Week Ending August 9, 1997
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 11:03:48 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 12:40 PM 7/31/97 -0400, you wrote:
>
> Aloha, WillGGeiger@juno.com
>
>On Thu, 31 Jul 1997 13:41:03 +1000 jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au transcribes,
>then writes:
>Yes, society has an impact on us, and we can impact society. Some
>children have been raised in a terrible environment and have become
>wonderful adults. Some children have been raised in wonderful
>environments and become terrible adults. Some criminals deserve to be
>killed, IMO, in part so they cannot murder again. Note that the words
>"kill" and "murder" do not always mean exactly the same thing.
>
>A local (Wayne County, Detroit) jail was named after Sgt. William
>Dickerson, slain by an inmate who was a convicted murderer. There is no
>death penalty in Michigan.
>
>A few years ago, Canada did not want to extradite U.S. felons sentenced
>to death. My reply to that was to suggest sending them all death row
>inmates in the U.S.
>
gee, my reply to that would be- get a life! those felons are a product of U.S.
society, don't expect other countries to sink to your level of punishment.
>It seems to me that most morals and taboos evolved to protect society.
>
this is the point i'm trying to make.
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 11:10:02 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: Moral Relativism (was: 4 color principles)
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 01:28 PM 7/31/97 -0400, you wrote:
>> >To say that people do not always agree on what exactly constitutes right
>> >and wrong, good and evil, is to state the obvious. To conclude from this
>> >that there is no good or evil, except in the subjective opinions of
>> >individuals, is not just foolish but potentially destructive. Please do
>> >not expect us to believe that whether the Holocaust was wrong is a matter
>> >of opinion.
>> >
>>
>> foolish to say, because people like you seem to think opinions are not valid,
>> despite it being the most important thing in the universe-
>>
>
>"people like you"?
>For someone who doesn't believe in absolutes, you sure are good at
>pigeonholing people. I never said that opinions are invalid or
>unimportant. I just think that there exists a world outside of our view
>of it, a world with truths that are not determined by our opinions.
>
"people like you" - ergo, people who suggest such a model.
My "pidgeonhole" is valid, moreso than your assumptions anyway-
i never said i don't believe in absolutes, ijust believe our own opinions are massivley more signifigant that what "God" or whoever thinks.
>> No, i'm simply suggesting that it wasn't wrong for a bunch of nazi psyco's-
>> when it comes down to it, all you have is numbers-
>
>No, I have the knowledge that shoving men, women, and children into ovens
>because they are Jewish is wrong. This is my opinion, but it is also a
>truth. I can't give you a modus ponens or contrapositive to prove this
>beyond doubt, but I don't need to. This is obvious to anyone with a moral
>compass, even you who dismisses this knowledge as an opinion.
>
I'M NOT DISMISING ANYTHING! If you'd pay attention, in stead of indulging
in this sort of thing, i already SAID that opinions are the MOST IMPORTANT
thing we have! doesn't sound like a dismissal to me. . . .
>> what i'm suggesting is
>> that
>> number count- some people in the medical industry believe in euthanasia,
>> if i consider it abhorent is it my opinion or the 'truth'? god and evil are
>> *fundamentally* subjective- they exist only in our mind, as do our other
>> opinions,
>> memories of those we cherish, books we never get down on paper. . . .
>> all the good stuff, actually.. . *G*
>>
>
>We are on opposite sides of the street, philosophically. I am consolled
>by the knowledge that very few people agree with your way of thinking (and
>thank God for that). I suggest we agree to disagree, lest this listserv
>turns into sci.philosophy.epistemology.
>
>-Eric
>
sorry, i'm not going to let this rest:-
"very few people-opposite sides, ect"
once again, your argument shows you have
paid very little attention to my own,
though i will endeavour to wrap this up today.
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 11:29:44 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 03:36 PM 7/31/97 +0000, you wrote:
>On 31 Jul 97 at 17:32, jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
>
>> At 11:14 PM 7/30/97 +0000, you wrote:
>> >On 31 Jul 97 at 13:41, jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
>> >
>> >> At 11:36 AM 7/29/97 +0000, you wrote:
>> >> >On 29 Jul 97 at 15:34, jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> really? what about homosexuality? or adultery? or use of drugs?
>> >> >
>> >> >All condemned by some societies, and accepted by others. Are you
>> >> >saying that whether or not they are good, bad, or morally neutral is
>> >> >_entirely_ cultural? That being homosexual is all right, if your
>> >> >culture says so, _and_ killing homosexuals is all right, if your
>> >> >culture says so?
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> how abour mass murderers? how about child molesters?
>> >
>> >How does that answer my question?
>> >
>> my point exactly! there IS no answer to such questions except in a
>> subjective sence!
>
>No, you dodged the question. You're still dodging the question.
>I asked the question, "Does X have quality Q only in circumstance Y."
>(X=killing homosexuals, Q = is wrong, Y= when society says so). Your
>answer did not apply.
>
my answer is :
"yes, dependant on the ultimately polymorphous and variable
situation which quality Q, dependant on circumstance Y."
><snip>
>> so you agree with me- it's a matter of opinion.
>
>You seem to be under the impression that all opinions are equal. That
>is ludicrous, and can easily be proven false.
>
i had this argument once in high school. the teacher and a few students couldn't understand that an opinion can't be wrong or right, it JUST IS.
In my opinion, and opinion is, by DEFFINITION what cannot be proven wrong.
>Besides, it is not strictly a matter of opinion. It is also a matter
>of definition. You do not seem to be able to tell the difference
>between "evil" and "what society says is bad". If that is your
>definition of "evil", then of course what society says is evil is
>evil, by definition.
>
exactly. it's just a matter of how honest we are.
>If you are claiming that the definition of "evil" is "what society
>says is bad", then please say so. Your definition seems to change as
>we talk. It is certainly unclear.
>
no, it doesn't, you misunderstanding comes from your need to rebut
my statement.
><snip>
>> no, actually, i think you'll find that was the point- hot an cold
>> are only measured on a relative scale,
>
>If that is your point, you made it badly. You certainly appeared to
>be saying that there is no good and evil, that all actions are
>equally good and evil. You stated outright that criminals are as
>innocent as their victims, and strongly implied that killing the SS
>during WWII was as bad as the SS killing the Jews. That isn't arguing
>for no absolutes (an opinion I generally think is correct), that is
>an argument for no set standards at all.
>
no, i did not suggest any of that. please pay attention, i'm sure you can find ways to disagree with me without taking me out of context. An absolute is by deffinition the only set standard, outside of society and opinion. I implied that, from a certain social POINT OF VIEW, those things are the same, and suggested that absolutes are non-valid.
>> even though concepts like
>> absolute zero sugest an absolute value- are you suggesting evil is
>> simply complete lack of good?
>
>Don't read too much into an analogy. If I argued that a
>Vice-President is like a spare tire, you wouldn't suggest that I
>believed he was toroidal and made of rubber.
>
oh, really? *g*
>> >> back in medievil times, all sorts of horrid stuff went on: are you
>> >> suggesting everyone alive back then is evil? no, they were what
>> >> society made them: i know you rambo types would rather pretend
>> >> criminals deserved to be killed,
>> >
>> >I never claimed that I thought that anyone deserved to be killed. In
>> >fact, no one in this thread said they would _ever_ kill, except you.
>> >
>>
>> i used it as an example of who is evil, who deserves what, and why
>> they deserve it. Frankly, this should have been blatantly obvious,
>> and i doubt it wasn't.
>
>No, it wasn't. You said we were "rambo types" who "pretend criminals
>deserve to be killed". It wasn't an obvious example of who is good or
>evil, it was attributing opinions to others that they had not
>expressed, in an insulting way.
>
*sigh* are you suggesting i was labeling the entire list a bunch of "rambo's"?
well, i wasn't. i apologise for the confusion.
><snip>
>>
>> you miss the point again- define "crimes"! in some areas men
>> are allowed to beat their wives once a month! isn't that criminal?
>
>"Criminal" is arbitrary and cultural. However, I have never claimed
>that "criminal" and "evil" are synonymous. Nor does any decent
>dictionary. Against the law and morally wrong are not synomymous.
>
and i would argue that "evil" is simply another subjective deffinition,
just like criminal.
><snip>
>> no, they aren't justifiable, just not fundamentally evil- they are
>> evil, because evil is only a matter of our opinion.
>
>Perhaps our problem is definition. You're definition of evil is not
>the same as mine, therefore your "evil" is strictly a matter of
>opinion. Please define "evil", so I know what you mean when you say
>"evil".
>
i am suggesting that *all* evil is fundamentally subjective-
the deffinition is exactly what we are arguing about!
><snip>
>> no justification, actually, not in my opinion, and that's what
>> counts, yes?
>
>By your reasoning, if my opinion is that killing you isn't evil, then
>it isn't. Do I understand you correctly?
>
yes! and you opinion is compared to that of the societies, who decides
if you are a criminal.
><snip>
>> >Yes. Motive is not, in itself, sufficient to make an evil act good.
>> >
>>
>> what is there but motive? are you suggesting somebody who kills in
>> self defence is as bad as a cold-blooded killer? what is really
>> diffirent, if not motive?
>
>How about, "The amount of harm done, and the necessity to do it to
>prevent greater harm"? There are many ways to decide what is good and
>what is evil. I still suggest that you tell me your definition, so I
>can discuss this with you.
>
i was comparing a static- one death to the other- and once again, what matters?
at some times in history, 'greater harm' meant 'getting in a samurai's way',
and extenuating circumstances meant 'he pissed me off, and i'm bigger than him'-
all completly subjective.
><snip>
>>
>> yes, *argued* but never, never *proven*- nothing is ever proven ,
>> only argued, from a metaphysical point of view.
>
>Who said "evil" had to be metaphysical? Please give me your
>definition of "evil".
>
argh! ok, from a philosophical point of view- i believe i've already defined evil?
><snip>
>> but they are immutable. . . . .they are relative:
>
>Do you mean, "but they are mutable"?
>
no, their status is immutable- the act it self remains identical , reguardless of
the social value given to it.
>> "evil is in the eye of the beholder" make lots more sence than the
>> original version.
>
>Definitely _not_. "Beauty" is a matter of taste. No person's taste is
>superior to another, no school of taste is superior to another.
>
doh. you're right- i just put my own opinion against my opinions about opinions- sorry.
>Opinion is another matter. Opinions, it can easily be proven, are not
>equal.
>
>Filksinger
>
prove it!
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 1997 18:34:15 -0700
From: "Robert A. West" <robtwest@erols.com>
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
>
> >
> >There are issues that are valid cultural choices, where a society must
> >make a choice to survive as a coherent whole. There are other issues
> >that are valid personal choices. There are still other issues where
> >the range of available options changes with technology. And some issues
> >are rock-bottom good/evil choices. Deliberately causing confusion among
> >these is a form of hypocrisy.
> >
>
> no, it's simply a recognition of the stupidity of such categorisations-
> they're all very pretty on paper, but only a sociologist would think they stand up
> to real life.
Actually, you have it bass-ackwards. You are propounding a
politically-correct redaction (almost to the point of parody) of various
academic ideas current in sociology, along with anthropology, ethnology
and literary criticism. I am countering with common sense arguments,
similar to David Hume's legendary refutation of Solipsism. (He invited
his opponent, who believed that all experience is subjective and there is
no external reality, to stub his toe on a rock.)
There are several academic threads from which your ideas ultimately come:
One thread parallels the anti-anthropomorphism movement championed by
Conrad Lorentz in the biological sciences. The idea is that, to
understand a culture, subculture or whatever, it is vital to put aside
your own cultural preconceptions and to try to understand the culture on
its own terms. This was a needed antidote to some very poor scholarship.
Another thread is Deconstructionism, which contends that, since no two
minds are exactly alike and since all people have been conditioned by
different life experiences, there is no way to understand what the intent
was of any author. Once the words are down on paper, their meaning is no
longer controlled by the author, but by the reader. Again, this was a
valuable counter to the tendency of some authors to preach before they
understood.
A third thread is the realization that good literature is not the
exclusive product of "dead white european males", and that our culture
would be well served by expanding the "canon" to include the major works
of other cultures as well, even if it means that some of the "canon" has
to be shoved aside to make room.
As Kipling said, "If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken,
twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools . . . " The problem comes
when these ideas hit the popular press and culture, and are adopted by
people who, all too frequently, are only interested in justifying their
own actions or laziness, or in furthering political agendas.
One perennial result is undergraduates who throw deconstructionist theory
in the face of their instructors in an attempt to get out of the effort
of studying the assigned works and actually (shudder) thinking!
Another result is the movement towards complete subjectivization of
grammar, spelling and usage. We have a culture that is increasingly
functionally illiterate, innumerate and scientifically ignorant, covered
over with the rhetoric of "post-literacy", "ethnomathematics" and "ethnic
science".
A third result is the complete repudiation of, not only the canons of
literature, but the very idea that there ought to be a canon. Thus, we
are forming a culture without common cultural values and experiences,
unless you count Nike and Reebok.
The fourth result is nonsense of the form, "there is no right and wrong,"
and "all ideas are equally valid."
In fact, all the above ideas are ultimately self-deconstructing. If all
ideas are equally valid, then you have no cause to criticize my idea that
there is such a thing as Good and Evil, and only succeed in giving the
impression that you believe my belief to be wrong in an absolute sense.
If all words are ultimately meaningless, then there is no way to convince
me using words.
IMHO, no one can live a life based on the core value that there are no
core values. I am certain that no society can long survive that way. I
have never seen anyone who has been mugged, cheated or raped say that it
is OK, because the person doing the mugging, cheating or rape might have
different cultural values. I *have* seen absolute pacifists who will not
cooperate with the police because the police carry weapons, but this is
based on a belief in Good and Evil, not the repudiation of the idea.
>
> >--
> ><------------------------------------------------------->
> >Robert A. West /// "Censorship is tyranny."
> >Phone W:(215)466-3628; H:(215)348-9113
> >http://www.erols.com/robtwest
> >
> >
--
<------------------------------------------------------->
Robert A. West /// "Censorship is tyranny."
Phone W:(215)466-3628; H:(215)348-9113
http://www.erols.com/robtwest
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 11:55:12 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
this will (hopefully) be my last post on this issue.
At 06:34 PM 8/2/97 -0700, you wrote:
>jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >There are issues that are valid cultural choices, where a society must
>> >make a choice to survive as a coherent whole. There are other issues
>> >that are valid personal choices. There are still other issues where
>> >the range of available options changes with technology. And some issues
>> >are rock-bottom good/evil choices. Deliberately causing confusion among
>> >these is a form of hypocrisy.
>> >
>>
>> no, it's simply a recognition of the stupidity of such categorisations-
>> they're all very pretty on paper, but only a sociologist would think they stand up
>> to real life.
>
>Actually, you have it bass-ackwards. You are propounding a
>politically-correct redaction (almost to the point of parody) of various
>academic ideas current in sociology, along with anthropology, ethnology
>and literary criticism. I am countering with common sense arguments,
>similar to David Hume's legendary refutation of Solipsism. (He invited
>his opponent, who believed that all experience is subjective and there is
>no external reality, to stub his toe on a rock.)
>
well, now this is just silly! pollitically correct? did you miss the whole ss/jew
thing? is thins just an all-purpose rebuttal you paste into an argument when you
have nothing to say?
and btw, most sociologists, ect are bass-ackwards by deffinition.
>There are several academic threads from which your ideas ultimately come:
>
>One thread parallels the anti-anthropomorphism movement championed by
>Conrad Lorentz in the biological sciences. The idea is that, to
>understand a culture, subculture or whatever, it is vital to put aside
>your own cultural preconceptions and to try to understand the culture on
>its own terms. This was a needed antidote to some very poor scholarship.
>
this concept has been shown to be false- we are never free of our bias,
the Phenomenological movement showed us that, if not much else. .
>Another thread is Deconstructionism, which contends that, since no two
>minds are exactly alike and since all people have been conditioned by
>different life experiences, there is no way to understand what the intent
>was of any author. Once the words are down on paper, their meaning is no
>longer controlled by the author, but by the reader. Again, this was a
>valuable counter to the tendency of some authors to preach before they
>understood.
>
you are suggesting this as an argument opposing theory? it works for literature, but
in actual science, you are making actual statements, like "what goes up, must come down", which have an obvious overt nmeaning, unless your arguing for subtle nuance in shience?
>A third thread is the realization that good literature is not the
>exclusive product of "dead white european males", and that our culture
>would be well served by expanding the "canon" to include the major works
>of other cultures as well, even if it means that some of the "canon" has
>to be shoved aside to make room.
>
abnd I'M PC? are you suggesting that as my failing? a canon itself is
a redundant concept- it entails the sort of absolutist thinking which i am arguing against.
>As Kipling said, "If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken,
>twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools . . . " The problem comes
>when these ideas hit the popular press and culture, and are adopted by
>people who, all too frequently, are only interested in justifying their
>own actions or laziness, or in furthering political agendas.
>
yes, or when they are constructed originally in a dishonest environment-
like the one many lobbyists and theorists dwell within-
it's always easier to blame the 'common' people for abusing it, tho isn't it?
I't call it elitists and deluded, but that's just my opinion. :->~
>One perennial result is undergraduates who throw deconstructionist theory
>in the face of their instructors in an attempt to get out of the effort
>of studying the assigned works and actually (shudder) thinking!
>
yes, how about instructors who bend whatever theory they have at hand to suit their
personal dislike of a particular student, or argument?
>Another result is the movement towards complete subjectivization of
>grammar, spelling and usage. We have a culture that is increasingly
>functionally illiterate, innumerate and scientifically ignorant, covered
>over with the rhetoric of "post-literacy", "ethnomathematics" and "ethnic
>science".
>
no, you can't blame this sort of thing for illiteracy- it has more to do with
public schools being bankrupt, and various people blaming various concepts rather than actually working against it- don't get me wrong, i live ina country where political correctness has probably proven the death of the indigenous population, tho some
bright sparks have found new and interesting ways to blame white people,
so it's ok *sarcasm*
>A third result is the complete repudiation of, not only the canons of
>literature, but the very idea that there ought to be a canon. Thus, we
>are forming a culture without common cultural values and experiences,
>unless you count Nike and Reebok.
>
i already mentioned this: my points would be
A) the cannon you suggest was not destroyed by these forces, quite the opposite, as people moved away from the "cannon concept", they found less need for such nonsence,
B) what makes dickens preferable to Nike? at least nikie keeps yer feet warm(sorts)!
>The fourth result is nonsense of the form, "there is no right and wrong,"
>and "all ideas are equally valid."
>
yeah! isn't it great? Glad to see some good came of all this! *g*
>In fact, all the above ideas are ultimately self-deconstructing. If all
>ideas are equally valid, then you have no cause to criticize my idea that
>there is such a thing as Good and Evil, and only succeed in giving the
>impression that you believe my belief to be wrong in an absolute sense.
>
no, you misunderstand- all ideas are equally valid in a CONSTRUCTIVIST SENCE!
that is, there is no "higher logic" - the logic is ours, and it's value is
our own- we can argue FACT, and choose our own reality, but all that i required is
that we respect OPINION as SEPERATE to FACT- ergo, opinion is what cannot be disproved.
>If all words are ultimately meaningless, then there is no way to convince
>me using words.
>
no, words matter- "god" doesn't! saying "this is true because it just is" is no longer valid- you my supply real proof, as proof is defined by the culture in question.
>IMHO, no one can live a life based on the core value that there are no
>core values.
stop misquoting me. core values exist, but they exist as OUR OPINIONS!
not god's not 'just what is right' but ours, and ours to cherish and promote.
>I am certain that no society can long survive that way. I
>have never seen anyone who has been mugged, cheated or raped say that it
>is OK, because the person doing the mugging, cheating or rape might have
>different cultural values.
this goes beyone misquotation- once again, and listen this time, i'm not suggesting this
those things are wrong, because we say they are, and we have every right to.
>I *have* seen absolute pacifists who will not
>cooperate with the police because the police carry weapons, but this is
>based on a belief in Good and Evil, not the repudiation of the idea.
>
yes, *BELIEF!* not reality or certainty, but what you believe- that's what's important!
>>
>
>> >--
>> ><------------------------------------------------------->
>> >Robert A. West /// "Censorship is tyranny."
>> >Phone W:(215)466-3628; H:(215)348-9113
>> >http://www.erols.com/robtwest
>> >
>> >
>
>--
><------------------------------------------------------->
>Robert A. West /// "Censorship is tyranny."
>Phone W:(215)466-3628; H:(215)348-9113
>http://www.erols.com/robtwest
>
>
>
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 11:56:54 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: Delivery Notification: Delivery has failed
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
>At 12:40 PM 7/31/97 -0400, you wrote:
>>
>> Aloha, WillGGeiger@juno.com
>>
>>On Thu, 31 Jul 1997 13:41:03 +1000 jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au transcribes,
>>then writes:
>> Are you actually saying that
>>>>kiddie-porn is fine, so long as you are in Japan, and wrong, so long
>>>>as you are in the US?
>>>
>>>no, i'm saying that it's neither totally wrong or totally right- back
>>>in medievil times,
>>>all sorts of horrid stuff went on: are you suggesting everyone alive
>>>back then is evil?
>>>no, they were what society made them: i know you rambo types would
>>>rather pretend
>>>criminals deserved to be killed, but as it turns out they're just as
>>>"""innocent"""
>>>as anyone else. . .
>>
>>Yes, society has an impact on us, and we can impact society. Some
>>children have been raised in a terrible environment and have become
>>wonderful adults. Some children have been raised in wonderful
>>environments and become terrible adults. Some criminals deserve to be
>>killed, IMO, in part so they cannot murder again. Note that the words
>>"kill" and "murder" do not always mean exactly the same thing.
>>
>
>once again, that's a matter of opinion- which is my point.
