@admsvcs.csun.edu>
Subject: Re: [gworld] finding my religion

At 10:27 PM 6/12/97 -0500, CdBd3rd wrote:
>
>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...]
>
Can I assume that those minor Deaths were not to be feared?

John H.

>      {who me?  Blue Oyster Cult?? Nope, never heard of 'um...}
>
>Later,  Gary
>--
>                ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
>		REVEL IN THE DIVINE RADIANT GLORY !!!
>		   [Gary] CdBd3rd@Worldnet.ATT.Net
>          -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -  -
>

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

   Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 21:38:33 -0400
   From: thorn@dreamfires.com
Subject: Re: [gworld] losing my religion

Geez, I'd love to run in that!!!! asnyone running  PBEM anytime soon?

Thorn

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: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 17:25:38 -0700 (PDT)
   From: Donovan Colbert <dcolbert@campus.mci.net>
Subject: RE: [gworld] Espers, a new concept, expansion

I really like this idea, and am already considering incorperating it in my
game. I like the idea of *only* PSHs having access to this skill. My logic
would be that the Ancients had done some genetic manipulation to try and to
tap into that unused 85% gray matter with some success, and that these
traits were passed on to offspring once tapped. Of course, you would need to
have a mentor (ala Firestarter, children setting fire to their cribs,
etc...) to show you how to harness these enormous powers and they wouldn't
be "freebie" powers in the sense that most mutations don't really extract a
toll for using them. Hmnnn, possibly PSIs should have to take hit point and
strenth modifiers to reflect their "weaker/sickly" nature?

I've been trying to figure a way to work in some "mysticisim" while avoiding
the whole "Wizard" feeling. I don't want this to turn into D&D.
At 01:15 PM 6/15/97 -0400, you wrote:

>Comments?  I have been working on a comprehensive write-up of all this
>in my free time (1.5 hours in the past week: oh, well)  Is anybody
>interested?  Ideas?
>
>-- Yep...keep 'em coming, and my ideas are above.
>
>Reggie
>
>

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

   Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 16:54:58 -0700 (PDT)
   From: Donovan Colbert <dcolbert@campus.mci.net>
Subject: Re: [gworld] hit point thing.

 Now, in real life, all the time you hear about some guy or gal that got
stabbed 45 times and lived. These are just "common" people. Now, granted,
typically this kind of abuse *kills*, often getting stabbed *once* kills a
common person. But there are exceptions. The heros that we play are
*supposed* to be exceptional in all matters, right? I think that is almost a
paraphrase of the explination given in the D&D basic rules. Stonger,
hardier, more skilled... People take bullets and live all the time,
especially when they are armored in some way (i.e., bulletproof vest or body
armor of some sort). The average person is capable of taking a tremendous
amount of damage and still living. But even in real life, the guy that got
stabbed 45 times and lived might walk away from it, only to get bit by a
snake and die while waiting for medical attention. So is it *really* that
much of a stretch to imagine the same sort of scenario in an FRP? Also,
remember, even though it may take several minutes in real life to resolve a
melee or ranged combat, typically in game time the battle lasts less than a
minute or so, heck, less than half a minute. So it seems like it has been a
long time for Player A to get shot each time by a round of automatic
gunfire, but the damage really indicates that the first shot was a grazing
wound, the second shot hurt but didn't hit any vital organs, and the third
shot maybe caught something a little less important than a lung or heart,
and that all of this happened within 6 seconds of eachother in *game* time.
That seems pretty realistic to me, when you look at it in perspective.
Especially for such a simple combat resolution method.


At 05:43 PM 6/15/97 -0400, you wrote:
>In a message dated 97-06-14 11:08:37 EDT, you write:
>
>> Well, I've gone on long enough.  When it comes right down to it, I'm happy
>>  with any system that works ok, as long as the company's good and the games
>>  are frequent.  Now if I can just convince my players to start a GW
>campaign..
>> .
>>  :-)
>
>I am not advocating any big changes in the play of game, but several of your
>points about the 'reliability' factor don't hold up when you consider the
>MANY ways in GW that are already instantly lethal (poison, radiation,
>artifacts, black rays, death field generation, etc.).  To say a snake bite
>can bring a character down but it would take 10-15 solid blows with a dagger
>won't, is not justifiable simply by saying its 'more playable'.  If so, then
>why not have poison just do damage.  Why not have black rays just do damage.
> Radiation.  Why have any special or unusual results whatsoever.  That would
>be playable, but utterly flavorless.
>
>Tim
>
>

