   Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 17:06:52 -0600
   From: Moses Wildermuth <wolf1@ecity.net>
Subject: Re: [gworld] Terminology

On 26-May-97, Tom wrote:
>There once was a Dragon article (I think it was in Dragon) that had a small
>dictionary of Gamma World terms that the characters and populace use. Does
>anyone have this information, my Dragon magazines are 120 miles away and I
>wouldn't know where to look in them. My players could use the help in
>getting into the setting with a bit of symantics.


there is alisting like that in the beginning of 4th edition rule book, never
saw dragon article regarding this.  Wolfy.

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

   Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 22:59:31 +0100
   From: James <James@jpb-s.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [gworld] 4th Edition General questions

> >The fundamental paradox:
> >Fact: Weapons are designed be dangerous; to kill people even.
> >Fact: Tech III weapons are the standard  weapons in GW 4th.
> >Fact: Tech III weapons are not dangerous to to even the puniest 
> >        1st level non-character class npc.
> >
> >You can tinker with the number of hit points, modify
> >the damage rules with crits or make high tech weapons widely
> >available. But somehow, you have got to solve the paradox to
> >get a playable game.
> >
> 
> Hm. In terms of playability, though, there is a point against that. If
our 
> campaign was delayed by every wacko with a gun telling us to do silly
things or 
> he/she/it would kill us, we would never get out of our own hometown, let
alone 
> carry on a campaign. There has to be a balance between reality and
playability. 
> If that means that you have to use the idea of the 'Captain America
Serum', then 
> so be it. I want to run in a campaign with a -chance- of going somewhere
and 
> doing something, rather than the abovementioned scenario, or some crazy
guy with 
> an IR Laser sniping people from a tree, etc etc etc. Sure, if he does,
I'll take 
> the hit points damage. But roll up a new character every time something
like 
> that happens? I'd rather not spend the time. Unless I used the character 
> generator, but then so much for character development. I'd rather have a
fun 
> game than a realistic game any day.
> 

I agree 100% that playability must take precedence over realism. If combat
is too deadly, you either have to become very, very careful or you end up
going through characters like nobody's business. Both of these types of
games can be fun, but on balance I tend to prefer a more cinematic and 
fluid style of play.

However, what I was getting at was rather different. What I am was getting
at is how this extreme imbalance between the damage ordinary weapons do and
what people can take is counter intuitive, and has often resulted in
situations
where the story was going and where the mechanics led was totally
different. For example, in one game it happened that a crime boss wanted
to teach the party a lesson. He didn't want them dead, just shown them who
was who. Ideally I wanted a few thugs armed with clubs and chains to ambush
the party, bust them up a bit and leave. To simulate that in GW, I had to
use
shotguns, which of course gave the wrong message.

But going back to the original example, let's look at it from the other
angle.
The "Freeze" scenario limitation applies just as much to the party. 
I mean I can envisage all sorts of occasion when the 
party might want to creep behind somebody. Maybe the don't know for sure
if these are the bad guys or maybe they want information. As a GM you can 
fudge it, you can make the threatened npc's act afraid. But the real
problem
is for the players, who might want to take that course of action, but
are aware the mechanics can't handle it. You are still in the situation
whereby
what you want to express and what the rules allow are at odds. Which is why
I believe GW rules need some tinkering before they can be playable.

Compare it Star Wars. Star Wars is a game which lends itself to a cinematic
style
and in which characters don't die easily. But at the same time it hasn't
lost any expressive
power.

Regards,

--- James ---

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

   Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 09:50:47 -0400
   From: Rob Quinn <rquinn@sprint.net>
Subject: Re: [gworld] 4th Edition General questions

> For example, picture the scene in which Mr A surprises Mr B, points a
> gun to him and says "Freeze!". Mr B can just calmly walk away, a few
> bullets wounds aren't going to bother him. A game that cannot express such a
> basic scenario is flawed and one is left wondering if it was ever 
> play tested.
> The fundamental paradox: 
> Fact: Weapons are designed be dangerous; to kill people even.
> Fact: Tech III weapons are the standard  weapons in GW 4th.
> Fact: Tech III weapons are not dangerous to to even the puniest 
>         1st level non-character class npc.

 A friend of mine had an idea: The majority of weapons are anti-riot
oriented, designed and WIDELY distributed during the great civil unrest
that occured before the fall. They're made to screw people up, but not
kill them.
 You can also say people after the fall are nothing like those from before.
Who was more likely to survive? Joe Blow with the mutation ``NewEyes: change
your eye color instantly. Available at any Walmart'' or Sgt. Blow of the
North American Army with ``Regeneration, Total: x4542; available to Special
Forces only''.

 Or you can just say the weapons systems suck. I raised all of the damamges
massively. It helped.

--
| Opinions are _mine_, facts                                     Rob Quinn |
| are facts.                                                 (703)689-6582 |
|                                                        rquinn@sprint.net |
|                                                Sprint Corporate Security |

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

   Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 08:28:41 -0500
   From: Craig Huber <cshuber@primenet.com>
Subject: Re: [gworld] 4th Edition General questions

> Well, the point is you still had to do fix the game to cater for
> the hit points. I've got caught out by the excessive hit point system
> on a number of occasions.
>
> The fundamental paradox:
> Fact: Weapons are designed be dangerous; to kill people even.
> Fact: Tech III weapons are the standard  weapons in GW 4th.
> Fact: Tech III weapons are not dangerous to to even the puniest
>         1st level non-character class npc.
> 

You are quite right.  My only problem with your statement is that you
peg the "execssive hit point system" as the cause.  In my opinion, the
problem is the "insufficient weapon damage values", instead.  I believe
that is what our colleague was trying to point out.