>
>
>>A local (Wayne County, Detroit) jail was named after Sgt. William
>>Dickerson, slain by an inmate who was a convicted murderer. There is no
>>death penalty in Michigan.
>>
>>A few years ago, Canada did not want to extradite U.S. felons sentenced
>>to death. My reply to that was to suggest sending them all death row
>>inmates in the U.S.
>>
>>It seems to me that most morals and taboos evolved to protect society.
>>
>>Later, you discussed the question of motive. You've heard the road to
>>hell is paved with good intentions. Circumstance can be important too,
>>not just motive. Remember the story a few years ago about the Louisianna
>>woman who screamed in fear as a (asian) stranger approached her door, and
>>her husband shot the young man? The victim was trying to find a
>>Halloween party. This was a crime on the resident's part, though he was
>>found not guilty. I found this whole affair thoroughly repulsive.
>>
>
>you misunderstand- circumstances are motive- this example is one where the man's motive was valid-
>BUT, his perception was flawed, and hence his motive was not valid, geddit?
>it's still a matter of motive
>
>
>
>>Granted, some things are immoral, not crimes, depending on where the act
>>is commited, since crime is breaking the (local) law, whereas certain
>>immoral behavior is not illegal.
>>
>>
>
>once again , this is my point.
>
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Date: Sat, 02 Aug 1997 19:05:36 -0700
From: "Robert A. West" <robtwest@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Instant Change as a Weapon
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Filksinger wrote:
>
> On 31 Jul 97 at 13:36, Anthony Jackson wrote:
>
> > Incidentally, instant change cannot be used to change into a focus
> > either (i.e. iron man cannot use instant change to put on his
> > armor). Only in hero ID armor _could_ be put on in this way.
>
> No where in the BBB or elsewhere does it ever state that Foci take
> time to don or remove _for the character who bought them_. Consider a
> magic ring. It should take time for me to take it off of someone
> else's finger, but why should it take time to take it off my own?
If the focus cannot be worn under street clothes, it clearly *must*
require time to don and doff, otherwise the power Instant Change would be
almost useless. This clearly falls under special effect, IMHO.
>
> If the Inaccessible part of the Focus limitation worked this way,
> then it wouldn't be a smaller limitation than Accessible.
??? I don't follow this as all. An inaccessible focus is much harder to
take away from someone. Whether it takes time to put on or off is
special effect and/or Extra Time Limitation, and if the thing was hard to
put on, it might take more than a turn to take off.
>
> BTW, while Only in hero ID is specifically described as being used
> for armor, etc., that isn't a focus, there is no reason why a
> character can't have a OIF _and_ a Only in hero ID.
p. 110: "Only in Hero ID cannot usually be bought in addition to a Focus
Limitation."
Seems a pretty good reason to me!
>
> Consider a character similar to Thor in the comics. He has two forms,
> Mr. Wimpy and Mr. He-Man. Mr. He-Man has a weapon that always returns
> to his hand when he throws it, but which he cannot summon. It only
> returns when he _throws_ it.
>
> Now, the hammer only works for Mr. He-Man. Mr. Wimpy cannot use it.
> This would be a OIF _and_ a Only in Hero ID.
Not so far as I can see. A personal and a universal focus are the same
number of points, so compromises between them are also usually zero-point
choices.
Option 1: Wimpy and He-man are multiforms: the points for the focus are
part of He-man, so it cannot function when Wimpy is the operational form,
even without the limitation. Even if the physical hammer does not
disappear, it is a prop, not a focus, unless Wimpy pays points for it, or
unless it is taken with the Independent Limitation (verrry dangerous!)
Option 2: He-man is the special effect of Instant Change and a batch of
Only in Hero ID powers. Wimpy changes by striking the hammer on the
ground three times, and can use the hammer as a plain 4D6HA, just as
anyone can. The hammer is the focus of multiple powers, some universal,
some personal to He-man, some personal to Wimpy. No point saving.
Option 3: Wimpy is the only person in the world who cannot use the
hammer. Now you have a limitation!
>
> Filksinger
> "Keeping in mind that the notes we sing are never, ever, wrong!"
--
<------------------------------------------------------->
Robert A. West /// "Censorship is tyranny."
Phone W:(215)466-3628; H:(215)348-9113
http://www.erols.com/robtwest
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 12:28:18 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
i already did- but i would point out that this sort of moral ambiguity is VERY
prevelant in modern comics.
At 09:22 PM 8/2/97 -0600, you wrote:
>Please take this to private e-mail....It has NOTHING to do with Champions
>anymore.
>
>Thank You
>
>
>David W Toomey
>dwtoomey@juno.com
>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <filkhero@pop.netaddress.com>
From: "Filksinger" <filkhero@usa.net>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 03:43:16 +0000
Subject: Re: Thunderbolts (was Re: Starship Troopers)
Reply-to: filkhero@usa.net
Priority: normal
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
On 2 Aug 97 at 13:57, Richard D. Bergstresser Jr. wrote:
> From: "Filksinger" <filkhero@usa.net>
> > Plan Nine from Outer Space. Winner of the Golden Turkey Award for All
> > Time Worst Movie.
>
> Wrong. Robot Monster had the Gorilla. Plan Nine had human zombies.
> Both were by Ed Wood.
Hmmm. I have never actually had the opportunity to see Plan Nine, but
I was definitely informed by sources I thought knowledgeable that it
had the gorilla with the helmet. Obviously they hadn't seen it
either, or had worse memories than I realised.
Filksinger
"Keeping in mind that the notes we sing are never, ever, wrong!"
Comments: Authenticated sender is <filkhero@pop.netaddress.com>
From: "Filksinger" <filkhero@usa.net>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 05:27:09 +0000
Subject: My PBEM
Reply-to: filkhero@usa.net
Priority: normal
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Thank you for all the responses to my PBEM game. I believe I have
more than enough, so many that I will probably not be able to use all
the ones I have.
To those of you who responded, I intend to tell you either way. If I
don't respond to you at least once by Tuesday, then a) I apologize in
advance for not answering, and b) you didn't make it. You might try
standby, however, though that may mean you take one of my NPCs who I
think would be good to add to the group, or possibly another persons
character.
Filksinger
"Keeping in mind that the notes we sing are never, ever, wrong!"
X-Forwarding-Note: Was sent to herolist@october.com; forwarding to hero-l@omg.org
From: "Richard D. Bergstresser Jr." <richBLOCKberg@erols.com>
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 02:20:25 -0400
Subject: Re: Thunderbolts (was Re: Starship Troopers)
Newsgroups: october.hero
X-Listname: Hero
Reply-To: hero-l@october.com (Multiple recipients of Hero)
Path: october.com!not-for-mail
Organization: Prometheus Corp.
Lines: 29
X-Sender: richBLOCKberg@nrf-as1s39.erols.com
Nntp-Posting-Host: nrf-as1s39.erols.com
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
herolist wrote:
>
> From: ludator@softfarm.com (Bryan Berggren)
> Subject: Re: Thunderbolts (was Re: Starship Troopers)
> To: champ-l@omg.org
>
> At 01:57 PM 8/2/97 -0400, Richard D. Bergstresser Jr. wrote:
> >Wrong. Robot Monster had the Gorilla. Plan Nine had human zombies.
> >Both were by Ed Wood.
>
> =Robot Monster= was NOT an Ed Wood movie (though you may be thinking of
> =Bride of the Monster=, which was).
Thanks, you're right.
You can tell because =Robot Monster= to
> the best of my knowledge does not:
> a) star Tor Johnson
> b) feature Kendall the Cop
> c) have any angora-fondling scenes.
> :] :] :]
Um, Glen or Glenda only met one of those qualifications.
--
Yes, I've finally resorted to a Spam block.
To respond, remove the letters BLOCK from my address.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
Rich.
X-Forwarding-Note: Was sent to herolist@october.com; forwarding to hero-l@omg.org
From: BeerCarboy@aol.com
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 03:37:10 -0400 (EDT)
X-To: hero-l@october.com
Subject: Robot Monster
X-Listname: Hero
Reply-To: hero-l@october.com (Multiple recipients of Hero)
X-Smtp-Ip-Host: emout09.mx.aol.com ip 198.81.11.24
X-Smtp-Mail-From: BeerCarboy@aol.com
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At Sat, Aug 2, 1997 2:25 PM EDT richberg@erols.com (Richard D. Bergstresser
Jr.)
wrote:
<big snip regarding "Robot Monster" NOT "Plan Nine from Outer Space">
>> Plan Nine from Outer Space. Winner of the Golden Turkey Award for All
>> Time Worst Movie.
>Wrong. Robot Monster had the Gorilla. Plan Nine had human zombies.
>Both were by Ed Wood.
Thanks for playing, but once more the Tobacco leaf wrapped smoking object is
not proffered. Ed was responsible for "Plan Nine" but "Robot Monster" was
the magnum opus of another, and somewhat more successful, auteur whose name
escapes me (but whose nick-name was something like One-Take). Oh yes, I was
mistaken before about the monster's name in "Robot Monster," not No-Man but
Ro-Man.
Carter Humphrey
BeerCarboy@AOL.com
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 20:27:31 +1000
From: Robert Challenger <thanos@zip.com.au>
Subject: Skills??
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Does anyone have any house rules for skills in Champions??
And is there a specific reason why sciences arent based on Int for
their rolls??
--
Don't think cause I understand, I care.. | Robert Challenger
Don't think cause I'm talking, we're friends.. | Thanos@Zip.Com.Au
- 6 Underground, Sneaker Pimps. |
Manic Depressive Dragon -==(UDIC)==-
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 20:36:37 +1000
From: Robert Challenger <thanos@zip.com.au>
Subject: Skills again
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Well, don't I feel stupid.
I use the GMs screen lists when im making a character to work out the
points costs for my characters, rather than flipping back and forth thru
my BBB as the binding is suffering atm.
<dont worry, this is going somewhere>
Anyway, I just pulled out my BBB and found out that there IS an option
to base it off Int [sigh]
Well, Im just feeling foolish now, and wish to apologise to the list
for my stupidity before ppl start yelling at me to RTFBBB.
--
Don't think cause I understand, I care.. | Robert Challenger
Don't think cause I'm talking, we're friends.. | Thanos@Zip.Com.Au
- 6 Underground, Sneaker Pimps. |
Manic Depressive Dragon -==(UDIC)==-
From: Eric Burns <burns@cug.dorm.usm.maine.edu>
Subject: Skills again
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 13:33:02 -0400 (EDT)
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
> Well, Im just feeling foolish now, and wish to apologise to the list
> for my stupidity before ppl start yelling at me to RTFBBB.
>
Don't sweat it, at least your posts are on topic (unlike the
Epistemology/"What is Truth?" Thread That Wouldn't Die!!!). ;-)
-Eric
X-Sender: ludator@207.40.36.2
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 12:33:56 -0500
From: ludator@softfarm.com (Bryan Berggren)
Subject: Re: Thunderbolts (was Re: Starship Troopers)
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 8
At 02:20 AM 8/3/97 -0400, Richard D. Bergstresser Jr. wrote:
>You can tell because =Robot Monster= to
>> the best of my knowledge does not:
>> a) star Tor Johnson
>> b) feature Kendall the Cop
>> c) have any angora-fondling scenes.
>> :] :] :]
>
>Um, Glen or Glenda only met one of those qualifications.
One's enough. The key point is that =Robot Monster= does not fill any. ;]
--
Vox 25:17, Patron Saint of Gadflies
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Files corrupt; absolute files corrupt absolutely. |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
Visit the SoapVox at http://www.io.com/~angilas/soapvox.html
X-Forwarding-Note: Was sent to herolist@october.com; forwarding to hero-l@omg.org
From: ludator@softfarm.com (Bryan Berggren)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 12:33:56 -0500
X-To: hero-l@october.com (Multiple recipients of Hero),champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: Thunderbolts (was Re: Starship Troopers)
X-Listname: Hero
Reply-To: hero-l@october.com (Multiple recipients of Hero)
X-Smtp-Ip-Host: www.softfarm.com ip 207.40.36.2
X-Smtp-Mail-From: ludator@softfarm.com
X-Sender: ludator@207.40.36.2
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 11
At 02:20 AM 8/3/97 -0400, Richard D. Bergstresser Jr. wrote:
>You can tell because =Robot Monster= to
>> the best of my knowledge does not:
>> a) star Tor Johnson
>> b) feature Kendall the Cop
>> c) have any angora-fondling scenes.
>> :] :] :]
>
>Um, Glen or Glenda only met one of those qualifications.
One's enough. The key point is that =Robot Monster= does not fill any. ;]
--
Vox 25:17, Patron Saint of Gadflies
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Files corrupt; absolute files corrupt absolutely. |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
Visit the SoapVox at http://www.io.com/~angilas/soapvox.html
X-Sender: ludator@207.40.36.2
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 12:34:01 -0500
From: ludator@softfarm.com (Bryan Berggren)
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 9
At 12:06 PM 8/3/97 -0700, Robert A. West wrote:
>1) In a four-color comic book or campaign, the heroes generally believe
>in Good and Evil as palpable concepts that correspond to an external
>reality. While I do not wish to state that heroism is *impossible*
>without this assumption, it is certainly a lot easier to risk your life
>for an absolute, rather than a cultural or personal, standard.
>
>2) In 4-color, moral ambiguity arises from imperfection of understanding
>these absolutes, and from a practical necessity to choose between ideals,
>not from an absence of objective standards. This situation does not
>arise too often, or else you have strayed from the 4-color genre, but it
>does arise.
>
>3) This view corresponds, in practice, to the common-sense view shared by
>most people most of the time. Accordingly, it is not a concept that a
>comic-book publisher or a GM need worry overmuch about stating.
This whole argument got me thinking about a couple things which seem true
about "4-color" genre conventions:
1) 4CGCs can appear in the breach as well as the recognition. It's
just as valid if one is broken to create a feeling of wierdness
or unexpectedness (moral ambiguity being a common one here) then
if one is rigidly clung to.
2) 4CGCs often seem to arise from storytelling "shorthand". For
example, it's generally accepted that one 4CGC is "The flimsiest
of masks will conceal your identity". This makes it easier to
write stories, because your hero can improvise a costume from
materials available to him without having to go to extreme
measures to conceal his identity.
Again, moral ambiguity (or rather the lack thereof) fits into
this category. There was an excellent breakdown elsewhere in
this thread as to how a life of crime can seem acceptable,
even unavoidable, to the person living it while he appears as
"low life scum" to the world at large. This sort of "but look
at his view" analysis would be verboten in a typical 4-color
story, since the mugger/shoplifter/etc. exists to be captured
and jailed without a second thought to make the hero look good.
Assuming that Good is good and Evil is bad and never the twain
shall meet essentially speeds up the drive to the plotline, so
that the author can get to the action A.S.A.P.
>4) If an individual hero wants to try being a *true* moral-relativist, he
>is welcome to try, but I ha' me doots:
>
> "Come, fellow Vindicators! We must stop Doctor Destroyer's
> latest plot, which is in conflict with our cultural paradigm,
> at least as expressed in this moment in the space-time continuum
> and as interpreted by the Vindicators' microculture and within
> each of our own ideocultural isolates!"
>
>Wow! Techno-man is certainly going to be inspired to risk his life on an
>11- teleport activation after that speech!
To me, even the most stringent moral relativism doesn't entirely preclude
motivation to take down villains, especially literal world-beaters like Doc
D. To whit, moral relativism doesn't negate the drive for self-preservation
and (by extension) prevervation of things personally important to you. If
whether you consider Doc D's plan to destroy 90% of all humanity inherently
"Evil" doesn't change the fact that your wife and children are in the 90%,
then it's likely it won't change your opposition to the plan either.
Though, frankly, I am playing Devil's Advocate here -- after all, I
basically started the whole durn "philosophy" thread unwittingly by stating
that there =was= no moral relativity in 4-color comics.
--
Vox 25:17, Patron Saint of Gadflies
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Files corrupt; absolute files corrupt absolutely. |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
Visit the SoapVox at http://www.io.com/~angilas/soapvox.html
From: Eric Burns <burns@cug.dorm.usm.maine.edu>
Subject: Robot Monster
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 13:35:21 -0400 (EDT)
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
> <big snip regarding "Robot Monster" NOT "Plan Nine from Outer Space">
> >> Plan Nine from Outer Space. Winner of the Golden Turkey Award for All
> >> Time Worst Movie.
>
> >Wrong. Robot Monster had the Gorilla. Plan Nine had human zombies.
> >Both were by Ed Wood.
>
> Thanks for playing, but once more the Tobacco leaf wrapped smoking object is
> not proffered. Ed was responsible for "Plan Nine" but "Robot Monster" was
> the magnum opus of another, and somewhat more successful, auteur whose name
> escapes me (but whose nick-name was something like One-Take). Oh yes, I was
> mistaken before about the monster's name in "Robot Monster," not No-Man but
> Ro-Man.
>
> Carter Humphrey
>
>
The more I hear about this movie, the more I am certain: I must watch
"Robot Monster" before I die!!!
-Eric
From: Eric Burns <burns@cug.dorm.usm.maine.edu>
Subject: Re: Ars Magica --> Hero
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 14:00:09 -0400 (EDT)
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
> > If Jane had a Rego of 15 and a Mentum of 0, or a Rego of 0 and a Mentum of
> > 15, she could still do this effect. Therefore, you should let the PC pay
> > for the effect with END from either or both reserves, however he/she wants
> > to.
>
> I don't recall seeing this in Ars (must not have read it well
> enough). So, some one with no skill in fire (ignem 0) can still do fire
> spells? Gee, I dunno....
>
I just flipped through my Ars book, and this seems to be the case (at
least in my version, there were like 4 editions of Ars). However,
requiring the character to know both the Form and Technique skills for the
desired effect makes sense, and you may want to do it.
> > How about allow the player to purchase levels in Ignem related spells, or
> > Creo related spells (for instance). That way you could use both Creo and
> > Ignem levels in, say, a fireball spell. Although, averaging the scores is
> > not a bad idea either.
>
> I'd like to be able to do that, but how to judge if their combined
> skill roll is "enough" for the spell? Mikey the Mage has 11- Creo and
> 13- Ignem, can he do a fireball? How about summon a fire elemental?
>
Well, the roll is adjusted by active points (-1 per 10 AP, according to
the BBB). As for "combining" the two rolls, how about just taking the
better of the two? It would be quick, simple, and fair. A more complex
method would be to add the target role in excess of 11- of the worse skill
to the better skill. A 13- and 11- would combine to 13 + (11 - 11) = 13-,
while a 15- and a 13- would combine to 15 + (13 - 11) = 17-.
Also, I reviewed the rules for spontanious magic (magic cast on the fly).
A mage can only use half of his magic skill on spontanious magic if he/she
is willing to expend a fatigue level, and 1/5th if he/she isn't. A mage
can only use his/her full magic skill on formulaic mage; that is on spells
he/she has made him/herself very familiar with. I suggest you place a
penalty on spells cast from the spontanious spells VPP, and also apply an
increased END limitation on the spontanious spells VPP. Formulaic spells
are supposed to be pretty dependable so you may want to give a bonus to
the skill roll. I'm assuming here that spontanious spells get VPP of
their own. If you put spontanious and formulaic spells in the same VPP,
you could just create a special rule.
-Eric
> --
>
> Stephen B. Mann sm6439@cnsvax.albany.edu
> SUNY Learning Network http://sln1.esc.edu
>
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 12:06:12 -0700
From: "Robert A. West" <robtwest@erols.com>
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
>
> this will (hopefully) be my last post on this issue.
>
For some reason your latest post varied in line-length from twenty to
256 characters. It certainly does not make it any easier to read.
I concede you the last word, both on the list and privately. This has
gotten very far outside the purpose of the list, as has been pointed out.
As for continuing this by private e-mail, I am not particularly
interested in attempting to teach sophomore-level philosophy to someone
who cannot conduct a conversation without resorting to ad-hominum
attacks. I have never intentionally misquoted or mischaracterized anyone
in my life -- that would be an evil act.
Let me revert to the Champions-relevant thoughts where this whole thing
began, and henceforth only deal with replies to those.
1) In a four-color comic book or campaign, the heroes generally believe
in Good and Evil as palpable concepts that correspond to an external
reality. While I do not wish to state that heroism is *impossible*
without this assumption, it is certainly a lot easier to risk your life
for an absolute, rather than a cultural or personal, standard.
2) In 4-color, moral ambiguity arises from imperfection of understanding
these absolutes, and from a practical necessity to choose between ideals,
not from an absence of objective standards. This situation does not
arise too often, or else you have strayed from the 4-color genre, but it
does arise.
3) This view corresponds, in practice, to the common-sense view shared by
most people most of the time. Accordingly, it is not a concept that a
comic-book publisher or a GM need worry overmuch about stating.
4) If an individual hero wants to try being a *true* moral-relativist, he
is welcome to try, but I ha' me doots:
"Come, fellow Vindicators! We must stop Doctor Destroyer's
latest plot, which is in conflict with our cultural paradigm,
at least as expressed in this moment in the space-time continuum
and as interpreted by the Vindicators' microculture and within
each of our own ideocultural isolates!"
Wow! Techno-man is certainly going to be inspired to risk his life on an
11- teleport activation after that speech!
> >--
> ><------------------------------------------------------->
> >Robert A. West /// "Censorship is tyranny."
> >Phone W:(215)466-3628; H:(215)348-9113
> >http://www.erols.com/robtwest
> >
> >
> >
--
<------------------------------------------------------->
Robert A. West /// "Censorship is tyranny."
Phone W:(215)466-3628; H:(215)348-9113
http://www.erols.com/robtwest
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 12:14:35 -0700
From: "Robert A. West" <robtwest@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Robot Monster
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
BeerCarboy@aol.com wrote:
>
> At Sat, Aug 2, 1997 2:25 PM EDT richberg@erols.com (Richard D. Bergstresser
> Jr.)