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

   Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 16:32:43 -0700 (PDT)
   From: Donovan Colbert <dcolbert@campus.mci.net>
Subject: Re: [gworld] greenfolk

The Bark and Thorns Guild...
The Faternal Organization of Fungi
The Podspawn Vines

:)

At 01:49 PM 6/14/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Tom Foster wrote:
>>
>> Hey now,
>
>	<snip>
>>
>> * Every other race, including NPC races like the Created (but they don't
>> exist...), (sorry, campaign-joke), have their own Cryptic Alliance.
>> Except the plants. You'd figure that someone would have thought, 'hey,
>> it was those _mammals_ who messed the world up, Gamma Terra should
>> belong to -us-!!' or something.
>>
>	<snip>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Tom F.
>>
>	Tom,
>   Well are you creativly impaired? Put together an Alliance for plants
>yourself. If you accept my challenge, I'll post it to my page.
>						GameMaster
>
>

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

   Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 22:36:43 +0100
   From: James <James@jpb-s.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [gworld] hit point thing.

----------
> From: James <James@jpb-s.demon.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: [gworld] hit point thing.
> Date: 14 June 1997 10:26
>
>
>
>
> Hi John,
>
> I thought that was a well argued post. I'd just like to point out that
> games with active defenses (Fudge, Pendragon, Star Wars) do
> need to be complex. However, I agree putting that into GW would
> be beyond the realms of house rules and well into redesign.
>


Doh! I did it again. I meant to say

" games with active defenses (Fudge, Pendragon, Star Wars) do NOT
 need to be complex. "

When will they invent a spell checker that knows what I mean?

Regards,

 --- James ---

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

   Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 10:45:21 -0400 (EDT)
   From: RCrichton@aol.com
Subject: Re: [gworld] finding my religion

In a message dated 97-06-17 02:55:44 EDT, you write:

>   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.
GW4- The Mind Masters. The ONLY one I don't own.....
-Bob

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

   Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 09:18:45 -0400 (EDT)
   From: TimC27@aol.com
Subject: Re: [gworld] hit point thing.

In a message dated 97-06-17 02:27:38 EDT, you write:

> 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.  ;-)

I am as subject to "hyper-ball" as the next mutant.

Tim    &)

BTW, figured "&)" would be a mutant's wink.


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

   Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 09:18:35 -0400 (EDT)
   From: TimC27@aol.com
Subject: Re: [gworld] hit point thing.

In a message dated 97-06-16 21:33:45 EDT, you write:

> 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."

Amen.

Tim

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

   Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 11:36:20 +0100
   From: James <James@jpb-s.demon.co.uk>
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.

The sentient animal perspective on religion can be powerful indeed. For
inspiration
(not that you seem to need any) The Planet of the Apes films might help.
The way it
was done was quite clever. Clearly humans were singled out as the enemy for
historic reason and because how they had treated the apes. However for the
common ape full explanation had be lost in time and simply
passed down as a cultural/religious taboos.  I do recall in one of the
films
that the command "No!" had all sort of taboos associated with (it was an
old
control word - like  'Sit!' might be to an Ark), and the sense of horror,
blasphemy
and shock when its a human that uses it. Powerful stuff indeed.

But you can't make a direct comparison between GW and Planet of the Apes.
The way I understand while in Planet of the Apes, I don't believe there
were
normal, dumb apes anymore. In GW I believe the existence of New Animals
does not preclude the existence of normal animals. So while there are Hoops
there are also rabbits; there are Arks as well as ordinary dogs. And I
don't think
a Hoop will look at a rabbit as anything more than a dumb animal. In fact I
wouldn't
be surprised if they ate rabbits.  So I doubt they'd be shocked by images
of how humans
treated animals in the past.

H G Well's "Island of Dr Moreua" (sp?) also has some powerful ideas
regarding
sentient animals. In that case the rituals were in place to try to fight
back the
more bestial instincts ("Are we not men?"). The New Animals in GW are
already
past that stage, but there is nothing to say the party might not encounter
a few
"missing links" creatures which are caught in-between the dumb and New
Animal
state of evolution.

Regards,

--- James ---

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

   Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 10:42:32 +0100
   From: James <James@jpb-s.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [gworld] hit point thing.


> 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.
>

Absolutely. Couldn't agree more.

Regards,

--- James ---