The difference?  I'm not wandering around the Gamma World with a PC that
can be killed by a pair of rat bites.  If a normal human has 1-6 hit
points, how much does a bee sting do?  Nothing?  1 point?  1/10 of a 
point?

I don't find the hit points excessive: in fact, I would rather that
other games adopted the approach of using such a scheme.  Using such a
system allow small, basically non-lethal attacks to be defined
consistent with more normal attack ranges.  Just adjust weapon damage
ratings accordingly.

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

   Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 05:28:09 PDT
   From: "Tom Foster" <yoiko99@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gworld] 4th Edition General questions


>> > One of the most annoying concepts to the 4th edition is hit points in
>> > >general.
>>
>> The whole hit point system for GW doesnt really bother me. First, I use
>> criticals and fumbles in combat which can really shorten the lifespan of
>any
>> creature quickly.
>
>Well, the point is you still had to do fix the game to cater for
>the hit points. I've got caught out by the excessive hit point system
>on a number of occasions. The GM as a storyteller instinctively draws
>from classic scenes in movies or books. Gamma Wolrd as is cannot
>handle some of the basic of situations one routinely encouters in fiction.
>For example, picture the scene in which Mr A surprises Mr B, points a
>gun to him and says "Freeze!". Mr B can just calmly walk away, a few
>bullets
>wounds aren't going to bother him. A game that cannot express such a
>basic scenario is flawed and one is left wondering if it was ever
>play tested.
>
>The fundamental paradox:
>Fact: Weapons are designed be dangerous; to kill people even.
>Fact: Tech III weapons are the standard  weapons in GW 4th.
>Fact: Tech III weapons are not dangerous to to even the puniest
>        1st level non-character class npc.
>
>You can tinker with the number of hit points, modify
>the damage rules with crits or make high tech weapons widely
>available. But somehow, you have got to solve the paradox to
>get a playable game.
>
>Regards,
>
>--- James ---

Hm. In terms of playability, though, there is a point against that. If our
campaign was delayed by every wacko with a gun telling us to do silly things or
he/she/it would kill us, we would never get out of our own hometown, let alone
carry on a campaign. There has to be a balance between reality and playability.
If that means that you have to use the idea of the 'Captain America Serum', then
so be it. I want to run in a campaign with a -chance- of going somewhere and
doing something, rather than the abovementioned scenario, or some crazy guy with
an IR Laser sniping people from a tree, etc etc etc. Sure, if he does, I'll take
the hit points damage. But roll up a new character every time something like
that happens? I'd rather not spend the time. Unless I used the character
generator, but then so much for character development. I'd rather have a fun
game than a realistic game any day.

Tom

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

   Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 10:26:10 +0100
   From: James <James@jpb-s.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [gworld] Arranists

> Since Daniel asked the question, I will, too - anybody used my Red Death
> alliance?
>

Where does the Red Death come from? The first time I saw it was on Kerry's
page. But then, I noticed a cryptic reference (pun intended)  to the Red
Death
in Treasures of the Ancients (laser FIR pg 17).  So, what's the story
Kerry?

But back the questions. I haven't used either of the alliances yet.
The Red Death would not be appropriate for my campaign.
Elite assassins belong to sophisticated worlds filled with political
intrigue and subtle balances of power. It would fit well in something
like Dune or Warhammer FRP.  My GW is not a subtle place as it
is very much molded on the Western genre. As such I could imagine
perhaps one mysterious npc taking on the role of the Red Death, but there
isn't just the enough demand to sustain a whole alliance.

As for the Arranists, they would be right at home in my campaign.
Their neo-Luddite position would certainly bring them into conflict
with my Restorationist party. It's just a question of finding the
right moment.

Regards,

--- James ---

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

   Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 22:41:49 -0600 (MDT)
   From: Scott Kent <sfkent@frii.com>
Subject: Re: [gworld] New GW site

At 10:05 PM 5/24/97 +0100, James wrote:

>I've finally found the time to put up my Gamma World site.
>Its a fairly talky site, with articles based on a lot of the things we've
>discussed here.  The tilte, the Art of Gamma World Appreciation
>just about says it all. The URL is
>
>http://www.jpb-s.demon.co.uk/f_gw.htm
>
>Please let me know of any problems, typos or if you have any tips
>regarding Web design, but be gentle because I'm still
>new at the game (my other web site is very basic).
> I already know  with Netscape 1 the pictures
>come out funny. I'll see what I can do about it.

I just have to comment on your site.  The layout works quite well!
And thanks for not getting carried away with frames!  It's nice
to see someone use them without overusing them for once.  I haven't
read through all of the material on your site yet, but so far I've
found it to be very entertaining.

Also, thanks for the plug for my site.  :-)

I've added a link to your new page from mine, too, just in case there
are some GW fans who haven't yet subscribed to this list.

========================================================================
Scott Kent                   | Warning: Improper use of micro-missiles
sfkent@frii.com              |          can be hazardous to your health!
http://www.frii.com/~sfkent  |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