> wrote:
>
> <big snip regarding "Robot Monster" NOT "Plan Nine from Outer Space">
> >> Plan Nine from Outer Space. Winner of the Golden Turkey Award for All
> >> Time Worst Movie.
>
> >Wrong. Robot Monster had the Gorilla. Plan Nine had human zombies.
> >Both were by Ed Wood.
>
> Thanks for playing, but once more the Tobacco leaf wrapped smoking object is
> not proffered. Ed was responsible for "Plan Nine" but "Robot Monster" was
> the magnum opus of another, and somewhat more successful, auteur whose name
> escapes me (but whose nick-name was something like One-Take). Oh yes, I was
> mistaken before about the monster's name in "Robot Monster," not No-Man but
> Ro-Man.
>
The following information comes from Leonard Maltin's 1996 Movie and
Video Guide, which is also available on CD-ROM.
Title: Robot Monster
Year: 1953
Director: Phil Tucker
Starring: George Nader, Gregory Moffett, Claudia Barrett,
Selena Royle, John Mylong.
Rating: BOMB!!!
Notes: Originally in 3-D (except for the dinosaur stock footage
from ONE MILLION B.C.)
If you want the plot summary, buy the book. :-)
--
<------------------------------------------------------->
Robert A. West /// "Censorship is tyranny."
Phone W:(215)466-3628; H:(215)348-9113
http://www.erols.com/robtwest
From: DocTough@aol.com
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 15:14:45 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Variant Skills System for HSR
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Doc sez...
When I was going about formalizing the homerules I've been using for
years I made a long desired change to the Skills system. For a good while I
was uncomfortable with the standard system with its differing costs and lack
of good definition. So i changed it.
In a nutshell, I made all skills cost 3 CPs with +1 to the stat based
rolls costing +2 CPs. However, I've incorporated a system of Subskills that
allow characters to have better definition and specialize in cetain aspects
of the overall Skill. PCs can also buy up the rolls with these Subskills
(rolls based off of the overall skill roll) for +1 CP per +1 to the roll.
I've also eliminated Skill Enhancers. The Overall Skill is considered
to allow the characters to attempt any reasonable feat within the purview of
the Skill and their other experiences and skills.
There are a number of preset Subskills that cover the need for a
Profession Skill, (finally) account for "Kits", cover topics of History,
Inventor, etc.
So far my current players have noticed little difference in using
skills, except that they no longer spent as much on Skills, and Talent and
Perks, as they did before.
Doc Tough
X-Forwarding-Note: Was sent to herolist@october.com; forwarding to hero-l@omg.org
From: Trevor Barrie <tbarrie@ibm.net>
Date: Sun, 3 Aug 1997 16:18:55 -0300 (ADT)
X-To: Multiple recipients of Hero <hero-l@october.com>
Subject: Re: Ars Magica --> Hero
X-Listname: Hero
Reply-To: hero-l@october.com (Multiple recipients of Hero)
X-Smtp-Ip-Host: out1.ibm.net ip 165.87.194.252
X-Smtp-Mail-From: tbarrie@ibm.net
X-Sender: tbarrie@drollsden
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 2
On Sat, 2 Aug 1997, Stephen B. Mann wrote:
> > If Jane had a Rego of 15 and a Mentum of 0, or a Rego of 0 and a Mentum of
> > 15, she could still do this effect. Therefore, you should let the PC pay
> > for the effect with END from either or both reserves, however he/she wants
> > to.
>
> I don't recall seeing this in Ars (must not have read it well
> enough). So, some one with no skill in fire (ignem 0) can still do fire
> spells? Gee, I dunno....
No, somebody who has no knowledge of fire (no score in Ignem) can't cast
fire spells. Somebody who has basic competency with fire (Ignem 0) can, if
his or her score in the relevant Technique is high enough.
Of course, any competently-trained Hermetic magus will have scores in all
fifteen Arts. For that matter, so will an incompently-trained Hermetic
magus, unless his or her training was _really_ screwed-up.
From: johnl@vnet.net (John Lansford)
Subject: Re: Instant Change as a Weapon
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 19:55:03 GMT
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 1
On Sat, 02 Aug 1997 19:05:36 -0700, you wrote:
>> Now, the hammer only works for Mr. He-Man. Mr. Wimpy cannot use it.
>> This would be a OIF _and_ a Only in Hero ID.
>
>Not so far as I can see. A personal and a universal focus are the same
>number of points, so compromises between them are also usually zero-point
>choices.
>
>Option 2: He-man is the special effect of Instant Change and a batch of
>Only in Hero ID powers. Wimpy changes by striking the hammer on the
>ground three times, and can use the hammer as a plain 4D6HA, just as
>anyone can. The hammer is the focus of multiple powers, some universal,
>some personal to He-man, some personal to Wimpy. No point saving.
Mr. Wimpy cannot use the hammer, because it isn't a hammer at that
time. It is a walking stick when Thor is in his Donald Blake
incarnation and Blake has no access to any of the hammer's powers. Not
until he stamps it on the ground three times does he transform into
Thor and the stick turns into the hammer.
All the powers in the hammer, including the hammer itself, should have
(IMO) the "Only in Hero ID" limitation. The hammer should not (again
IMO) have a focus limitation because no one else can use it, nor can
you really seperate it from Thor while he's conscious. You can
sometimes play on his psychological limitations to not use it, but you
can't take it from him. Therefore, it seems to me that the foci
limitation on the hammer isn't a good interpretation for the
character, but the "Only in Hero ID" is.
John Lansford
Cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: Variant Skills System for HSR
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-17
From: dwtoomey@juno.com (David W Toomey)
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 16:39:19 EDT
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 3
On Sun, 3 Aug 1997 15:14:45 -0400 (EDT) DocTough@aol.com writes:
>Doc sez...
>
> When I was going about formalizing the homerules I've been using
>for
>years I made a long desired change to the Skills system. For a good
>while I
>was uncomfortable with the standard system with its differing costs
>and lack
>of good definition. So i changed it.
>
So when do we get to see details?
David W Toomey
dwtoomey@juno.com
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 08:49:36 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 5
alright, i know i already said this was dead, but i feel i have a right to
defend my opinion from rubbish like this, 'lest the person in question thinks they've made a valid point.
At 03:43 AM 8/3/97 +0000, you wrote:
>I am beginning to see where we are going with this, and I think it
>might be time to examine just what it is we are talking about.
>
>You are suggesting that the meaning of "good" and "evil" are
>completely subjective, having no standards outside of what people,
>individually or as a group, give them.
>
>Is this essentially correct?
i've already said this several times.
>
>BTW, it is time to clear up some misunderstandings about opinions.
>You seem to be confusing beliefs, values, and opinions. Opinions are
>beliefs, but beliefs are not necessarily opinions, and values are
>separate from both of them.
>
gee, thank for telling us your opinions- they happen to differ from mine-
all these things are opinions, in the truest sence of the word.
>On 3 Aug 97 at 11:29, jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
>
>>i had this argument once in high school. the teacher and a few
>>students couldn't understand that an opinion can't be wrong or
>>right, it JUST IS. In my opinion, and opinion is, by DEFFINITION
>>what cannot be proven wrong.
>
>That is because you were wrong. I mean factually wrong. While it
>is a commonly held belief that opinions are unprovable and equal,
>that is incorrect. The definition of opinion states that opinions are
>held without proof, not that they are unprovable.
>
that is the most ridiculous attempt to split hairs i have ever seen. bith those things
mean exactly the ame thing, at least in the real world, anyway.
>Opinion
>Noun. A belief or conclusion held with confidence but not
>substantiated by positive knowledge or proof.
>
>Thus, "In my opinion, hitting that dynamite with a hammer will do no
>harm whatsoever" is an opinion. It is also provable, one way or
>another, by hitting the dynamite.
>
you just contradicted your deffinition. Have you heard of flat-earthers?
and believers in esp? and creation scientists?
Just because someone doesn't share your attitudes about what constitutes proof doesn't mean they have been 'proved wrong'.
><snip>
>> >Opinion is another matter. Opinions, it can easily be proven, are not
>> >equal.
>
>> prove it!
>>
>
>Very well. I will now show that _you_ do not actually believe that
>all opinions are equal.
>
I've already mentioned the paradox inherent in having any opinions about opinions. Get over it, ok?
>You want to cross a bridge over a rock filled 3,000-foot
>deep chasm, but it looks unsafe. You have two people standing nearby.
>One is my six-year-old son, the other a structural engineer
>specializing in the inspection of and rebuilding of old bridges.
>
>You say to them, "In your opinion, will this bridge hold my weight?"
>
>My son says, "Yes, it will hold your weight."
>
>The engineer says, "In my opinion, you will not live to reach the far
>side. This thing will collapse if we talk too loud."
>
>Do you cross?
>
you miss the difference between a *professional* opinion and a true (unprovable)
opinion. A proffesional opinion is one which is tied in to a particular structure of
empiricism, and isn't really an opinion at all, because it's held accountable
to the greater whole- note that whole may be physical or structural or both-
the proffesional opinion of a lawyer has very litle to do with the laws of physics.
Btw, at the start of this i assumed everyone knew what a professional opinion was-
it's a very common term, used by people like doctors and so on all the time.
>I am not trying to be funny or facetious. Opinions are important,
>that is very true. However, opinions are not equal. Opinions are
>beliefs held about facts, without proof. Such beliefs may be
>provable or forever unprovable. Such beliefs are either correct or
>incorrect. Someone's opinion is correct.
>
>Filksinger
>
>"Keeping in mind that the notes we sing are never, ever, wrong!"
>
i could go on for hours about how that fact has nothing to do with this- as
i already said, my opinions may clash with God, but i(menotyou) will not find out
'till after i'm dead, will i? What we're talking about is 'reality' as it exists in this metaphysical frame of refrence.
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 09:08:40 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 6
ok, can we talk about this if we stick to hero stuff? i will endeavour to ignore the quite ridiculous attempts at retaliation this guy has made. . .
At 12:06 PM 8/3/97 -0700, you wrote:
>jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
>>
>> this will (hopefully) be my last post on this issue.
>>
>
>For some reason your latest post varied in line-length from twenty to
>256 characters. It certainly does not make it any easier to read.
>
you counted? (endeavouring)
>I concede you the last word, both on the list and privately. This has
>gotten very far outside the purpose of the list, as has been pointed out.
>As for continuing this by private e-mail, I am not particularly
>interested in attempting to teach sophomore-level philosophy to someone
>who cannot conduct a conversation without resorting to ad-hominum
>attacks.
(endeavour, endeavour)
>I have never intentionally misquoted or mischaracterized anyone
>in my life -- that would be an evil act.
>
(endeavour)
>Let me revert to the Champions-relevant thoughts where this whole thing
>began, and henceforth only deal with replies to those.
>
(am i spelling this right?)
>1) In a four-color comic book or campaign, the heroes generally believe
>in Good and Evil as palpable concepts that correspond to an external
>reality. While I do not wish to state that heroism is *impossible*
>without this assumption, it is certainly a lot easier to risk your life
>for an absolute, rather than a cultural or personal, standard.
>
I would contend that most good heros nowadays retain their personal brand of heroism
despite the degredation of culture and other heros-
so when spidey doesn't kill, he does so despite the cround(his fans, other heros)
wanting him to. I see this as far more heroic-
the best example is when supes went to space and fought on warworld-
everything about him changed, except his personal beliefs.
>2) In 4-color, moral ambiguity arises from imperfection of understanding
>these absolutes, and from a practical necessity to choose between ideals,
>not from an absence of objective standards. This situation does not
>arise too often, or else you have strayed from the 4-color genre, but it
>does arise.
>
*yawn* please don't start suggesting that any point of contention is simply "beyond the gernre"- are you that canon-guy? in any event, i would place both modern spidey and modern superman as 4-color comics. This is working from the fact that, since we are discussing comics, we should categorise modern mainstream comics in some way other than 'modern' or 'conventional' point of contentions, anyone?
>3) This view corresponds, in practice, to the common-sense view shared by
>most people most of the time. Accordingly, it is not a concept that a
>comic-book publisher or a GM need worry overmuch about stating.
>
it does? it is?
nope! i think it's about time we decide where this conversation is heading-
i wasn't aware we were back to limiting the players actions again. . .
>4) If an individual hero wants to try being a *true* moral-relativist, he
>is welcome to try, but I ha' me doots:
>
> "Come, fellow Vindicators! We must stop Doctor Destroyer's
> latest plot, which is in conflict with our cultural paradigm,
> at least as expressed in this moment in the space-time continuum
> and as interpreted by the Vindicators' microculture and within
> each of our own ideocultural isolates!"
>
>Wow! Techno-man is certainly going to be inspired to risk his life on an
>11- teleport activation after that speech!
>
really? what if Techno-man's a moral-relativist too? hell, what if he's just
a jargon-stuffed ninny, who won't cooperate or respond with anything other than insults and more jargon unless his own particular conceptual buttons are pushed?
Think of hi at the tech/hero equavilent of a haughty magic sword. . *g*
>> >--
>> ><------------------------------------------------------->
>> >Robert A. West /// "Censorship is tyranny."
>> >Phone W:(215)466-3628; H:(215)348-9113
>> >http://www.erols.com/robtwest
>> >
>> >
>> >
>
>--
><------------------------------------------------------->
>Robert A. West /// "Censorship is tyranny."
>Phone W:(215)466-3628; H:(215)348-9113
>http://www.erols.com/robtwest
>
>
>
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 10:51:31 +1000 (EST)
X-Sender: bryce144@fan.net.au
From: Len Undy <bryce144@fan.net.au>
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 7
At 11:29 AM 03/08/97 +1000, you wrote:
Lots cut, including rubber vice-president(damn, I knew there was something
wrong with him)
>>> no justification, actually, not in my opinion, and that's what
>>> counts, yes?
>>
>>By your reasoning, if my opinion is that killing you isn't evil, then
>>it isn't. Do I understand you correctly?
>>
>
>yes! and you opinion is compared to that of the societies, who decides
>if you are a criminal.
>
Ahhh! It's finally clicked what your trying to say. I've been following
this since the start, and IMO it was degenerating into two different arguments.
But let's see if I can briefly(hah) add to this "discussion".
What your saying is that what's evil and criminal depends on the
society. If people in that society don't think something is evil, then in
that society its not evil. seems simple... Its not a case of "its evil,
but the society does it anyway", rather "its not evil, and we do it because
its either a good thing or at least accepted".
Let's look at the Roman Gladiators. Most were slaves or prisoners of
war. Many didn't even have weapons to defend themselves from the lions etc.
They were ripped apart and eaten in front of thousands for entertainment.
It seems barbaric, even "evil" by today's standards. But back then it was
not only accepted as part of Roman society, but almost fundimental for its
stability. Rome's citizens(the city, not empire) would even roit(sp?) if
they didn't get regular games. To them it was as important as health care,
tax etc is today.
Look at slavery in recent times. You can't tell me that supporters
of slavery actually thought it was a "bad" thing. They might believe that
the negro population was ment to be slaves, and that the north was "evil"
for interfering with their rights.
What I'm trying to say is that what's "evil" and "good" is ever
changing depending on the society and times. The Romans KNOW that they
were right, and we KNOW that they were wrong. Both sides Know what is
"Evil" and what isn't but for both sides the Definition is diffirent.
What's good and evil wholly depends on our own believes, shaped by
the society around us.
Now some other thought....
Here's an example that comes to mind.: A poor kid in a bad
nieghbourhood takes to shoplifting. He doesn't see as bad, 'cause its not
like they can't afford to lose a few products. Sure its against the law,
but its not "wrong". As he gets older, he flunks out of school(that's a
whole new subject), and is really low on cash. Without cash he can barely
afford food, let along anything else. His really desperate for a decent
life damnit!. So he takes up mugging. He never really hurts anyone(he
activly tries not to), and they have plenty of money anyway. It won't
really matter to them...He also starts robbing 7-11 corner stores... He can
pick up food, and money from these places, and his criminal ocupation has
become a career. Its the only way he knows how to survive. But one day, a
corner store clerk draws on him, and he has to shot the clerk. Sure he
carries around a loaded gun, but only to scare them. He never wanted to
shoot someone. It was in self defense.
Now, what we would see is a hard working man, trying to run a corner
store in a tough area, shot down by some low life scum. But in the eyes of
that "low life scum" he never really did anything "wrong". It was a matter
of survival. Now I'm not saying that this person should be let of from his
crimes. He should be punished. But his not evil, not a bad man.
But what about another man, let's call him Joe. Now Joe has always
been a rough man, some would say to rough for his own good. Now this other
guy he sees now and then keeps giving this smug look, like his better then
Joe. So Joe goes home, looks at his basball bat, and thinks" Now I know its
wrong to kill a man, but damnit, its going to good when I teach him a
lesson, Yes sir". Now Joe is possibly evil, because he Knows his doing the
wrong thing, but because his going to enjoy what his doing, he doesn't care.
Now that's wrong.
I lossing track of what I'm trying to say, so I'll finish here.
What's Evil depends on the individial and society. But what's Evil by an
individial's standards, does not overide what is Evil by societies standards.
Bryce(royally confusing himself)
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 13:30:33 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
From: "happyelf(sickjokedude)!" <jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection (back on topic?)
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 14
At 10:22 PM 8/3/97 -0700, you wrote:
<meaningless tiff removed from public>
>I am not sure what the conceptual problem is with saying that
>"thus-and-so is out of genre." After all, that's what a genre is all
>about -- a set of parameters within which a story can be constructed.
>Stories that are too far outside those parameters are in a different
>genre, that's all.
>
but you are approaching backwards- i emant, you should not limit actions:
a genre should be a guideline, nothing more. .
>If I play in a campaign, I want to understand the tone that the GM is
>setting and to cooperate in it. That is called "role playing". Spare
>me from so-called roleplayers who play the same role all the time!
why? that's exactly what you are suggesting- role playing limited to a set of stock cliches. .
>If I
>don't agree with the setting to the point that I cannot cooperate, I
>don't play in that campaign. Let me give you an example of where bad
>role-playing can put a damper on things.
>
well, it can't be much of a campaign if you deviate by a small amount and are suddenly
"out of context". . .
>I am playing in a campaign where the GM has decreed that our
>(pseudo-medieval) culture does not believe in magic, and even lacks fairy
>tales. When we see magic, we are supposed to be disbelieving and/or
>astonished. As we acquire magical powers (the title is, "The Magic
>Returns") we are supposed to be unsure of their precise use, even though
>we have the rulebooks in front of us.
>
>One player (call him Sam) will not cooperate in the setting selected. He
>started off by declaring that he believed in Magic and all the "old
>tales", which by GM decree do not exist. Sam's character lectures our
>characters on details contained in the rulebook that his characters could
>not possibly know, and generally wrecks the mood.
>
this not an example of breaking a genre!! this is just player-vs-pc knowlege.
>The rest of us are enjoying doing things that we know are silly (because
>we have the rulebooks), but that our characters would find reasonable
>(given their ignorance), and enjoy role-playing the learning process.
>Sam fairly sabotages this by his character's actions, and the rest of us
>have less fun as a result.
>
once again, this is still not relevant- the 'genre' you speak of is not
really a genre, but a simple observence observed by all who role play.
>IMHO, it is vital for the GM to communicate the tone that he expects,
>because that affects the type of characters, powers and backgrounds that
>players will select. It is important that players cooperate, because the
>genre selection affects the type of scenarios that the GM chooses. It is
>courteous for players to cooperate, because the GM is inviting them into
>his story and is spending a great deal of effort to entertain them if he
>is any good.
>
your point is valid, your example clearly isn't.
>--
><------------------------------------------------------->
>Robert A. West /// "Censorship is tyranny."
>Phone W:(215)466-3628; H:(215)348-9113
>http://www.erols.com/robtwest
>
>
>
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 21:12:52 -0700
From: "Robert A. West" <robtwest@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Instant Change as a Weapon
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 13
John Lansford wrote:
>
> On Sat, 02 Aug 1997 19:05:36 -0700, you wrote:
>
> >> Now, the hammer only works for Mr. He-Man. Mr. Wimpy cannot use it.
> >> This would be a OIF _and_ a Only in Hero ID.
> >
> >Not so far as I can see. A personal and a universal focus are the same
> >number of points, so compromises between them are also usually zero-point
> >choices.
> >
> >Option 2: He-man is the special effect of Instant Change and a batch of
> >Only in Hero ID powers. Wimpy changes by striking the hammer on the
> >ground three times, and can use the hammer as a plain 4D6HA, just as
> >anyone can. The hammer is the focus of multiple powers, some universal,
> >some personal to He-man, some personal to Wimpy. No point saving.
>
> Mr. Wimpy cannot use the hammer, because it isn't a hammer at that
> time. It is a walking stick when Thor is in his Donald Blake
> incarnation and Blake has no access to any of the hammer's powers. Not
> until he stamps it on the ground three times does he transform into
> Thor and the stick turns into the hammer.
>
You assume that the original poster was trying to duplicate Thor. This may
not be so, and my example specifically suggested a different mechanic.
Perhaps I should illustrate with one of my characters, Saladin. He has a magic
sword upon which the rest of his powers depend. He has (choosing only certain
powers and disads for illustration, and simplifying slightly):
5 15 STR all the time
9 13 DEX all the time
7 3 SPD all the time
24 +30 STR, Only in Hero ID
38 +16 DEX, Only in Hero ID
9 +2 SPD, Only in Hero ID, including figured amount.
2 Instant Change OAF Sword & Scabbard {Mystical change, draw sword}
30 45-active-point MP OIF Sword semi-Personal (Islamic faith only)
1u 10PD/10ED Force Field {super-parry} OIF
1u 5D6 HA 0 END OIF
1u +1 HTH Combat Level {Magical Sword} OIF
4s 2D6 HKA {DC 12 is a campaign limit} OIF
1u Missile Deflection vs all ranged attacks OIF
etc.
Disad: 10 Accidental Change {Anybody draws sword from scabbard}
20 Phys Lim: must obey Islamic Law (all the time, greatly}
etc.
Note that the sword varies in its treatment:
-it is an OIF when wielded, since it has magical properties resisting,
but not precluding, taking it from his hand.
-it is an OAF when sheathed, but the only power that depends on it is
Instant Change: draw the sword and poof!
-other powers that depend on the sword's being drawn are Hero ID,
since Saladin remains Saladin, even if the sword is taken
away, unless someone sheathes it.
Thus, my comments.
>
> John Lansford
--
<------------------------------------------------------->
Robert A. West /// "Censorship is tyranny."
Phone W:(215)466-3628; H:(215)348-9113
http://www.erols.com/robtwest
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 01:00:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection (back on topic?)
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 15
On Sun, 3 Aug 1997, Robert A. West wrote:
> If I play in a campaign, I want to understand the tone that the GM is
> setting and to cooperate in it. That is called "role playing". Spare
> me from so-called roleplayers who play the same role all the time! If I
> don't agree with the setting to the point that I cannot cooperate, I
> don't play in that campaign. Let me give you an example of where bad
> role-playing can put a damper on things.
>
> I am playing in a campaign where the GM has decreed that our
> (pseudo-medieval) culture does not believe in magic, and even lacks fairy
> tales. When we see magic, we are supposed to be disbelieving and/or
> astonished. As we acquire magical powers (the title is, "The Magic
> Returns") we are supposed to be unsure of their precise use, even though
> we have the rulebooks in front of us.
>
> One player (call him Sam) will not cooperate in the setting selected. He
> started off by declaring that he believed in Magic and all the "old
> tales", which by GM decree do not exist. Sam's character lectures our
> characters on details contained in the rulebook that his characters could
> not possibly know, and generally wrecks the mood.
>
> The rest of us are enjoying doing things that we know are silly (because
> we have the rulebooks), but that our characters would find reasonable
> (given their ignorance), and enjoy role-playing the learning process.
> Sam fairly sabotages this by his character's actions, and the rest of us
> have less fun as a result.
In the Legend of the Five Rings RPG a point similar to this is made.
Although rules and notes (anmd even a charactersheet) for ninja characters
are given, great pains are made to the effect that *no one* believes they
exist. PCs should not accept any evidence of ninja as fact they exist.
As they say in the book, any dozen farmers can ambush a lone samurai,
stick a few shuriken in his back and blame it on 'ninja'.
Naturally, there will (or should) come a time where the PCs will encounter
a 'ninja' face to face abd draw their own conclusions about what the
character saw. But to start out at day one claming ninja are real (or
worse, to be one) will wreck the mood (and the genre presented) in short
order.
Obey the conventions of the genre (and of the campaign) is essential to
getting the utmost enjoyment out of the game. Delibertly
ignoring/flauntingthese rules/guidelines just spoils it for the rest of
us.
***************************************************************************
* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
***************************************************************************
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 22:22:54 -0700
From: "Robert A. West" <robtwest@erols.com>
Subject: Champions Genre Selection (back on topic?)
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 12
jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
>
> >
> >For some reason your latest post varied in line-length from twenty to
> >256 characters. It certainly does not make it any easier to read.
> >
>
> you counted? (endeavouring)
A guesstimate, since 256 is a line-length limit on many systems. It
happened again in this post and is very annoying. I haven't seen this
happen with anyone else's postings, so I infer that your system may have
a problem.
> [snip]
>
> *yawn* please don't start suggesting that any point of contention is simply "beyond the gernre"- are you that canon-guy? in any event, i would
place both moder
Sorry, your line simply wrapped off the end of the world at that point,
and I have no idea *what* you were going to say. See my comment above.
> nope! i think it's about time we decide where this conversation is heading-
> i wasn't aware we were back to limiting the players actions again. . .
??? Decide where a conversation is heading ??? Talk about limiting! ;-)
I am not sure what the conceptual problem is with saying that
"thus-and-so is out of genre." After all, that's what a genre is all
about -- a set of parameters within which a story can be constructed.
Stories that are too far outside those parameters are in a different
genre, that's all.
If I play in a campaign, I want to understand the tone that the GM is
setting and to cooperate in it. That is called "role playing". Spare
me from so-called roleplayers who play the same role all the time! If I
don't agree with the setting to the point that I cannot cooperate, I
don't play in that campaign. Let me give you an example of where bad
role-playing can put a damper on things.
I am playing in a campaign where the GM has decreed that our
(pseudo-medieval) culture does not believe in magic, and even lacks fairy
tales. When we see magic, we are supposed to be disbelieving and/or
astonished. As we acquire magical powers (the title is, "The Magic
Returns") we are supposed to be unsure of their precise use, even though
we have the rulebooks in front of us.
One player (call him Sam) will not cooperate in the setting selected. He
started off by declaring that he believed in Magic and all the "old
tales", which by GM decree do not exist. Sam's character lectures our
characters on details contained in the rulebook that his characters could
not possibly know, and generally wrecks the mood.
The rest of us are enjoying doing things that we know are silly (because
we have the rulebooks), but that our characters would find reasonable
(given their ignorance), and enjoy role-playing the learning process.
Sam fairly sabotages this by his character's actions, and the rest of us
have less fun as a result.
IMHO, it is vital for the GM to communicate the tone that he expects,
because that affects the type of characters, powers and backgrounds that
players will select. It is important that players cooperate, because the
genre selection affects the type of scenarios that the GM chooses. It is
courteous for players to cooperate, because the GM is inviting them into
his story and is spending a great deal of effort to entertain them if he
is any good.
--
<------------------------------------------------------->
Robert A. West /// "Censorship is tyranny."
Phone W:(215)466-3628; H:(215)348-9113
http://www.erols.com/robtwest
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 22:38:10 -0700
From: "Robert A. West" <robtwest@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Variant Skills System for HSR
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 10
DocTough@aol.com wrote:
>
>
> In a nutshell, I made all skills cost 3 CPs with +1 to the stat based
> rolls costing +2 CPs. However, I've incorporated a system of Subskills that
> allow characters to have better definition and specialize in cetain aspects
> of the overall Skill.
This strikes me as unnecessary. Per HSR, if a character has
Science/Chemistry(13-), he has a 13- chance to do any ordinary chemical
analysis, but would be at a disadvantage (-3, say) in a problem involving
Nuclear Chemistry. With Science/Nuclear Chemistry(11-), he would get the
better roll (11-) for the problem, and the other would act as a complementary
skill.
> PCs can also buy up the rolls with these Subskills
> (rolls based off of the overall skill roll) for +1 CP per +1 to the roll.
Do you allow complementary skills as well?
> I've also eliminated Skill Enhancers. The Overall Skill is considered
> to allow the characters to attempt any reasonable feat within the purview of
> the Skill and their other experiences and skills.
Again, this is standard Hero treatment. There is no "General Science" skill,
although one could purchase "KS: Science", which represents a character who
is widely read about science in general, but lacks practical laboratory
skills. I don't see where Skill Enhancers come into the picture.
> There are a number of preset Subskills that cover the need for a
> Profession Skill, (finally) account for "Kits", cover topics of History,
> Inventor, etc.
Kits are already covered as either mobile labs or as Skill Levels OAF.
>
> So far my current players have noticed little difference in using
> skills, except that they no longer spent as much on Skills, and Talent and
> Perks, as they did before.
Somehow, the fact that your players have noticed little difference does not
strike me as a resounding recommendation. The fact that they have spent
fewer points on non-combat Skills, Talents and Perks, only serves to raise
the power level of the campaign, which is not always a good thing.
>
> Doc Tough
--
<------------------------------------------------------->
Robert A. West /// "Censorship is tyranny."
Phone W:(215)466-3628; H:(215)348-9113
http://www.erols.com/robtwest
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 23:15:59 -0700
From: Captain Spith <cptspith@teleport.com>
Reply-To: cptspith@teleport.com
Subject: FISHY POWERS, PART I
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 18
Okay, I've finally got a bit o' time, so here are the major
highlights of how an underwater environment affect landlubbers...
PERCEPTION -
Underwater, it's harder to see, and increasingly so at a distance.
Fresh water is actually worse than salt water, since there is generally
more suspended matter in the water to obscure vision, thus the following
modifies Range Mod chart for PER rolls;
SALT SALT FRESH FRESH
RANGE CLEAR MURKY CLEAR MURKY
0-4" -2 -3 -3 -4
5-8" -5 -6 -7 -8 This chart is for water
penalties and normal
9-16" -8 -9 -11 -14 range mods combined; _don't_add
these mods to
17-32" -11 -12 -15 -19 existing range mods
33-64" -14 -15 -19 -24
TELESCOPIC VISION -
Make sure that telescopic modifiers _only_ negate normal range mods,
and not water condition mods
IR VISION -
Heat dissipates quickly in water, so in addition to any and all other
modifiers underwater, IR takes another -2 _per_range_doubling
(basically, IR is about useless)
UV VISION -
UV works normally underwater
NORMAL HEARING -
While sound travels better in water, it is much more distorted
(remember the space-born 'whale song' in Star Trek IV?) so all hearing
PER rolls are at -3, if missed, the sound may be heard, but is
unidentifiable.
RADIO HEARING -
All radio hearing suffers -6 underwater
HR RADIO HEARING -
High Range works a little better; only -4 to all PER
SONAR -
Okay, now we're TALKIN'! If both the character and target are
underwater, sonar works at +2, with, of course, the normal limitations
of sonar (large groups of small objects may appear to be one large
object, etc.)
RADAR -
About as well as HR Radio, -4
SMELL -
If you can't breathe underwater, you can't smell underwater. If you
CAN, it works normally, but shifting currents may move smells about in
strange ways, this specifically would also affect...
TRACKING SCENT -
which takes a -4 to start, and add'l -2 per hour that the trail is
old.
---------------------------------------
This brings us now to COMBAT!
DEX AND STR -
OCV in HTH is reduced by 2, all DCV is at -1, and ranged OCV is
unaffected. Atlantis(TM) offers the new talent "underwater movement"
with which all OCV/DCV penalties are ignored.
All attacks based on STR are reduced by 2 Damage Classes after all
other damage modifiers are applied (such as Martial Arts modifiers).
THROWING THINGS -
Just don't even try. The only useful thrown objects for underwater
use would be javelins (and their ilk), but those would fall into the
category of underwater weapons.
WEAPONS -
The gist of it is; most normal weapons (like guns, for example) just
won't work. Things like lasers or 'blasters' should work normally if
the actual circuitry/mechanisms are sealed water-tight. HTH Melee
weapons (clubs, swords, etc.) will only lose the aforementioned
'STR-based attack' 2 DC, unless the weapon is large/wide/bulky, then
damage may be reduced by up to 2 add'l DC.
------------------
SPECIAL EFFECTS
---------------
AIR -
Even air-based powers which supply their own air will dissipate
quickly in water, and will operate between 5 and 50% effectiveness.
ELECTRICITY -
WOW! THERE'S NO PROBLEM WITH POWER _HERE_!! Except, that being
surrounded by water, you may end up damaging yourself as much as anyone
else!
Force Fields/Walls will act as damage shields at 1D6 normal damage per
15 active points. This affects the user as well as any legitimate
victims.
EBs and RKAs will add 1DC for every 20 active points in fresh water,
add 1DC per 15 active points in salt water. If an attack channels
electricity to the target, it will act as an Area Affect Line (attacker
to target) Explosion (OUCH!), and both target and attacker will take
damage. If an attack fires a projectile which doesn't deliver a charge
ubtil impact, it will act as an Explosion only.
Of course if the Electrically-powered character has full insulation or
the Personal Immunity advantage, (s)he can ignore the damage everyone
else is enjoying...
FIRE -
If the fire requires air for combustion, yer outta luck. Chemical or
Magical-based fire (and others not requiring air) will be fine.
ICE -
If the ice is produced by the character, the objects of ice will tend
to immediately begin to float to the surface (no specific modifiers are
given).
If the character produces a field of cold by which ice is then
formed, the effects will tend to be enhanced (due to abundance of raw
material as it were) add 1DC in dirty, salty water, 2DC for clean salt
or dirty fresh water, and 3DC for clean fresh water.
MENTAL POWERS -
The only limitations here are maintaining line-of-sight. PER rolls
should be made every phase to maintain mental contact (except in the
case of Mind Link, of course)
WATER -
Water SFX are generally unaffected, though non-attack powers like TK
or entangle may be increased by 1DC per 20 active points.
LIGHT -
Since light is diffused by water, light-based powers are less
effective. Treat as if they had "reduced by range" in clear water,
subtract an additional 1DC per range doubling in murky or clouded water.
Powers using UV light will not be affected, Powers using IR light
will work at point blank or 1-hex range, but not at all beyond that.
SONICS -
YEAH! AND I THOUGHT ELECTRICITY WAS GOOD! Sound is fortunately
directional, so the source of sound powers does not take damage from
his/her own powers.
Force Fields and Walls add 5 pts. per 20 active.
EBs act as if they are Area Affect Cone. A character may attempt to
focus the blast with a Control roll (INT roll)modified by -1 per 10
active points in the power.
--------------------------
Okay, that's part 1. Next is skills, powers and power modifiers. I
will try to get them posted within the next day. They should go faster,
being less general then most of the preceding.
All information is taken from 'ATLANTIS(tm) a sourcebook for
Champions', though I do not gaurantee completely accurate regurgitation
of information.
--
-Capt. Spith
Savior of Humanity
Secular Messiah
Date: Sun, 03 Aug 1997 23:19:37 -0700
From: Darrin Kelley <flashbak@pacbell.net>
Reply-To: flashbak@pacbell.net
Subject: PBEM games.
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 16
am currently looking for information any Fuzion or Hero System
related PBEM games.
The reasons for this are two-fold. First I would actually like to
find one to join. Other game systems would be fine too. Though I would
ask that they be limited to Rifts, TORG, Cyberpunk or Mekton. Otherwise,
I suspect that I might end up facing an E-Mail overload.
And second, I would actually like to analyse a few so I can
eventually start one of my own. So that I can find out what utilities
are needed to make such a game run smoothly.
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 16:24:06 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
From: "happyelf(sickjokedude)!" <jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection (back on topic?)
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 17
At 01:00 AM 8/4/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Obey the conventions of the genre (and of the campaign) is essential to
>getting the utmost enjoyment out of the game. Delibertly
>ignoring/flauntingthese rules/guidelines just spoils it for the rest of
>us.
>
so i suppose you could say that conventions of the genre are valid limits-
however, i would suggest that many of the 'conventions' of the 4-color genre are not
as constructive as this- mayhap they include a limit that does not add as much to cohesion, or as such a limit should, to be considered valid?
>***************************************************************************
>* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
>* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
>* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
>* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
>***************************************************************************
>
>
X-Sender: ludator@207.40.36.2
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 01:27:32 -0500
From: ludator@softfarm.com (Bryan Berggren)
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 05:17 PM 8/4/97 +1000, happyelf(sickjokedude)! wrote:
>so you'd prefer spidey not to save lives? you expect bats to be sane?
>methinks you missed the point- these are both NON-fourcolor origins!
>bats is a looney, and petey was an complete ass!
I'd agree with you on Batman, but not Spidey. The Kirby/Ditko comics of the
Great Marvel Age (Fantastic Four, Spider-Man, Thor, Dr. Strange, Avengers)
all but *define* "four-color comics".
And I'd point out, Spidey's origin is a good example of one of the 4-color
Genre Conventions I mentioned earlier: that having superhuman abilities
obligates one to take sides between Good and Evil, and attempting to remain
"neutral" (including using your powers solely for mundane pursuits like
legal profit) results in Bad Things.
--
Vox 25:17, Patron Saint of Gadflies
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Files corrupt; absolute files corrupt absolutely. |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
Visit the SoapVox at http://www.io.com/~angilas/soapvox.html
From: BeerCarboy@aol.com
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 02:31:46 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 19
OK, I think that many of the people involved in this discussion are failing
to see why it's are called four-colored principles. I think the idea is how
the comics in question have principles which do not apply in our real world.
One principle has seemingly upset a lot of people because they think it does
apply in real life, namely that good and evil have a fundamentally different
nature in comics (or at least this sort of comic) than they have in reality.
I think that none of us have a problem with it stated in terms that vaguely,
but the attempt to specify those differences have rubbed some people the
wrong way. So let me try to give some examples of those differences by
citing specific comic book characters.
Spiderman: Peter Parker started his career as a do-gooder when a man (a
criminal) he had the opportunity to apprehend but chose not to then went and
murdered Peter's Uncle (who was the closest thing Peter had to a father while
he was growing up). Peter saw this as his fault (arguable in that if the
specific criminal in question was in custody he could not have killed Ben
Parker) and then decides to fight crime because "with great power . . ."
yadda, yadda, yadda. In the Marvel Universe Peter/Spiderman is doing the
"right thing" but in reality his "great responsibility" could probably be
better discharged in a research laboratory trying to figure out how he does
what he does, rather than simply dealing with a small number of street
criminals and some paranormal types with sociopathic behavior problems.
Batman: Watching his parents die in a random mugging gone wrong gave Bruce
Wayne such a hatred of crime that he has spent his life perfecting his
abilities physical and mental so as to apprehend criminals. Some lip-service
in recent years has been given to the idea that he is obsessed but overall he
doing the right thing in the DC universe, but in reality he would be a
severely disassociative personality engaging in extreme anti-social
compulsive behavior.
We can do something similar with almost any comc book character, what is the
"right thing" in the comix is generally pretty bizarre and unacceptable by
real world moral/ethical standards.
Carter Humphrey
BeerCarboy@AOL.com
From: DocTough@aol.com
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 02:50:49 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Variant Skills System for HSR
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 22
In a message dated 97-08-04 01:45:11 EDT, Rob wrote:
<< DocTough@aol.com wrote:
> >
>
> In a nutshell, I made all skills cost 3 CPs with +1 to the stat based
> rolls costing +2 CPs. However, I've incorporated a system of Subskills
that
> allow characters to have better definition and specialize in cetain
aspects
>> of the overall Skill.
<This strikes me as unnecessary. Per HSR, if a character has
Science/Chemistry(13-), he has a 13- chance to do any ordinary chemical
analysis, but would be at a disadvantage (-3, say) in a problem involving
Nuclear Chemistry. With Science/Nuclear Chemistry(11-), he would get the
better roll (11-) for the problem, and the other would act as a
complementary
skill.>
Fairly true, but I've reduced the need for purchasing repetative skills
by grouping them under a common, more general Superskill. (BTW, I've also
removed the need for the KS:s). Under my system, which I will post in great
detail about for those interested, the above skills would be treated as such:
4 Chemistry(General-1) (13-)(14-) Int-based
(Nuclear-0) (13-)
The base cost of the skill is 3 CPs for the Int-based. Assuming
character had a INT 18 to 22, this gives a base roll of 13 or less. The
Subskill listed in the () next to the Superskill is considered the PC's field
of expertise and gets an automatic rating of +1, as noted by the Subskill-1
notation for no additional cost. The next Subskill costs 1 CP and gives the
PC a rating of Nuclear Chemistry-0, or a roll of 13- (the base skill roll).
If the rating was bought up to Nuclear-1, for +1 CP, the Subskill roll would
be 14-, or base Skill roll plus level the appropriate Subskill.
This allows for Pc to have decent Skill rolls without spending
additional points that would otherwise go to Talents, Perks, Character
Advantages, Equipments, Agents, etc. I firmly believe that Skills are very
important to a character, but have experienced players that would shortchange
their PCs and then wonder why they couldn't perform non-superpowered feats
without them.
As for Complimentary rolls, they are now treated as simply adding the
rating of the appropriate (GM approved) subskill rating to the roll of the
skill in question. For the above example, the General-1 subskill would add
+1 straight out to the Nuclear Chemistry feat if the GM felt that it applied
for a total roll of 14 or less. Not all applications a skill as a
Complimentary Skill are trully appropriate. Being a Chemist by education and
lab experience (Medical), I find that my practical knowledge of general
chemistry were already accounted for in more advanced topics, but help a
little. The lack of a roll is meant to imply that you know that you know and
your efforts should not be undermined by the "luck of the dice".
>> PCs can also buy up the rolls with these Subskills
>> (rolls based off of the overall skill roll) for +1 CP per +1 to the roll.
<Do you allow complementary skills as well?>
Absolutely, varying educational experiences often combine in unexpected
manners to create the true depth of our practical knowledge. I've covered
how to use Subskills in a common Superskill as complimentary above. For
using two different Superskills, simply use the system as per HSR, but only
apply the +1 to the roll per 2 pts the Complimentary roll was made by
disregarding a "just made it" roll. This works rather well under principles
of Education, yes another degree, for the purposes of the genre ans system.
Less certainty that the other skill will prove a benefit to the Base Skill,
but allowing for that unique serendipidity that drives progress and
advancements.
This later system seems to show up less as often the Superskill in
question will provide some knowledge of teh Complimentary skill. For
example, the Skill Mechanics provides some rudimentary understanding of how
automobiles operate (cams, gears, belts, pistons, etc. are all important
engineering advances that are used in cars) and could be used to effect
repairs without a KS: Automobile Mechanics.
> > I've also eliminated Skill Enhancers. The Overall Skill is
considered
> to allow the characters to attempt any reasonable feat within the purview
of
> the Skill and their other experiences and skills.<<
>Again, this is standard Hero treatment. There is no "General Science"
skill,
although one could purchase "KS: Science", which represents a character who
is widely read about science in general, but lacks practical laboratory
skills. I don't see where Skill Enhancers come into the picture.<
They went away for two reasons primarliy. The first is that they were
cost abusive, particularily if the player wished to acquire them later. A
simple expenditure of 3 CPs could reap a greater return from the already
purchased skills. Second, they seemed to imply a board basic knowledge of
the topic of the Skill enhancer of the corse of play in my campaign and some
other local groups. Granted this interruptation evolved out of houserules,
but I removed as part of cleaning up my houserules.
Since all skills would now carry the same cost and therefore should be
of similar practical use to the PC during the course play, Skill Enhancers
were dropped.
>> There are a number of preset Subskills that cover the need for a
> Profession Skill, (finally) account for "Kits", cover topics of History,
> Inventor, etc.<<
> Kits are already covered as either mobile labs or as Skill Levels OAF<
Yes, they can be treated this way, but making them subkills was done to
allow them to be include at the site of the Skill. Plus, I've generally had
reservations about focussing non-combat Skill Levels. Cost turns out to
about the same.
>
> > So far my current players have noticed little difference in using
> skills, except that they no longer spent as much on Skills, and Talent and
> Perks, as they did before.<<
>Somehow, the fact that your players have noticed little difference does not
strike me as a resounding recommendation. The fact that they have spent
fewer points on non-combat Skills, Talents and Perks, only serves to raise
the power level of the campaign, which is not always a good thing.<
I don't think I stated that as clearly as I could have. The players
found that the use of skill felt the same (ie Complimentary rolls,
timerequirements, kits, professional use). They did like that they had
greater flexiblity with the skill and a wider range of skill feats they could
know attempt without feeling they were required to spend excessive, in their
minds, points on skills.
Yes, the extra spending of points on powers did raise the power level of
the campaign in the past to uncomfortable level. I tried to lower the
starting points, but they simply spent less on non-combat skills and
abilities anyway. Now they know they will have points to get they Perks and
talents they found interesting but wouldn't spend points on before.
I find the organization of the skill/subskill system reduces the
confusion for players to locating the appropriate skill to use.
>
> Doc Tough
--
<------------------------------------------------------->
Robert A. West /// "Censorship is tyranny."
Phone W:(215)466-3628; H:(215)348-9113
http://www.erols.com/robtwest
Thanks for your comments, Robert, I hope I've clear some issues up. Its
not an iverly radical change from the current system, but it removes a few of
the small issues I had with the HSR system.
Doc Tough
From: DocTough@aol.com
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 02:52:47 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Variant Skills System for HSR
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 20
Doc sez...
I'd be glad to post more details, but I'd want to put them in a
managable file to be attached to a posting. I'll see what I can do. Thanks
for your interest.
Doc Tough
From: DocTough@aol.com
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 02:56:06 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: FISHY POWERS, PART I
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 21
Doc sez...
Thanks for the insightful posting, Captain. This is something I'll same
for the rules archive.
Doc Tough
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 1997 17:17:25 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
From: "happyelf(sickjokedude)!" <jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 23
At 02:31 AM 8/4/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Spiderman: Peter Parker started his career as a do-gooder when a man (a
>criminal) he had the opportunity to apprehend but chose not to then went and
>murdered Peter's Uncle (who was the closest thing Peter had to a father while
>he was growing up). Peter saw this as his fault (arguable in that if the
>specific criminal in question was in custody he could not have killed Ben
>Parker) and then decides to fight crime because "with great power . . ."
>yadda, yadda, yadda. In the Marvel Universe Peter/Spiderman is doing the
>"right thing" but in reality his "great responsibility" could probably be
>better discharged in a research laboratory trying to figure out how he does
>what he does, rather than simply dealing with a small number of street
>criminals and some paranormal types with sociopathic behavior problems.
>
>Batman: Watching his parents die in a random mugging gone wrong gave Bruce
>Wayne such a hatred of crime that he has spent his life perfecting his
>abilities physical and mental so as to apprehend criminals. Some lip-service
>in recent years has been given to the idea that he is obsessed but overall he
>doing the right thing in the DC universe, but in reality he would be a
>severely disassociative personality engaging in extreme anti-social
>compulsive behavior.
>
>We can do something similar with almost any comc book character, what is the
>"right thing" in the comix is generally pretty bizarre and unacceptable by
>real world moral/ethical standards.
>
>Carter Humphrey
>
>
so you'd prefer spidey not to save lives? you expect bats to be sane?
methinks you missed the point- these are both NON-fourcolor origins!
bats is a looney, and petey was an complete ass!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> BeerCarboy@AOL.com
>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <ghoyle1@mail.airmail.net>
From: "Guy Hoyle" <ghoyle1@mail.airmail.net>
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 10:45:16 +0000
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Reply-to: guyhoyle@iname.com
Priority: normal
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 31
------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 09:46:05 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
> Subject: Re: 4 color principles
> To: champ-l@omg.org
> On Mon, 4 Aug 1997, happyelf(sickjokedude)! wrote:
>
> <Spiderman & Batman stuff snipped)
>
> > so you'd prefer spidey not to save lives? you expect bats to be sane?
> > methinks you missed the point- these are both NON-fourcolor origins!
> > bats is a looney, and petey was an complete ass!
>
> First of all, I'd like to point out that batman was created backl in 1939,
> *way* before the establishment of the 'classic' 4-color genre. In his
> first appearences Bats killed a few of his foes (or, at least, didn't try
> and stop them form having a fatal accident). So, I (amazingly enough)
> have to agree with Mr. Jones/Happyelf here.
>
> But, Spiderman came about in the early Sixties (1961? 1963?) When the
> 4-color genre was at it's height. Heck, one can even make a case that it
> was just really getting started (if your a major Marvel fan anyway)! So,
> I'd say Spiderman's origin is classic 4-color.
Hmm, this is rather later than I'd put the origin of the 4-Color
comic. I'd say Batman was created in the tradition of the "pulp"
era, but 4-color comics were born with Superman in 1938. Most of the
superheroes of the 1940s and early 50s were definitely part of the
4-color world. Also, IMO, the end of the 4-color era began in the
early to mid-80s, when "heroes" began using killing attacks regularly
instead of as the exception (Wolverine, of course, appeared in the
late 70s, but he was an exception to the rule; the Punisher appeared
even earlier, but he was often seen as a villain, and sometimes used
non-lethal bullets).
Guy
----------------------------------
Guy Hoyle (guyhoyle@iname.com)
http://web2.airmail.net/ghoyle1/
Visit The Gamemaster's Bookshelf
and the PANGAEA Project!
----------------------------------
Guy Hoyle (guyhoyle@iname.com)
http://web2.airmail.net/ghoyle1/
Visit The Gamemaster's Bookshelf
and the PANGAEA Project!
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 09:35:24 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 24
On Mon, 4 Aug 1997, happyelf(sickjokedude)! wrote:
> At 01:00 AM 8/4/97 -0400, you wrote:
> >Obey the conventions of the genre (and of the campaign) is essential to
> >getting the utmost enjoyment out of the game. Delibertly
> >ignoring/flauntingthese rules/guidelines just spoils it for the rest of
> >us.
> >
>
> so i suppose you could say that conventions of the genre are valid limits-
> however, i would suggest that many of the 'conventions' of the 4-color
genre are not
> as constructive as this- mayhap they include a limit that does not add
as much to cohesion, or as such a limit should, to be considered valid?
Genre conventions are not always valid 'limits'. Instead genre
conventions help define the campaign itself. In a 4-color game, the genre
conventions do not limit the characters, with the exception that one would
not (or should not) find dark clad gun-totiing avengers of the night
running about. Having Batman in there with the rest of the JLA is sort of
a mistake, since (realistically) he'd probably have nothing to do with
them. About the only major 4-color convention that I can think of (right
now) is that "Heroes don't kill", which in a way, does limit characters,
but shouldn't detract from the game itself. (This is why Dark Champions
was created, see.)
On the other hand, if I am trying to run a certain genre (and to reference
my last post, lets say it is feudal Japan circa 1542), I'd excpet the
players to have 9at least) a basic understanding of the genre being
presented and try to create characters that fit within the boundries of
that genre. So, if you want to play a ninja, that's fine, just don't
expect to be able to go running around in your night suit tossing shuriken
at everyone and not have anyone bat an eye. A ninja is at the *bottom* of
the social structure, in fact he doesn't even *count* in the social
structure of the time, and a known ninja will soon find himself very dead.
In the 1542 Japan game that I'm in, one of the PCs was a farmer while the
rest of us were samurai. After a while, the player complained about not
having any armor, getting stuck with all the dirty jobs and not having any
say in anything. Our response? "Hey, wake up dude! Your playing a
character from the bottom third of the social scale, we *don't* have to do
anything for you, PC or not!" And if the PC took offense and picked a
fight, we were perfectly in our own right (ie abiding by the genre
conventions of the game) to cut him down like the mad dog that he was.
Needless to say, thay player never did acheive clue and left that game.
***************************************************************************
* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
***************************************************************************
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 09:46:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 25
On Mon, 4 Aug 1997, happyelf(sickjokedude)! wrote:
<Spiderman & Batman stuff snipped)
> so you'd prefer spidey not to save lives? you expect bats to be sane?
> methinks you missed the point- these are both NON-fourcolor origins!
> bats is a looney, and petey was an complete ass!
First of all, I'd like to point out that batman was created backl in 1939,
*way* before the establishment of the 'classic' 4-color genre. In his
first appearences Bats killed a few of his foes (or, at least, didn't try
and stop them form having a fatal accident). So, I (amazingly enough)
have to agree with Mr. Jones/Happyelf here.
But, Spiderman came about in the early Sixties (1961? 1963?) When the
4-color genre was at it's height. Heck, one can even make a case that it
was just really getting started (if your a major Marvel fan anyway)! So,
I'd say Spiderman's origin is classic 4-color.
Now, as to Spidey saving lives. I don't think that the original poster
was arguing agaisnt his actions as Spiderman, he was just stating they
weren't the actions of a more 'stable' person. It comes back to "With
great power..." Sure, Spidey could sit in a lab and do research, but he
can't just stand around, being able to do the things that he can do,
knowing that there are people out there that might kills someone else's
Uncle Ben (or Aunt May). So he goes out, night after night, trying to
(inhis own way) make the world a little safer. He takes out common
theives and muggers, battles supervillians, gets chased by the cops and
slamed constantly by JJ Jameson. But he never gives up (which is what
makes him a hero).
***************************************************************************
* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
***************************************************************************
Comments: Authenticated sender is <gdighton@mail.elite.net>
From: "Garth Dighton" <gdighton@elite.net>
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 14:58:17 +0000
Subject: Re: Ars Magica --> Hero
Priority: normal
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 37
On 2 Aug 97 at 21:03, Stephen B. Mann wrote:
> > From: Eric Burns <burns@usmcug.usm.maine.edu>
[SNIP]
>
> > If Jane had a Rego of 15 and a Mentum of 0, or a Rego of 0 and a Mentum of
> > 15, she could still do this effect. Therefore, you should let the PC pay
> > for the effect with END from either or both reserves, however he/she wants
> > to.
>
> I don't recall seeing this in Ars (must not have read it well
> enough). So, some one with no skill in fire (ignem 0) can still do fire
> spells? Gee, I dunno....
Actually, in Ars Magica, you can. There is a difference between Ignem
0 and not having Ignem at all. Beginning apprentices don't have all
the Techniques and Forms yet, and it takes time (a season) to give
them basic level (i.e. 0) in the Art. On p. 267 of the 3rd
Edition Ars Magica, it says:
"For each Season of Training, your apprentice gets one Experience
Point in Magic Theory (which starts at a score of 0). He also learns
the basics in a single Art, granting him a score of 0 in that Art.
You choose the order of the Arts that your apprentice learns the
basics in. Before learning an Art, it's impossible to cast a spell
that involves that Art. Once an Art is learned, even if the score is
0, casting a spell with that Art is possible."
Beginning Wizards are assumed to have all the Arts at at least 0, but
they can distribute their initial 150 levels any way they please, so
they may continue to have scores of 0. Not having training in an Art
would be a serious Flaw for a wizard
Garth Dighton
gdighton@elite.net
X-Forwarding-Note: Was sent to herolist@october.com; forwarding to hero-l@omg.org
From: "Garth Dighton" <gdighton@elite.net>
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 14:58:17 +0000
X-To: hero-l@october.com, champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: Ars Magica --> Hero
X-Listname: Hero
Reply-To: hero-l@october.com (Multiple recipients of Hero)
X-Smtp-Ip-Host: almond.elite.net ip 205.199.220.1
X-Smtp-Mail-From: gdighton@elite.net
Comments: Authenticated sender is <gdighton@mail.elite.net>
Priority: normal
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 38
On 2 Aug 97 at 21:03, Stephen B. Mann wrote:
> > From: Eric Burns <burns@usmcug.usm.maine.edu>
[SNIP]
>
> > If Jane had a Rego of 15 and a Mentum of 0, or a Rego of 0 and a Mentum of
> > 15, she could still do this effect. Therefore, you should let the PC pay
> > for the effect with END from either or both reserves, however he/she wants
> > to.
>
> I don't recall seeing this in Ars (must not have read it well
> enough). So, some one with no skill in fire (ignem 0) can still do fire
> spells? Gee, I dunno....
Actually, in Ars Magica, you can. There is a difference between Ignem
0 and not having Ignem at all. Beginning apprentices don't have all
the Techniques and Forms yet, and it takes time (a season) to give
them basic level (i.e. 0) in the Art. On p. 267 of the 3rd
Edition Ars Magica, it says:
"For each Season of Training, your apprentice gets one Experience
Point in Magic Theory (which starts at a score of 0). He also learns
the basics in a single Art, granting him a score of 0 in that Art.
You choose the order of the Arts that your apprentice learns the
basics in. Before learning an Art, it's impossible to cast a spell
that involves that Art. Once an Art is learned, even if the score is
0, casting a spell with that Art is possible."
Beginning Wizards are assumed to have all the Arts at at least 0, but
they can distribute their initial 150 levels any way they please, so
they may continue to have scores of 0. Not having training in an Art
would be a serious Flaw for a wizard
Garth Dighton
gdighton@elite.net
From: BeerCarboy@aol.com
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 11:11:33 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 29
At Mon, Aug 4, 1997 3:35 AM EDT jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
(happyelf(sickjokedude)!) wrote:
<Snip: my own post about how Spiderman and Batman can illustrate the
difference between comic book ethics and real life ethics>
>so you'd prefer spidey not to save lives? you expect bats to be sane?
>methinks you missed the point- these are both NON-fourcolor origins!
>bats is a looney, and petey was an complete ass!
Preference has nothing to do with this, I was illustrating the difference
between the ethics of 4-color comics and reality! Within the context of
their books these characters are doing the right thing but clearly in reality
what they are doing would be ludicrous. Do you think that if Spiderman
really existed that the behavior he exhibits in the comics would be the best
way for him to discharge his ". . . great responsibility?" As for Batman
being nuts, well there has been some treatment of the idea but it has been
very superficial. Most of the characters who assert this are unreliable,
either clearly stupid or villainous; meanwhile Bats remains the only solution
for capturing many of the worst criminals. These are both four color comics
(Batman may have started out as something else but he's a four color
character now) and therefore I think we have to consider their origins to be
four-color as well.
Carter Humphrey
BeerCarboy@AOL.com
From: BeerCarboy@aol.com
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 11:20:27 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 28
At Mon, Aug 4, 1997 10:21 AM EDT susano@access.digex.net (Michael Surbrook)
wrote:
<SNIP discussion of Batman's origin>
>Now, as to Spidey saving lives. I don't think that the original poster
>was arguing agaisnt his actions as Spiderman, he was just stating they
>weren't the actions of a more 'stable' person. It comes back to "With
>great power..." Sure, Spidey could sit in a lab and do research, but he
>can't just stand around, being able to do the things that he can do,
>knowing that there are people out there that might kills someone else's
>Uncle Ben (or Aunt May). So he goes out, night after night, trying to
>(inhis own way) make the world a little safer. He takes out common
>theives and muggers, battles supervillians, gets chased by the cops and
>slamed constantly by JJ Jameson. But he never gives up (which is what
>makes him a hero).
Within the universe of the comic book he is a hero, in reality he would be a
self-indulgent little twit. He has no measurable positive effect on crime
and he has wasted not only his scientific genius (how many applications might
their be to his web fluid if he had patented it and made it generally
available) but has also found the perfect way for his powers to mean nothing
(this is an argument about if he existed in the real world, not how he should
behave in the comics). Clearly similar arguments could be made about any
major 4-color character (and despite what Batman was when Kane created him,
he is definitely four color now).
Carter Humphrey
BeerCarboy@AOL.com
From: Brian Wong <rook@sanfran.infinex.com>
Subject: Hero Web Site Returns! (fwd)
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 08:31:34 -0700 (PDT)
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 30
Hello;
I thought this might be of interest. I just tested it and it worked
for me. So at least my name-server has it.
Forwarded message:
> From fuzion-owner@pjh.org Mon Aug 4 07:31:23 1997
> From: HeroGames@aol.com
> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 10:09:07 -0400 (EDT)
> Message-ID: <970804100905_-723252330@emout14.mail.aol.com>
> To: fuzion@pjh.org
> Subject: Hero Web Site Returns!
> Reply-To: fuzion@pjh.org
> Sender: fuzion-owner@pjh.org
> Precedence: list
>
> Yes, it's finally back up! Go to www.herogames.com to check it out. Lots of
> new stuff!
>
> We'll be away at GenCon most of this week, so we won't be updating it until
> after this week. But check in regularly; we'll have lots of things to post!
>
> -- Steve Peterson
>
> # The Fuzion Mailing List -- Hosted by PJH.ORG -- fuzion@pjh.org
> # To unsubscribe, send mail to lists@pjh.org.
>
From: Brian Wong <rook@sanfran.infinex.com>
Subject: Re: PBEM games.
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 09:19:54 -0700 (PDT)
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 35
>
> am currently looking for information any Fuzion or Hero System
> related PBEM games.
>
> And second, I would actually like to analyse a few so I can
> eventually start one of my own. So that I can find out what utilities
> are needed to make such a game run smoothly.
Hmm. I'm in the same boat as you. I would love to run a PBeM Champs
game. I make a much better GM than player. (15 years as GM, but less than 20
sessions ever as player... I've never quite gotten the hang of it...)
Since I know there's a snowballs chance in hell of being around at
the right time when a PBeM gets anounced... I'd like to know which one's
take Lurkers, and which one's have GM's that show their inner workings.
With 15 years as a table top GM, I still have 0 experience in
the PBeM medium. But I think my plots would go over easier there.
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 12:37:54 -0400 (EDT)
X-Sender: jprins@interhop.net
From: jprins@interhop.net (John and Ron Prins)
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 32
>Within the universe of the comic book he is a hero, in reality he would be a
>self-indulgent little twit. He has no measurable positive effect on crime
Yeah, never mind that he's saved the world dozens of times (though that
easily applies to every superhero) and has saved hundreds of lives over his
career as Spiderman. Nothing important :-).
>and he has wasted not only his scientific genius (how many applications might
>their be to his web fluid if he had patented it and made it generally
>available)
Well, he probably would have gotten rich and famous, that's for sure.
> but has also found the perfect way for his powers to mean nothing
>(this is an argument about if he existed in the real world, not how he should
>behave in the comics).
Huh? Excuse me, but given the combinations of A.) Super Strength, B.) Super
Agility, C.) Stick-to-Walls and D.) Spidey Sense, what other job is Spidey
qualified for? Manual labour? Sports? Either one would mean less to the
world than fighting supervillians - and anything else you could mention
(rescue, etc.) can easily fall under the term 'superhero'. Unless you'd like
Spidey to be some army's supersoldier.
Of course, Parker's intellect (probably) has nothing to do with his powers.
And in the 4 color genre, super-scientists never have any effect on the real
world anyway (there's another convention) - as the stuff they produce gets
stolen, destroyed, used up, monopolized, etc., etc. Also, most of the
so-called super science is so esoteric that it never has an effect on the
world market (Reed Richards opens a gate to the Negative Zone. Whee! Why
can't Reed build something useful like a cheap electronic mosquito repellant?).
Actually, the 4-color convention for super-science should be as follows:
"If you build/discover something with altruistic goals in mind, your
device/discovery will be stolen, lost, or destroyed beyond recovery. Only if
you hoard your high-technology do you get to keep it."
Which shows you why Spidey doesn't spend all day in the lab (somebody would
just swipe/destroy his work) and doesn't market his web fluid (he'd lose the
patents to crooked lawyers or wicked buisinessmen).
Anyway, it only takes the first time for a superhero to be convinced that
his 'career choice' is a worthwhile one - the dialogue goes like this:
"Gosh, if I hadn't have been here, nobody would have stopped Doctor
Demonicus from completing his Doomsday Device and destroying the world!"
Which, while patently false in a 4 color universe (somebody always shows up
to stop those world destroying plots), is nonetheless valid from the hero's
perspective.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"HEY! Give my nuclear warhead RIGHT BACK!!"
-Gold Digger #35
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
John D. Prins
jprins@interhop.net
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 10:32:44 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Reply-To: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: PBEM games.
Cc: champ-l@omg.org
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 33
Brian Wong writes:
>
> Hmm. I'm in the same boat as you. I would love to run a PBeM Champs
> game. I make a much better GM than player. (15 years as GM, but less than
> 20 sessions ever as player... I've never quite gotten the hang of it...)
>
> Since I know there's a snowballs chance in hell of being around at
> the right time when a PBeM gets anounced... I'd like to know which one's
> take Lurkers, and which one's have GM's that show their inner workings.
> With 15 years as a table top GM, I still have 0 experience in
> the PBeM medium. But I think my plots would go over easier there.
As a rule, the easiest way to learn about PBeM game-mastering is to try doing
it; you'll probably make some mistakes at first, but the problems associated
with GMing aren't the same as the players have anyway.
The big difficulty with PBeM gaming is always turnaround time; people can't
just instantly respond to one another's actions, like they do in face-to-face
gaming. This will particularly mangle combat, but can cause problems whenever
people are going to be responding to one another's actions.
From: HeroGames@aol.com
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 15:21:57 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Hero Games Web Site Returns!
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 36
The Hero Games web site is finally back in operation at www.herogames.com.
Now we'll be able to update it regularly. You'll find a number of new things
on there already, such as some 4th Edition Hero System versions of New
Millennium characters. We are now set up to take credit card orders; ordering
information is up there.
After GEN CON this weekend, we'll be putting up more new material... but give
us a chance to recover first.
We hope to see all Hero fans at GEN CON; stop by our booth and say hi, or
check out one of our seminars.
-- Steve Peterson
Hero Games
From: BeerCarboy@aol.com
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 1997 18:54:41 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 39
At Mon, Aug 4, 1997 1:45 PM EDT jprins@interhop.net (John and Ron Prins)
wrote:
>Of course, Parker's intellect (probably) has nothing to do with his powers.
>And in the 4 color genre, super-scientists never have any effect on the real
>world anyway (there's another convention) - as the stuff they produce gets
>stolen, destroyed, used up, monopolized, etc., etc. Also, most of the
>so-called super science is so esoteric that it never has an effect on the
>world market (Reed Richards opens a gate to the Negative Zone. Whee! Why
>can't Reed build something useful like a cheap electronic mosquito
repellant?)
Within the real world I would think that there would be considerable good to
come from a full scale analysis of how he obtained his powers. And in the
4-color world what you say is absolutely true, which is why I used this as a
means to demonstrate the difference between that world and ours . . .
Carter Humphrey
BeerCarboy@AOL.com
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 13:13:33 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 42
At 09:35 AM 8/4/97 -0400, you wrote:
>In the 1542 Japan game that I'm in, one of the PCs was a farmer while the
>rest of us were samurai. After a while, the player complained about not
>having any armor, getting stuck with all the dirty jobs and not having any
>say in anything. Our response? "Hey, wake up dude! Your playing a
>character from the bottom third of the social scale, we *don't* have to do
>anything for you, PC or not!" And if the PC took offense and picked a
>fight, we were perfectly in our own right (ie abiding by the genre
>conventions of the game) to cut him down like the mad dog that he was.
>Needless to say, thay player never did acheive clue and left that game.
>
see, in the real world, martial arts evolved to kick the crud out of uppity
saamurai like that- in a good game, you would have given the character
depth- instead of just using the genre as such a cop-out.
>***************************************************************************
>* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
>* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
>* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
>* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
>***************************************************************************
>
>
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 13:17:20 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 41
At 09:46 AM 8/4/97 -0400, you wrote:
>First of all, I'd like to point out that batman was created backl in 1939,
>*way* before the establishment of the 'classic' 4-color genre. In his
>first appearences Bats killed a few of his foes (or, at least, didn't try
>and stop them form having a fatal accident). So, I (amazingly enough)
>have to agree with Mr. Jones/Happyelf here.
>
horray!!
>But, Spiderman came about in the early Sixties (1961? 1963?) When the
>4-color genre was at it's height. Heck, one can even make a case that it
>was just really getting started (if your a major Marvel fan anyway)! So,
>I'd say Spiderman's origin is classic 4-color.
>
well, we could argue that this sort of "penitant once was snob"
is a kinda self-righteous origin. . .
>Now, as to Spidey saving lives. I don't think that the original poster
>was arguing agaisnt his actions as Spiderman, he was just stating they
>weren't the actions of a more 'stable' person. It comes back to "With
>great power..." Sure, Spidey could sit in a lab and do research, but he
>can't just stand around, being able to do the things that he can do,
>knowing that there are people out there that might kills someone else's
>Uncle Ben (or Aunt May). So he goes out, night after night, trying to
>(inhis own way) make the world a little safer. He takes out common
>theives and muggers, battles supervillians, gets chased by the cops and
>slamed constantly by JJ Jameson. But he never gives up (which is what
>makes him a hero).
>
and is that 4-color genre? i think not, but that's just my opinion.
>***************************************************************************
>* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
>* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
>* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
>* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
>***************************************************************************
>
>
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 13:20:36 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 40
At 11:20 AM 8/4/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Within the universe of the comic book he is a hero, in reality he would be a
>self-indulgent little twit. He has no measurable positive effect on crime
>and he has wasted not only his scientific genius (how many applications might
>their be to his web fluid if he had patented it and made it generally
>available) but has also found the perfect way for his powers to mean nothing
>(this is an argument about if he existed in the real world, not how he should
>behave in the comics). Clearly similar arguments could be made about any
>major 4-color character (and despite what Batman was when Kane created him,
>he is definitely four color now).
>
>Carter Humphrey
>
>
yes, but are they valid? this is a guy in a reality
replete with *other* supers- and he's saveed thousands
of lives beating said others up!
and btw, as fer crime? every little bit helps. . .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> BeerCarboy@AOL.com
>
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 13:25:47 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 43
At 11:11 AM 8/4/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Preference has nothing to do with this, I was illustrating the difference
>between the ethics of 4-color comics and reality! Within the context of
>their books these characters are doing the right thing but clearly in reality
>what they are doing would be ludicrous. Do you think that if Spiderman
>really existed that the behavior he exhibits in the comics would be the best
>way for him to discharge his ". . . great responsibility?" As for Batman
>being nuts, well there has been some treatment of the idea but it has been
>very superficial. Most of the characters who assert this are unreliable,
>either clearly stupid or villainous; meanwhile Bats remains the only solution
>for capturing many of the worst criminals.
and spidey, being superhuman, is a *more* valid example of this!
>These are both four color comics
>(Batman may have started out as something else but he's a four color
>character now) and therefore I think we have to consider their origins to be
>four-color as well.
>
>Carter Humphrey
>
>
well, at the stat of this i suggested superman ans
spiderman as modern 4-color comics. but i would
suggest that the logic behind your own argument
is very thin on ther ground, iot seems to
revolve around the idea that running round fighting
crime isn't valid: I would argu that in the "real world",
if a superhuman-type-person turned up in a city, crime would drop
greatly- this isn't shown in comics, because of one of the
princibles suggested i agree with, ie that supers don't seem able
to effect the world.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> BeerCarboy@AOL.com
>
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 13:30:55 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 45
At 01:41 PM 8/4/97 -0700, you wrote:
> Hooray on taking this off the list; but I would like to point out that
>the discussion is only on-topic when being discussed in those terms (the
>increasing prevelence of moral ambiguity in modern comics), bot when being
>discussed in terms of real-life morality and reality.
>---
>This mail was sent from the Corvallis Public Library
>
>
hello?? the current discussions seems to pivot on the 4-color genre as
compared to what "peter parker would do in real life"?
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 13:32:24 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 44
At 06:54 PM 8/4/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Within the real world I would think that there would be considerable good to
>come from a full scale analysis of how he obtained his powers. And in the
>4-color world what you say is absolutely true, which is why I used this as a
>means to demonstrate the difference between that world and ours . . .
>
so you're suggesting that, despite the fac super-scientists
can't duplicate powers very often at all, real world scientists could?
>Carter Humphrey
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> BeerCarboy@AOL.com
>
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 00:10:37 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
X-Sender: susano@access1.digex.net
Reply-To: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 47
On Tue, 5 Aug 1997 jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
> At 09:35 AM 8/4/97 -0400, you wrote:
> >In the 1542 Japan game that I'm in, one of the PCs was a farmer while the
> >rest of us were samurai. After a while, the player complained about not
> >having any armor, getting stuck with all the dirty jobs and not having any
> >say in anything. Our response? "Hey, wake up dude! Your playing a
> >character from the bottom third of the social scale, we *don't* have to do
> >anything for you, PC or not!" And if the PC took offense and picked a
> >fight, we were perfectly in our own right (ie abiding by the genre
> >conventions of the game) to cut him down like the mad dog that he was.
> >Needless to say, thay player never did acheive clue and left that game.
>
> see, in the real world, martial arts evolved to kick the crud out of uppity
> saamurai like that- in a good game, you would have given the character
> depth- instead of just using the genre as such a cop-out.
Excuse me? Jones, in the *real world* martial arts developed as a means
of self defense *and* warfare. And technically, the unarmed fighting
arts that non-samurai developed to defend themselves from armed and
belligerent samurai would really take off for another 100 years (when
the social structure got locked into place by the Tokugawa Shogunate)
We weren't 'uppity', we were trying to play by the established conventions
of the genre. Ie. as samurai we had certain rights and should attempt to
behaive in a certain way. I'd also like to point out it is not *my* job
as PC to give someone else's character depth, nor is it the GM's. The
GM's job is to present adventures and situations that will allow me (and
the other players) to role player our characters in accordance to the
personalities given the characters. Therefore establishing depth. If a
particular player doesn't do anything of the sort, whose fault is it?
And abiding by genre conventions is not a 'cop-out'. It is doing just
that, role-playing your character withing the conventions and boundries
described by the campaign. If I've paid the points for kirisutogomen (the
right of a samurai to kill anyone of a lower class) and someone (even
another PC who is playing a farmer) offends my character, then I should
cut that person down. To *not* do so is delibertly ignoring the whole
nature of the game. Now, granted, not every samurai is/was that touchy,
and my PC wouldn't just indiscriminatly hack down people, but at one point
(after I got sick of the famer player's whining) I did tell the GM, "If he
keeps this up, I'm gonna kill him."
If the GM states that 'x' is a fact of life in his game, then to ignore
'x' is a 'cop-out'. Abiding by 'x' is roleplaying.
And prime examples of 'x'?
In a four color game, I'd say it is "Heroes do not Kill"
In a 50's SF game? "All aliens are bug-eyed monsters who want our women"
In a modern horror game? "Any one can die at any time"
In a Dark Champions game? "There are no good guys and no bad guys. There
are just scum, the cops, and innocent people. And sometimes,
these groups cross boundies"
In the feudal Japan game? "Ninja are myths, and samurai can get away with
murder"
Genre conventions are called such because they define the setting (ie, the
genre).
Thus, in most supers games, *everyone* with superpowers wears a mask,
looks good in tights and stops aging somewhere between 25 and 35.
In a martial arts game, *everyone* is a martial artist (allow me to repeat
myself - *everyone*!). If its an anime martial arts game, everyone can
jump over the horizion too.
If its a Call of Cuthulhu game (or any other horror setting) guns won't
stop the monster, any one who goes off alone probably won't come back and
reading that strange book you found is probably bad for you... *very* bad.
I think I should stop now, since I'm obviously beginning to ramble...
BTW: Does anyone other than Jones have any thoughts on my opinions?
***************************************************************************
*"'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
***************************************************************************
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 00:13:28 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 46
On Tue, 5 Aug 1997 jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
> >But, Spiderman came about in the early Sixties (1961? 1963?) When the
> >4-color genre was at it's height. Heck, one can even make a case that it
> >was just really getting started (if your a major Marvel fan anyway)! So,
> >I'd say Spiderman's origin is classic 4-color.
>
> well, we could argue that this sort of "penitant once was snob"
> is a kinda self-righteous origin. . .
And it's no different than Dr. Strange's (and... uh, help me here guys)
> >Now, as to Spidey saving lives. I don't think that the original poster
> >was arguing agaisnt his actions as Spiderman, he was just stating they
> >weren't the actions of a more 'stable' person. It comes back to "With
> >great power..." Sure, Spidey could sit in a lab and do research, but he
> >can't just stand around, being able to do the things that he can do,
> >knowing that there are people out there that might kills someone else's
> >Uncle Ben (or Aunt May). So he goes out, night after night, trying to
> >(inhis own way) make the world a little safer. He takes out common
> >theives and muggers, battles supervillians, gets chased by the cops and
> >slamed constantly by JJ Jameson. But he never gives up (which is what
> >makes him a hero).
>
> and is that 4-color genre? i think not, but that's just my opinion.
Didn't you just say that Spiderman is a prime example of a 4-color
character?
***************************************************************************
* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
***************************************************************************
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 16:26:14 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 49
At 12:10 AM 8/5/97 -0400, you wrote:
>> see, in the real world, martial arts evolved to kick the crud out of uppity
>> saamurai like that- in a good game, you would have given the character
>> depth- instead of just using the genre as such a cop-out.
>
>Excuse me? Jones, in the *real world* martial arts developed as a means
>of self defense *and* warfare. And technically, the unarmed fighting
>arts that non-samurai developed to defend themselves from armed and
>belligerent samurai would really take off for another 100 years (when
>the social structure got locked into place by the Tokugawa Shogunate)
>
so now we're comparing historical validity? the age isn't important-
i was simply suggesting a way you could have made 'farm boy' more
of a "player" in one sence of the word. And it developed as a means
of unarmed warfare- or at the very least you must admit that
this was an important rtend.
>We weren't 'uppity', we were trying to play by the established conventions
>of the genre. Ie. as samurai we had certain rights and should attempt to
>behaive in a certain way.
okay, so my statement was historically renundant, but still valid
>I'd also like to point out it is not *my* job
>as PC to give someone else's character depth, nor is it the GM's. The
>GM's job is to present adventures and situations that will allow me (and
>the other players) to role player our characters in accordance to the
>personalities given the characters. Therefore establishing depth. If a
>particular player doesn't do anything of the sort, whose fault is it?
>
It's the fault of whoever choose "farmer" as his character-
did he know what he was getting into? honestly?
>And abiding by genre conventions is not a 'cop-out'. It is doing just
>that, role-playing your character withing the conventions and boundries
>described by the campaign. If I've paid the points for kirisutogomen (the
>right of a samurai to kill anyone of a lower class) and someone (even
>another PC who is playing a farmer) offends my character, then I should
>cut that person down. To *not* do so is delibertly ignoring the whole
>nature of the game. Now, granted, not every samurai is/was that touchy,
>and my PC wouldn't just indiscriminatly hack down people, but at one point
>(after I got sick of the famer player's whining) I did tell the GM, "If he
>keeps this up, I'm gonna kill him."
>
>If the GM states that 'x' is a fact of life in his game, then to ignore
>'x' is a 'cop-out'. Abiding by 'x' is roleplaying.
>
no, useing 'X' to silence a whiner is a cop-out "hey! a real barbarian
would kill your mage to get his gold!" why if a player says it it's cheating,
but when it's part of the "genre", it's roleplaying?
>And prime examples of 'x'?
>
>In a four color game, I'd say it is "Heroes do not Kill"
>
>In a 50's SF game? "All aliens are bug-eyed monsters who want our women"
>
what about the ones that prefer men?
>In a modern horror game? "Any one can die at any time"
>
anyone can get killed by the GM at any time-
>In a Dark Champions game? "There are no good guys and no bad guys. There
> are just scum, the cops, and innocent people. And sometimes,
> these groups cross boundies"
>
i would argue that this is 'false'- as in it isn't true, so much
as this is the twisted, cynical attitude expoused by the players, which isn't
any more valid than captain whitebread's view- otherwise, the '4-color hero
arging like spidey does with punnny' type thing is just comic relief with the chronically naieve- where it should be a battle of ideology of sorts, IMHHO. .
>In the feudal Japan game? "Ninja are myths, and samurai can get away with
> murder"
>
the problem is some of these are "facts", some are simply what the PC's ect believe-
i really think the two should be kinda put in different categories. . .
>Genre conventions are called such because they define the setting (ie, the
>genre).
>
>Thus, in most supers games, *everyone* with superpowers wears a mask,
>looks good in tights and stops aging somewhere between 25 and 35.
>
really? seeing as we play hero, we shouldn't (and aren't) limited by this-
but does that mean our games aren't four color? Did the ancient one
count as having super-powers? how about professor x?
>In a martial arts game, *everyone* is a martial artist (allow me to repeat
>myself - *everyone*!). If its an anime martial arts game, everyone can
>jump over the horizion too.
>
u-huh? well. . .i'll let this past- i find many different genres,
i spose a 'ninja battle' is more of a superheroic genre. .
>If its a Call of Cuthulhu game (or any other horror setting) guns won't
>stop the monster, any one who goes off alone probably won't come back and
>reading that strange book you found is probably bad for you... *very* bad.
>
i completly agree- but in this one. . it's best the PC's don't know this. .
>I think I should stop now, since I'm obviously beginning to ramble...
>BTW: Does anyone other than Jones have any thoughts on my opinions?
>
*sigh* does it have to be "Jones"? I think i prefer shouty-boy. . *l*
>***************************************************************************
>*"'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
>* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
>* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
>* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
>***************************************************************************
>
>
ok, hows about i put up my ridiculously long sighnoff thingie again? choose a name,
and please forgive the chliches. . . . .
HAPPYELF!!! AKA Michael John Jones AKA DIEHARD!
lord of "How's my typing? "last of the
goofy carnage: phone: 1-800-BITEME" tough-guy heros"
look fer me in coming to a PBEM
iseek.com/ near YOU! (maybe)
TheGathering (jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au)
:->~ :-<~ B->~
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 02:19:53 -0500 (EST)
From: Tokyo Mark <bastet@iquest.net>
X-Sender: bastet@iquest7
cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 50
> Excuse me? Jones, in the *real world* martial arts developed as a means
> of self defense *and* warfare. And technically, the unarmed fighting
> arts that non-samurai developed to defend themselves from armed and
> belligerent samurai would really take off for another 100 years (when
> the social structure got locked into place by the Tokugawa Shogunate)
Well, martial arts also developed as a means of exercise and competition,
but this is correct. I have no idea where Jones gets his 'facts' from.:)
Also keep in mind, many samurai practiced empty hand martial arts when
they were developed. The truest 'anti-samurai' martial arts would
probably be the okinawan styles.
>
> We weren't 'uppity', we were trying to play by the established conventions
> of the genre. Ie. as samurai we had certain rights and should attempt to
> behaive in a certain way. I'd also like to point out it is not *my* job
> as PC to give someone else's character depth, nor is it the GM's. The
> GM's job is to present adventures and situations that will allow me (and
> the other players) to role player our characters in accordance to the
> personalities given the characters. Therefore establishing depth. If a
> particular player doesn't do anything of the sort, whose fault is it?
I agree it's the players job to make his own character 'have depth'. From
the sound of it there might have been a misunderstanding regarding genre.
This is the biggest trouble I've had running a genre game, a few people
not playing in genre can mess things up badly. That's partially why in
my wire fu chinese game I mandated all PC's would be chinese.
>
> And abiding by genre conventions is not a 'cop-out'. It is doing just
> that, role-playing your character withing the conventions and boundries
> described by the campaign. If I've paid the points for kirisutogomen (the
> right of a samurai to kill anyone of a lower class) and someone (even
> another PC who is playing a farmer) offends my character, then I should
> cut that person down. To *not* do so is delibertly ignoring the whole
> nature of the game. Now, granted, not every samurai is/was that touchy,
> and my PC wouldn't just indiscriminatly hack down people, but at one point
> (after I got sick of the famer player's whining) I did tell the GM, "If he
> keeps this up, I'm gonna kill him."
In general I dislike PC's killing PC's, even if they can. But there are
times when they ask for it.
> And prime examples of 'x'?
>
> In a four color game, I'd say it is "Heroes do not Kill"
This is pretty much true. The Punisher started as a villain, after all.
>
> In a 50's SF game? "All aliens are bug-eyed monsters who want our women"
Was it the 50's or 60's that also saw the 'Earthmen as warlike savages'
thing. I seem to recall 'The Day The Earth Stood Still' in this catagory,
but forget the year of the movie.
> Genre conventions are called such because they define the setting (ie, the
> genre).
>
> Thus, in most supers games, *everyone* with superpowers wears a mask,
> looks good in tights and stops aging somewhere between 25 and 35.
This might be true in most supers games, but most of the one's I play in
are less four color so it's not as absolute.
>
> In a martial arts game, *everyone* is a martial artist (allow me to repeat
> myself - *everyone*!). If its an anime martial arts game, everyone can
> jump over the horizion too.
This is a little like saying everyone in a supers game has superpowers,
but it's definately true. And yep, alot of anime and wirefu characters
definately have flight:)
>
> If its a Call of Cuthulhu game (or any other horror setting) guns won't
> stop the monster, any one who goes off alone probably won't come back and
> reading that strange book you found is probably bad for you... *very* bad.
I've never played Call of Cthulu the game, but this sound rights on the
money for the books.
TokyoMark
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 18:18:30 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 51
At 02:19 AM 8/5/97 -0500, you wrote:
>> Excuse me? Jones, in the *real world* martial arts developed as a means
>> of self defense *and* warfare. And technically, the unarmed fighting
>> arts that non-samurai developed to defend themselves from armed and
>> belligerent samurai would really take off for another 100 years (when
>> the social structure got locked into place by the Tokugawa Shogunate)
>
>Well, martial arts also developed as a means of exercise and competition,
>but this is correct. I have no idea where Jones gets his 'facts' from.:)
>Also keep in mind, many samurai practiced empty hand martial arts when
>they were developed. The truest 'anti-samurai' martial arts would
>probably be the okinawan styles.
>
uh-huh? i mean real martial arts!! korean!! thai!! not that fuddy japanese
bujitsu riu crud!! *l* they evolved in areas where you needed to wage war against
better armed troops- not specifically samurai, they were all swanning about on
the island. Samurai mostly dealt with weapon styles, not unarmed combat.
I don't want to get into this again- i suppose it's my word against theirs,
would it help if i changed my nick to "ninja boy"? *l*
From: mike.lehmann@mail.terminal.net (Mike Lehmann)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 01:27:41 -0800
Organization: Terminal BBS (403)327-9731
Subject: PBEM games.
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 48
-=> Quoting Brian Wong to Mike Lehmann <=-
> am currently looking for information any Fuzion or Hero System
> related PBEM games.
> And second, I would actually like to analyse a few so I can
> eventually start one of my own. So that I can find out what utilities
> are needed to make such a game run smoothly.
BW> Hmm. I'm in the same boat as you. I would love to run a PBeM Champs
BW> game. I make a much better GM than player. (15 years as GM, but less
BW> than 20 sessions ever as player... I've never quite gotten the hang of
BW> it...)
It's tough to keep it going for long. Your players are the key: a good
group keeps it rolling along, rather than sputtering and dying...
BW> Since I know there's a snowballs chance in hell of being around at
BW> the right time when a PBeM gets anounced... I'd like to know which
BW> one's take Lurkers, and which one's have GM's that show their inner
BW> workings.
Just buy Penetration Vision...
Oh, you mean the game mechanics? <g>
BW> With 15 years as a table top GM, I still have 0 experience
BW> in the PBeM medium. But I think my plots would go over easier there.
Well, I usually accept lurkers (as long as they're well-behaved ;), and
while the roster is relatively stable as is, I occasionally bring new
players into the mix.
If you're interested in either lurking or being on the waiting list, let
me know. Please include your name and address in the body of the
message, as well as a note that it's a private message.
mike.lehmann@mail.terminal.net - - - - - Justice Krewe / Enigma Watch GM
- - - - - - http://www.dfw.net/~aronhead/justice_krewe.html - - - - - -
... "Ambition is a poor excuse for not having sense enough to be lazy."
~~~ Blue Wave/386 v2.30 [NR]
RI>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Internet: mike.lehmann@mail.terminal.net <<<<<<<<<<<
The TERMINAL BBS Fidonet; 1:358/17
Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada 1:358/18
This message was processed by NetXpres (403)327-9741
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: TRandom@aol.com
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 06:51:04 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: flight & pheromones
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 52
I have two totally unrelated questions that I would appreciate some help
answering:
1) I want to create a character who is able to change (temporarily) the way
other people react to his target. I can only imagine a special effect of
magic or pheromones. Either way, it would look like this: Pheromage hits
Superguy with mysterious looking effect. As far as SG knows, nothing
happened. However, for X hours, everyone coming into contact with SG is
predisposed towards a given emotion, love, anger, or whatever. Neither SG nor
those around him should easily be able to figure out why. I'm having trouble
figuring out how do this and could use any input. Thanks.
2) In a recent campaign, our GM had some trouble resolving a situation.
During combat our mentalist (Web) mentally paralyzed a powerarmored opponent.
The target had just activated flight boosters giving him (about to give him)
200" of flight. At the time, he was approx. 200" up fighting my cyborg
(Gauntlet). It was decided that the 200" of flight thrust would continue even
though the guy in the suit couldn't control the direction. Gauntlet, wishing
not to be an accessory in this guys going into the ground like a dart and
liquifying himself, quickly grabbed the pwrarmored guy. He did so in the
hopes of directing him to the ground more like a stone skipping on water.
Gauntlet has 5" flight, clinging, 70 str, combat pilot, and acrobatics to
help him do this. Our GM broke it down into Int and Dex rolls for each 60*
turn involved, with appropriate minuses. Any comments?
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 07:15:31 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 53
On Tue, 5 Aug 1997 jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
> >> see, in the real world, martial arts evolved to kick the crud out of uppity
> >> saamurai like that- in a good game, you would have given the character
> >> depth- instead of just using the genre as such a cop-out.
> >
> >Excuse me? Jones, in the *real world* martial arts developed as a means
> >of self defense *and* warfare. And technically, the unarmed fighting
> >arts that non-samurai developed to defend themselves from armed and
> >belligerent samurai would really take off for another 100 years (when
> >the social structure got locked into place by the Tokugawa Shogunate)
>
> so now we're comparing historical validity? the age isn't important-
Yes it is! If I am trying to run a game that simulates a certain genre -
such as 1542 Japan, or Viking Iceland, or post-Civil War Wild West, then
the age is important. Unless you are running a purely 'cinematic' game
the age help define the type of characters, the mentality of some people,
your equipment and the genreal technology level.
> i was simply suggesting a way you could have made 'farm boy' more
> of a "player" in one sence of the word. And it developed as a means
> of unarmed warfare- or at the very least you must admit that
> this was an important rtend.
And the farmer *was* a 125 point master of the martial arts. And having
combat skill doesn't make one 'more' of a player, interaction does.
> >I'd also like to point out it is not *my* job
> >as PC to give someone else's character depth, nor is it the GM's. The
> >GM's job is to present adventures and situations that will allow me (and
> >the other players) to role player our characters in accordance to the
> >personalities given the characters. Therefore establishing depth. If a
> >particular player doesn't do anything of the sort, whose fault is it?
>
> It's the fault of whoever choose "farmer" as his character-
> did he know what he was getting into? honestly?
It was explained to him. And the other PC who didn't know much asked
questions first. And after being told, "You're going to play a 'farmer',
you do know we all get to tell you what to do?" he did it anyway.
> >And abiding by genre conventions is not a 'cop-out'. It is doing just
> >that, role-playing your character withing the conventions and boundries
> >described by the campaign. If I've paid the points for kirisutogomen (the
> >right of a samurai to kill anyone of a lower class) and someone (even
> >another PC who is playing a farmer) offends my character, then I should
> >cut that person down. To *not* do so is delibertly ignoring the whole
> >nature of the game. Now, granted, not every samurai is/was that touchy,
> >and my PC wouldn't just indiscriminatly hack down people, but at one point
> >(after I got sick of the famer player's whining) I did tell the GM, "If he
> >keeps this up, I'm gonna kill him."
>
> >If the GM states that 'x' is a fact of life in his game, then to ignore
> >'x' is a 'cop-out'. Abiding by 'x' is roleplaying.
>
> no, useing 'X' to silence a whiner is a cop-out "hey! a real barbarian
> would kill your mage to get his gold!" why if a player says it it's cheating,
> but when it's part of the "genre", it's roleplaying?
Allo w me to clairify. If you're such a student of Japanese history and
martial arts then you should understand the circumstances in which a
samurai could excercise the right of kirisutogomen, right? Well after
telling the farmer to do 'x' (move some dead bodies, something a samurai
would *never* do) the player said (effectivly) 'Hell no'. In the real
world (and that's what we are playing here, he probably would have ended
up dead. If this was 18th C England and I was a lord and he was a
commoner, he would have been whipped.
Now, delibertly atatcking another PC smacks of the infantile D&D mentality
I always heard about where any game would dissolve into PCs (regardless of
alignment) killing each other off. And is it genre for the 'barbarian' to
hack down a mage for his gold? I'd say no, it's more in genre for the
barbarian to avoid the mage like he was a plague bearer.
> >And prime examples of 'x'?
> >
> >In a four color game, I'd say it is "Heroes do not Kill"
> >
> >In a 50's SF game? "All aliens are bug-eyed monsters who want our women"
>
> what about the ones that prefer men?
Shall I rephrase this to "90 percent of the time 'x' means"?
> >In a modern horror game? "Any one can die at any time"
>
> anyone can get killed by the GM at any time-
Yes. But only in certain horror games does it usually happen
indiscriminatly. You don't see people dropping like flies in 4-color
games do you?
> >In a Dark Champions game? "There are no good guys and no bad guys. There
> > are just scum, the cops, and innocent people. And sometimes,
> > these groups cross boundies"
>
> i would argue that this is 'false'- as in it isn't true, so much
> as this is the twisted, cynical attitude expoused by the players, which isn't
> any more valid than captain whitebread's view- otherwise, the '4-color hero
> arging like spidey does with punnny' type thing is just comic relief
with the chronically naieve- where it should be a battle of ideology of
sorts, IMHHO. .
And I would argue that the Punusher I remeber (late 80s) had this *exact*
world view.
> >Genre conventions are called such because they define the setting (ie, the
> >genre).
> >
> >Thus, in most supers games, *everyone* with superpowers wears a mask,
> >looks good in tights and stops aging somewhere between 25 and 35.
>
> really? seeing as we play hero, we shouldn't (and aren't) limited by this-
> but does that mean our games aren't four color? Did the ancient one
> count as having super-powers? how about professor x?
Okay, 1) note I worte 'most supers games' and 2) would it help if I put
'most' in front of 'everyone'?
> >In a martial arts game, *everyone* is a martial artist (allow me to repeat
> >myself - *everyone*!). If its an anime martial arts game, everyone can
> >jump over the horizion too.
>
> u-huh? well. . .i'll let this past- i find many different genres,
> i spose a 'ninja battle' is more of a superheroic genre. .
Having watched a whole slew of HK films I can say that yes, certain HK
martial arts films are virtually indistinguishable from a super hero
battle.
***************************************************************************
* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
***************************************************************************
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 97 08:06:12 -0400
x-sender: DFair@pop.worldweb.net
From: David Fair <DFair@sdslink.com>
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 55
>>Of course, Parker's intellect (probably) has nothing to do with his powers.
Not to be a futz here, but didn't they say one time that Parker is only a
genius (as in real-world genius) and that the knowledge of how to make
the web-fluid was somehow linked to his gaining of his spider-powers?
Sort-of a "genetic memory" passed on via the radioactive arachnoid?
The popularity of Windows surged in 1995, when |
Microsoft began shipping Windows 95, which | David A. Fair
included many innovations that the Macintosh | SDS International
had introduced 10 years earlier. | dfair@sdslink.com
- Reuters, Friday, July 18, 1997 |
Cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: flight & pheromones
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 1-5,7,9-25,27,29,31,33,35-36,38,40,42-44,46,49-53
From: dwtoomey@juno.com (David W Toomey)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 08:19:03 EDT
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 57
>1) I want to create a character who is able to change (temporarily) the
way
>other people react to his target. I can only imagine a special effect of
>magic or pheromones. Either way, it would look like this: Pheromage hits
>Superguy with mysterious looking effect. As far as SG knows, nothing
>happened. However, for X hours, everyone coming into contact with SG is
>predisposed towards a given emotion, love, anger, or whatever. Neither
SG nor
>those around him should easily be able to figure out why. I'm having
trouble
>figuring out how do this and could use any input. Thanks.
Not cheap, but:
?d6 Mind Control
Emotions Only (-1/2)
Doesn't affect initial target (-1/4)
Sticky (to affect others on contact)
invis to mental group (Not using TUM rules, this makes it unnoticed)
Y Charges, continuing X hours
Plug in ?, X, Y to fit your budget...
>2) In a recent campaign, our GM had some trouble resolving a situation.
>During combat our mentalist (Web) mentally paralyzed a powerarmored
>opponent. The target had just activated flight boosters giving him
(about to
>give him) 200" of flight. At the time, he was approx. 200" up fighting
my cyborg
>(Gauntlet). It was decided that the 200" of flight thrust would continue
even
>though the guy in the suit couldn't control the direction. Gauntlet,
wishing
>not to be an accessory in this guys going into the ground like a dart
and
>liquifying himself, quickly grabbed the pwrarmored guy. He did so in the
>hopes of directing him to the ground more like a stone skipping on
water.
>Gauntlet has 5" flight, clinging, 70 str, combat pilot, and acrobatics
to
>help him do this. Our GM broke it down into Int and Dex rolls for each
60*
>turn involved, with appropriate minuses. Any comments?
Works for me. I would have just had an acrobatics roll, with perhaps
combat pilot
as complimentary, when he started this maneuver, and at first impact. I
think the other way was too mechanics-heavy, but it apparently worked,
and each group is different on how precise you want to be.
David W Toomey
dwtoomey@juno.com
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 07:07:23 -0600
From: Curtis Gibson <Mhoram@apeleon.net>
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Michael Surbrook wrote:
>
> > At 09:35 AM 8/4/97 -0400, you wrote:
> > >In the 1542 Japan game that I'm in, one of the PCs was a farmer while the
> > >rest of us were samurai. After a while, the player complained about not
> > >having any armor, getting stuck with all the dirty jobs and not having any
> > >say in anything. Our response? "Hey, wake up dude! Your playing a
> > >character from the bottom third of the social scale, we *don't* have to do
> > >anything for you, PC or not!" And if the PC took offense and picked a
> > >fight, we were perfectly in our own right (ie abiding by the genre
> > >conventions of the game) to cut him down like the mad dog that he was.
> > >Needless to say, thay player never did acheive clue and left that game.
>
> We weren't 'uppity', we were trying to play by the established conventions
> of the genre. Ie. as samurai we had certain rights and should attempt to
> behaive in a certain way. I'd also like to point out it is not *my* job
> as PC to give someone else's character depth, nor is it the GM's. The
> GM's job is to present adventures and situations that will allow me (and
> the other players) to role player our characters in accordance to the
> personalities given the characters. Therefore establishing depth. If a
> particular player doesn't do anything of the sort, whose fault is it?
>
(lots of good genre examples snipped)
> I think I should stop now, since I'm obviously beginning to ramble...
> BTW: Does anyone other than Jones have any thoughts on my opinions?
I can understand your points and agree with them. What I would have
considered bad on the part of the other players and GM, is IF the player
of the farmer had devoloped the character specifically to be a 'peasant
hero' type and had talked to the GM (and/or other players) beforehand,
to do just that. Don't know how that is historically, most of my info on
that Era of Japan comes from novels, usually bad ones 8).
I do consider it part of the GMs job to give a character depth. When the
GM and player create/roll up a character in the GMs world, it's part of
the GM's job (as I see it) to help that character have depth in the
campaign world. Tying in pieces of history and character the planned
adventures, and the world background. I probably would have tried to
find a thing or two that the peasant type could do by dint of his
station that socially the Samuria couldn't/wouldn't that would have been
exciting and interesting for the farmer. That approach would work with a
mature gamer, but by other description the peasant player didn't fit
that definition.
You said you wanted other opinions 8)
>
> ***************************************************************************
> *"'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
> * Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
> * Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
> * Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
> ***************************************************************************
--
-Mhoram
Why is it a penny for your thoughts, but you have to put your
two cents in. Somebody's makin' a penny somewhere. -Stephen Wright
Mhoram's Fantasy Hero Domain:
http://apeleon.net/~mhoram/hero/FHsplash1.htm
From: boaters@ix.netcom.com
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 10:00:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Michael Surbrook wrote:
> Excuse me? Jones, in the *real world* martial arts developed as a
> means
> of self defense *and* warfare. And technically, the unarmed fighting
> arts that non-samurai developed to defend themselves from armed and
> belligerent samurai would really take off for another 100 years (when
> the social structure got locked into place by the Tokugawa Shogunate)
>
> We weren't 'uppity', we were trying to play by the established
> conventions
> of the genre. Ie. as samurai we had certain rights and should attempt
> to
> behaive in a certain way. I'd also like to point out it is not *my*
> job
> as PC to give someone else's character depth, nor is it the GM's. The
>
> GM's job is to present adventures and situations that will allow me
> (and
> the other players) to role player our characters in accordance to the
> personalities given the characters. Therefore establishing depth. If
> a
> particular player doesn't do anything of the sort, whose fault is it?
>
> And abiding by genre conventions is not a 'cop-out'. It is doing just
>
> that, role-playing your character withing the conventions and
> boundries
> described by the campaign. If I've paid the points for kirisutogomen
> (the
> right of a samurai to kill anyone of a lower class) and someone (even
> another PC who is playing a farmer) offends my character, then I
> should
> cut that person down. To *not* do so is delibertly ignoring the whole
>
> nature of the game. Now, granted, not every samurai is/was that
> touchy,
> and my PC wouldn't just indiscriminatly hack down people, but at one
> point
> (after I got sick of the famer player's whining) I did tell the GM,
> "If he
> keeps this up, I'm gonna kill him."
>
> If the GM states that 'x' is a fact of life in his game, then to
> ignore
> 'x' is a 'cop-out'. Abiding by 'x' is roleplaying.
>
> And prime examples of 'x'?
>
> In a four color game, I'd say it is "Heroes do not Kill"
>
> In a 50's SF game? "All aliens are bug-eyed monsters who want our
> women"
>
> In a modern horror game? "Any one can die at any time"
>
> In a Dark Champions game? "There are no good guys and no bad guys.
> There
> are just scum, the cops, and innocent people. And sometimes,
> these groups cross boundies"
>
> In the feudal Japan game? "Ninja are myths, and samurai can get away
> with
> murder"
>
> Genre conventions are called such because they define the setting (ie,
> the
> genre).
>
> Thus, in most supers games, *everyone* with superpowers wears a mask,
> looks good in tights and stops aging somewhere between 25 and 35.
>
> In a martial arts game, *everyone* is a martial artist (allow me to
> repeat
> myself - *everyone*!). If its an anime martial arts game, everyone
> can
> jump over the horizion too.
>
> If its a Call of Cuthulhu game (or any other horror setting) guns
> won't
> stop the monster, any one who goes off alone probably won't come back
> and
> reading that strange book you found is probably bad for you... *very*
> bad.
>
> I think I should stop now, since I'm obviously beginning to ramble...
> BTW: Does anyone other than Jones have any thoughts on my opinions?
>
> *******************************************************************
> *******
> *"'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano
> Orbatos,Orion *
> * Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
> * Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
> * Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of
> St.Mark *
> *********
> *****************************************************************
While my knowledge is limited in the Japan area I do know that had
you not killed him and I was the gm you would have been shamed/and or
removed from your position if anyone important ever found out that you
took that cr** from a farmer.
The reason that we role play in different genres are so that we can get
into the feel of what it was like to live back then or in a sci-fi or
fantasy realm. If you do not follow the "rules of that world" then it
is not truly that type of genre but a warped version of it.
I have to agree with Michael on this one.
Darin
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 10:16:18 -0400
X-Sender: absga@elbertonga.com
From: Patrick Barden <absga@elbertonga.com>
Subject: Eat it?
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Feedback needed.
How much of a disadvantage would you place on a power that had as its
delivery that it must be consumed. I have my own ideas but I want to et
some other peoples perspectives. I am trying to duplicate the effct of
potions that must be drunk to take effect.
Another question. How much would you limit a power that requires the
presence of an object but not the possession of it? (ie. A character whose
powers require a mirror as a focus but need not be in contact with the
mirror to use the power.)
Suggestions appreciated
Patrick B.
From: BeerCarboy@aol.com
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 10:19:53 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At Tue, Aug 5, 1997 3:25 AM EDT jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
>>Within the real world I would think that there would be considerable good
to
>>come from a full scale analysis of how he obtained his powers. And in the
>>4-color world what you say is absolutely true, which is why I used this as
a
>>means to demonstrate the difference between that world and ours . . .
>so you're suggesting that, despite the fac super-scientists
>can't duplicate powers very often at all, real world scientists could?
Absolutely, the principles that science can explain most reproducible
phenomena given sufficient data and that science itself is reproducible is
another one of those things that separates comic-book reality from our
reality. More importantly than reproducing his powers though are the
scientific discoveries that would cascade from a serious study of Spiderman
as a phenomenon, again something that doesn't happen in comic book science.
Earlier there was some discussion on whether PP could get rich from the
patenting of web fluid, but my feeling was that even if he could not more
good would come from his patenting and making it available than comes from
his swinging about the city trapping folks in it, at least in the real world
this would be true. Obviously, within the comix themselves what he is doing
is quite clearly correct.
Carter Humphrey
BeerCarboy@AOL.com
From: boaters@ix.netcom.com
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 10:20:03 -0400
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Just as a side note about killing in campaigns.
I think that a character that would instantly kill another should not be
allowed in a campaign, however, a character that has a reason and a long
plot that works well with the gm's campaign can add quite a bit of
spice.
examples
In Lupin there is a samauri character that protects him and fights with
him, because he wishes to be the one that kills Lupin
In a Dark Sun campaign we had a halfling that traveled with us and
fought with us. We thought of him as a friend buy what he was doing was
trying to get us to become legends, so he would spread stories in each
of the city states of our great doings. Little did we know that his
ultimate goal and mission was to bring back some heroes to his village
for dinner. (Yes, to eat us) This worked even though his eventual goal
was to kill us because he wished to work us up from the ground so that
we would not expect anything.
In a Rifts campaign that I ran I had an Atlantean Udead Slayer and a
Vampire. Normally, they would instantly go at each other throats, but I
worked with the players. The vampire, due to a spell, was human during
the day and vamp at night. The slayer could not kill one without
killing the other so he stuck so close to the vampire (making sure that
he was not making more and that the blood he got was either animal or
voluntary) that it made that part of the campaign great. The dialogue
was excellent, and they ended up saving each other almost every other
session.
I think that pcs that are out to kill other pcs are fine if you follow
some rules.
1. It can not be instant. It would be no fun if the players go at it
and kill each other in the first session.
2. It has to work with the gm's campaign. If it doesn't, not only can
it become annoying but imbalancing.
3. Hints have to be dropped if it is a subtle hatred. In the case of
the hafling a little digging gave us some clues that something was up,
but it was still up to us to keep digging, and who would think that a
companion would do that to you.
4. If the hatred it outright or known, then there has to be a reason
why he is not killed immediately.
5. Make the players right up about there crossover in backgrounds. In
detail make sure you as gm know exactly why the other person is out to
get the other. If they hate each other know both sides of the story.
It would be great if in the end the realize that niether of them killed
Mary Lou but the evil villian actually set this up from the beginning.
Just because Pcs are out to get pcs does not mean that it has to ruin
the campaign.
Darin
From: boaters@ix.netcom.com
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 10:32:02 -0400
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Curtis Gibson wrote:
>
>
> I do consider it part of the GMs job to give a character depth. When
> the
> GM and player create/roll up a character in the GMs world, it's part
> of
> the GM's job (as I see it) to help that character have depth in the
> campaign world. Tying in pieces of history and character the planned
> adventures, and the world background. I probably would have tried to
> find a thing or two that the peasant type could do by dint of his
> station that socially the Samuria couldn't/wouldn't that would have
> been
> exciting and interesting for the farmer. That approach would work with
> a
> mature gamer, but by other description the peasant player didn't fit
> that definition.
>
I think certainly that the gm has to know about the player's character
and the player should certainly know about the type of campaign that he
is getting in but if the player does not play in character, the gm
should tell him that he is not playing in character. It is not the gm's
position to go out of his way to give the character depth.
If the player does not have a good depth to the character before the
campaign ever starts it is not the gms job to give him one in the game.
Now if the character just happens to be starting and has little history
in the world as of yet then the gm should make sure that what the
character does has some effect.
ex. if the farmer was hanging around with a group of samurais then a.
he should have never spoken against them or whined, and b. there would
have been one hell of a reputation around the common folks. ("He is the
farmer that fights with the samurais.") It is up to the player to do
something with this to make actual character depth. The gm just has to
make it available.
just my opinion
Darin
From: boaters@ix.netcom.com
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 10:45:23 -0400
Subject: Re: flight & pheromones
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
TRandom@aol.com wrote:
> I have two totally unrelated questions that I would appreciate some
> help
> answering:
> 1) I want to create a character who is able to change (temporarily)
> the way
> other people react to his target. I can only imagine a special effect
> of
> magic or pheromones. Either way, it would look like this: Pheromage
> hits
> Superguy with mysterious looking effect. As far as SG knows, nothing
> happened. However, for X hours, everyone coming into contact with SG
> is
> predisposed towards a given emotion, love, anger, or whatever. Neither
> SG nor
> those around him should easily be able to figure out why. I'm having
> trouble
> figuring out how do this and could use any input. Thanks.
>
It could be a COM aid usable on others with the fade rate bought down.
Just make sure that it gets so high that no one could resist.
> 2) In a recent campaign, our GM had some trouble resolving a
> situation.
> During combat our mentalist (Web) mentally paralyzed a powerarmored
> opponent.
> The target had just activated flight boosters giving him (about to
> give him)
> 200" of flight. At the time, he was approx. 200" up fighting my cyborg
>
> (Gauntlet). It was decided that the 200" of flight thrust would
> continue even
> though the guy in the suit couldn't control the direction. Gauntlet,
> wishing
> not to be an accessory in this guys going into the ground like a dart
> and
> liquifying himself, quickly grabbed the pwrarmored guy. He did so in
> the
> hopes of directing him to the ground more like a stone skipping on
> water.
> Gauntlet has 5" flight, clinging, 70 str, combat pilot, and acrobatics
> to
> help him do this. Our GM broke it down into Int and Dex rolls for each
> 60*
> turn involved, with appropriate minuses. Any comments?
>
I think that the 5" of flight and 70 Str clinging and combat piloting
should be enough. I would make the character make two rolls. The first
would be combat piloting to land the crashing guy. (Serious minuses)
The second would be an acrobatics roll to not take the blunt of the
crash himself. (some minuses.)
Just my opinion.
Darin
From: DocTough@aol.com
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 10:57:39 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Posting Variant Skill system
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Doc sez...
Thanks for your interest, and I'll be glad to post the cendensed form of
my variant HSR Skill system.
To the member of the 'List that requested such this morning please
repost me your address, I lost it during a system disconnect from AOL while
reading it.
Look forward to seeing any of you at GenCon that are going. I'll likely
be hovering around the Hero table, GRG table, and poking my nose into any
HSR/Fuzion games. I'd also be interested in meeting to play/run a pick up
game, too.
Doc Tough
From: boaters@ix.netcom.com
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 10:59:35 -0400
Subject: Re: Eat it?
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Patrick Barden wrote:
> Feedback needed.
>
> How much of a disadvantage would you place on a power that had as its
> delivery that it must be consumed. I have my own ideas but I want to
> et
> some other peoples perspectives. I am trying to duplicate the effct
> of
> potions that must be drunk to take effect.
>
I would give it a -1/2 for potions. If potions are common then the
enemy would have enough reason to stop someone from taking one.However,
if this is a potion to be used on someone against there will then I
would make the limitation more. It really is hard to force feed someone
who does not want to do anything.
> Another question. How much would you limit a power that requires the
> presence of an object but not the possession of it? (ie. A character
> whose
> powers require a mirror as a focus but need not be in contact with the
>
> mirror to use the power.)
>
It depends on the item. I have a character that requires a light source
to use one of her powers. I think that it got a -3/4 or -1/2
limitation
> Suggestions appreciated
>
> Patrick B.
Darin
From: HeroGames@aol.com
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 11:39:01 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Hero Plus disks
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
I've received a message that someone is having a problem installing Hero Plus
disks. I've double-checked our production masters, and they work fine (as
well as a sample of disks that have been produced). We probably got a bad
disk in there, or it went bad in the shipment process.
Any bad disks will be replaced free by Hero Plus; just send 'em in and we'll
send replacements. Send them to Hero Plus, P.O. Box 699, Aptos, CA 95001-0699
with a note explaining the problem.
-- Steve Peterson, Hero Games
Subject: Re: Eat it?
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-2,4-7,9-17,21,27-28,31-37
From: dwtoomey@juno.com (David W Toomey)
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 12:21:26 EDT
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
>
>How much of a disadvantage would you place on a power that had as its
>delivery that it must be consumed. I have my own ideas but I want to
get
>some other peoples perspectives. I am trying to duplicate the effect of
>potions that must be drunk to take effect.
Fantasy Hero uses the 'Gestures' limitation, assuming you 'want' to drink
the potion
>Another question. How much would you limit a power that requires the
>presence of an object but not the possession of it? (ie. A character
>whose
>powers require a mirror as a focus but need not be in contact with the
>mirror to use the power.)
>
Denends on circumstances: i.e. Clairvoyance that requires a scrying
mirror on the wall isn't in contact with it, but I would use the same
limitations as normal. Demon summoning might require OIF/OAF Pentagram
that the caster never touches after
inscribing it. Of course, if the user does not have physical conteol of
the object, it is generally easier for others to negate/neutralize it.
To take away most foci normally requires a roll to hit at -2, but to pick
up a focus sitting on a table should be child's play. To me, this
counteracts the advantage of being able to use the focus without touching
it.
Now if you mean " I just grabbed Green Lantern's power ring and put it
on, but he's still controlling it" I don't know if that evenjustifies a
Focus limitation, perhaps a -1/4
at best..
David W Toomey
dwtoomey@juno.com
From: boaters@ix.netcom.com
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 12:49:03 -0400
Subject: 4 color super lines
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
I am trying to get my players into the four color genre with a new super
campaign that I have just started to run. So far everything has gone
well, but I also wanted to have those cheesy lines added for more fun.
The one that I always use for an example is "your *ss is grass and I'm
the lawn mower."
So far the only guy that has come up with one has been one that I had to
say no to due to the fact that it is a four color campaign. "Pray for
death" just doesn't quite fit for a character that is not supposed to
kill. (*sigh* looks like I will have to make CAK mandatory)
I thought that I would pick the minds of the list for more for both
heroes and villians.
Other than "muh ha ha ha" for villians
Darin
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 10:35:24 -0700
From: Mark Lemming <icepirat@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: 4 color super lines
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
boaters@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> I thought that I would pick the minds of the list for more for both
> heroes and villians.
>
> Other than "muh ha ha ha" for villians
I've always liked one of the Tick's quotes:
"I'm a Super-Hero! I don't want to stop crime.
I just want to Fight it!"
-Mark Lemming
From: Eric Burns <burns@cug.dorm.usm.maine.edu>
Subject: Using Shape Shift to Impersonate Others
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 14:01:27 -0400 (EDT)
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
The recent post we had about the biomorphic shapeshifter has got me
thinking about shapeshifting-type powers...
If a shapeshifter wants to be able to take the exact form of someone of
"normal" size and weight (between 4'9 and 6'6 and between 80# and 280#)
would he/she have to buy any power besides Shape Shift? Would you need
Growth, Shrinking, Density Increase, and Density Reduction (Shrinking with
mass reduction only limitation) to assume someone else's exact size and
weight? Besides disguise and mimicry, what other skills/talents/powers
would be required to pass as the person you've shapeshifted into, even
being able to pass a doctor's examination, finger printing, retinal scans,
et al?
Secondly, is there a good way to be able to adjust skills to match your
current form? For instance, M.A.W. - The Multiple Archtype Warrior can
assume the form of a ninja, barbarion, roman legionary, u.s. marine, or
any other warrior archtype throughout history, gaining the skills and
knowledge that each warrior would have. A ninja would get stealth,
acrobatics, climbing, ninjitsu, and speak fluent japanese (medieval
dialect), for instance. Is there any way other than mutiforms to do this
without running into a double stop sign?
-Eric
From: Eric Burns <burns@cug.dorm.usm.maine.edu>
Subject: Re: Eat it?
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 14:11:30 -0400 (EDT)
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
> >How much of a disadvantage would you place on a power that had as its
> >delivery that it must be consumed. I have my own ideas but I want to
> get
> >some other peoples perspectives. I am trying to duplicate the effect of
> >potions that must be drunk to take effect.
>
> Fantasy Hero uses the 'Gestures' limitation, assuming you 'want' to drink
> the potion
>
Hmm... what about poison that must be ingested? What kind of limit would
you give a 4d6k flask of hemlock? ("I drank what?!!" -Socrates)
>
> >Another question. How much would you limit a power that requires the
> >presence of an object but not the possession of it? (ie. A character
> >whose
> >powers require a mirror as a focus but need not be in contact with the
> >mirror to use the power.)
> >
> Denends on circumstances: i.e. Clairvoyance that requires a scrying
> mirror on the wall isn't in contact with it, but I would use the same
> limitations as normal. Demon summoning might require OIF/OAF Pentagram
> that the caster never touches after
> inscribing it. Of course, if the user does not have physical conteol of
> the object, it is generally easier for others to negate/neutralize it.
> To take away most foci normally requires a roll to hit at -2, but to pick
> up a focus sitting on a table should be child's play. To me, this
> counteracts the advantage of being able to use the focus without touching
> it.
>
Dave Mattingly has a rule I like in one of his Power Points articles.
It's called "Ubiquitous Focus", used to represent a focus that you can
find relatively often, but don't carry around with you. It got a -1/2,
the same as Obvious, Inaccessable.
>
> David W Toomey
> dwtoomey@juno.com
>
-Eric
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 14:18:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
X-Sender: susano@access5.digex.net
Reply-To: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
On Tue, 5 Aug 1997, Tokyo Mark wrote:
> > Excuse me? Jones, in the *real world* martial arts developed as a means
> > of self defense *and* warfare. And technically, the unarmed fighting
> > arts that non-samurai developed to defend themselves from armed and
> > belligerent samurai would really take off for another 100 years (when
> > the social structure got locked into place by the Tokugawa Shogunate)
>
> Well, martial arts also developed as a means of exercise and competition,
> but this is correct. I have no idea where Jones gets his 'facts' from.:)
Neither do I.
> Also keep in mind, many samurai practiced empty hand martial arts when
> they were developed. The truest 'anti-samurai' martial arts would
> probably be the okinawan styles.
True. As I understand it, ju-jutsu was orginally a much boader scoped art
way back in the 15th C, before 'devolving' into the more limited grappling
form seen today.
> > We weren't 'uppity', we were trying to play by the established conventions
> > of the genre. Ie. as samurai we had certain rights and should attempt to
> > behaive in a certain way. I'd also like to point out it is not *my* job
> > as PC to give someone else's character depth, nor is it the GM's. The
> > GM's job is to present adventures and situations that will allow me (and
> > the other players) to role player our characters in accordance to the
> > personalities given the characters. Therefore establishing depth. If a
> > particular player doesn't do anything of the sort, whose fault is it?
>
> I agree it's the players job to make his own character 'have depth'. From
> the sound of it there might have been a misunderstanding regarding genre.
> This is the biggest trouble I've had running a genre game, a few people
> not playing in genre can mess things up badly. That's partially why in
> my wire fu chinese game I mandated all PC's would be chinese.
Thew other problem comes from having a player seeming to ignore the
genre. The famer's player didn't really try to understand the game (a
least I didn't see him try to) and seemed adamant about not switching
thing to make his life any easier.
> > And prime examples of 'x'?
> >
> > In a four color game, I'd say it is "Heroes do not Kill"
>
> This is pretty much true. The Punisher started as a villain, after all.
As did Vigilante and a few others.
> > In a 50's SF game? "All aliens are bug-eyed monsters who want our women"
>
> Was it the 50's or 60's that also saw the 'Earthmen as warlike savages'
> thing. I seem to recall 'The Day The Earth Stood Still' in this catagory,
> but forget the year of the movie.
That was the other extreme. Films like "Day..." "Forbidden Planet" "This
Island Earth" all were variants on that theme.
> > Genre conventions are called such because they define the setting (ie, the
> > genre).
> >
> > Thus, in most supers games, *everyone* with superpowers wears a mask,
> > looks good in tights and stops aging somewhere between 25 and 35.
>
> This might be true in most supers games, but most of the one's I play in
> are less four color so it's not as absolute.
I did say 'most'.
***************************************************************************
* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
***************************************************************************
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 14:29:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
Cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
On Tue, 5 Aug 1997, Curtis Gibson wrote:
> (lots of good genre examples snipped)
>
> > I think I should stop now, since I'm obviously beginning to ramble...
> > BTW: Does anyone other than Jones have any thoughts on my opinions?
>
> I can understand your points and agree with them. What I would have
> considered bad on the part of the other players and GM, is IF the player
> of the farmer had devoloped the character specifically to be a 'peasant
> hero' type and had talked to the GM (and/or other players) beforehand,
> to do just that. Don't know how that is historically, most of my info on
> that Era of Japan comes from novels, usually bad ones 8).
The farmer PC was slowly beginning to evolve into a solider (aka
ashigaru). He was given armor and a spear and brought into the local
lord's employ. If the player had had patience (and a clue) he *could*
have eventually become a samurai, somthing that wasn't unheard of at the
time. (I mean, Hideyoshi started out as a sandal bearer).
> I do consider it part of the GMs job to give a character depth. When the
> GM and player create/roll up a character in the GMs world, it's part of
> the GM's job (as I see it) to help that character have depth in the
> campaign world. Tying in pieces of history and character the planned
> adventures, and the world background. I probably would have tried to
> find a thing or two that the peasant type could do by dint of his
> station that socially the Samuria couldn't/wouldn't that would have been
> exciting and interesting for the farmer. That approach would work with a
> mature gamer, but by other description the peasant player didn't fit
> that definition.
When I fianlly got a chance to look at the farmer's character sheet, I saw
a lot of stuff that made me ask the GM "where did he *get* this from?"
The GM said: "Hey, I got a character sheet out of him, I figured any more
was pushing it." Yeah, some people are really hard-assed about wanting
fully detailed backgrounds, but i cna understand the GM's position. And
besides, the PCs get what they pay for. If I know nothing aobut your
character, don't expect a lot of side plots involving you.
***************************************************************************
* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
***************************************************************************
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 14:34:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
On Tue, 5 Aug 1997 boaters@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> Just as a side note about killing in campaigns.
>
>
> I think that a character that would instantly kill another should not be
> allowed in a campaign, however, a character that has a reason and a long
> plot that works well with the gm's campaign can add quite a bit of
> spice.
Well, the GM wwasn't going to allow an 'instant kill', also my character
wasn't the type to just hack people down. So in the case cited there
would have been a chance for dialogue and for the farmer to fight back.
I do agree with your statements about PCs killing PCs. It is only in the
rarest of games (IMO) that such things would/could come up, and if they
do, everyone should be satisifed with the result (and made aware of what
could happen as well).
***************************************************************************
* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
***************************************************************************
From: Eric Burns <burns@cug.dorm.usm.maine.edu>
Subject: Re: flight & pheromones
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 14:46:37 -0400 (EDT)
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
> >1) I want to create a character who is able to change (temporarily) the
> way
> >other people react to his target. I can only imagine a special effect of
> >magic or pheromones. Either way, it would look like this: Pheromage hits
> >Superguy with mysterious looking effect. As far as SG knows, nothing
> >happened. However, for X hours, everyone coming into contact with SG is
> >predisposed towards a given emotion, love, anger, or whatever. Neither
> SG nor
> >those around him should easily be able to figure out why. I'm having
> trouble
> >figuring out how do this and could use any input. Thanks.
>
> Not cheap, but:
>
> ?d6 Mind Control
> Emotions Only (-1/2)
> Doesn't affect initial target (-1/4)
> Sticky (to affect others on contact)
> invis to mental group (Not using TUM rules, this makes it unnoticed)
> Y Charges, continuing X hours
>
> Plug in ?, X, Y to fit your budget...
>
How about an aid or transform to give the target the following power:
Mind Control: Nd6, AOE - Radius (+1), 0 END (+1/2), Continuous (+1),
Personal Immunity (+1/4) [+2 3/4], Always On (-1/2),
Only for command "You <emotion> me" (-1/2), Does not affect targets
without sense of smell (-1/4) [-1 1/4]
Or you could use minor transform to give the character an appropriate
25pts distinctive feature.
-Eric
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 13:33:59 -0700
From: RGSchwerdtfeger@directv.com (Richard G Schwerdtfeger)
Subject: Re[2]: 4 color super lines
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
One of my groups' favorite lines is the immortal
"We've come to kick a$$ and chew bubblegum.
And we're all out of bubblegum!"
Richard
______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: 4 color super lines
Author: Mark Lemming <icepirat@ix.netcom.com> at DTVCCGATE
Date: 8/5/97 10:35 AM
boaters@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> I thought that I would pick the minds of the list for more for both
> heroes and villians.
>
> Other than "muh ha ha ha" for villians
I've always liked one of the Tick's quotes:
"I'm a Super-Hero! I don't want to stop crime.
I just want to Fight it!"
-Mark LemmingReceived: from utilpo1.directv.com (198.205.78.115) by ccgate.directv.com with
SMTP
(IMA Internet Exchange 2.1 Enterprise) id 000310BF; Tue, 5 Aug 97 12:36:37
-0700
Received: from utilpo1.directv.com ([198.205.98.10]) by utilpo1.directv.com
(Post.Office MTA v3.1 release PO205e ID# 100-35062U100L100S0)
with SMTP id AAA188 for <RGSchwerdtfeger@directv.com&>
Tue, 5 Aug 1997 12:36:36 -0700
Received: from 192.67.184.65 ([192.67.184.65]) by utilpo1.directv.com (InterScan
E-Mail VirusWall NT)
Received: by emerald (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id NAA11585; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 13:38:41 -0400
Received: from dfw-ix15.ix.netcom.com by emerald (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id NAA11581; Tue, 5 Aug 1997 13:38:39 -0400
Received: (from smap@localhost)
by dfw-ix15.ix.netcom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4)
id MAA06182 for <champ-l@emerald.omg.org&> Tue, 5 Aug 1997 12:35:13 -0500
(CDT)
Received: from sjx-ca74-27.ix.netcom.com(207.93.129.155) by
dfw-ix15.ix.netcom.com via smap (V1.3)
id sma006006; Tue Aug 5 12:34:13 1997
Message-ID: <33E7645C.FE9154D@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 10:35:24 -0700
From: Mark Lemming <icepirat@ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.01 [en] (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: 4 color super lines
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
References: <33E7597F.59C52527@ix.netcom.com>
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 13:54:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender: bob.greenwade@klock.com
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 01:30 PM 8/5/97 +1000, jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
>At 01:41 PM 8/4/97 -0700, you wrote:
>
>> Hooray on taking this off the list; but I would like to point out that
>>the discussion is only on-topic when being discussed in those terms (the
>>increasing prevelence of moral ambiguity in modern comics), bot when being
>>discussed in terms of real-life morality and reality.
>
>hello?? the current discussions seems to pivot on the 4-color genre as
>compared to what "peter parker would do in real life"?
Ummm... None of those messages had been sent (or, at least, none were in
my mailbox) when that post was sent. The tenor of the conversation was
quite different from the current (quite appropriate) Peter Parker discussion.
---
This mail was sent from the Corvallis Public Library
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 13:54:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender: bob.greenwade@klock.com
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: 4 color super lines
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 12:49 PM 8/5/97 -0400, boaters@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>I am trying to get my players into the four color genre with a new super
>campaign that I have just started to run. So far everything has gone
>well, but I also wanted to have those cheesy lines added for more fun.
[yadda, yadda, yadda]
>I thought that I would pick the minds of the list for more for both
>heroes and villians.
>
>Other than "muh ha ha ha" for villians
I don't have any original ideas, but you can check the Supervillain Taunt
Page at http://users.intercomm.com/redwolf/scm/taunts.html for some inspiration.
---
This mail was sent from the Corvallis Public Library
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 13:54:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender: bob.greenwade@klock.com
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 06:18 PM 8/5/97 +1000, jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
>uh-huh? i mean real martial arts!! korean!! thai!! not that fuddy japanese
>bujitsu riu crud!!
'Scooz me just a sec.... Korean and Thai martial arts in 1542 Japan?
My memory of Japanese history is admittedly a bit shaky, but wasn't this
somewhere around the height of Japanese isolationism?
---
This mail was sent from the Corvallis Public Library
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 13:54:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender: bob.greenwade@klock.com
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: Eat it?
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 10:16 AM 8/5/97 -0400, Patrick Barden wrote:
>Feedback needed.
>
>How much of a disadvantage would you place on a power that had as its
>delivery that it must be consumed. I have my own ideas but I want to et
>some other peoples perspectives. I am trying to duplicate the effct of
>potions that must be drunk to take effect.
That's the basic form of an Expendable Focus.
>Another question. How much would you limit a power that requires the
>presence of an object but not the possession of it? (ie. A character whose
>powers require a mirror as a focus but need not be in contact with the
>mirror to use the power.)
Using some of the published books for bases, I'd call this specific
example an Immobile OIF (-1 1/2).
Steve Long [I pause here to wait for the boos and hisses from Certain
Persons to died down] proposed that using a "weapon of opportunity" -- that
is, picking up something that's just laying around -- would work as an OIF,
since it can be taken away but the character can still, in most cases, just
pick up another one. I'm only assuming that the mirror would be Immobile
(that is, one set on a wall); if any mirror would work, then it'd be a
regular OIF (-1/2).
In some cases, depending on the SFX, you could just call it OIF Reflection.
I hope this is somewhere at least close to what you're after. :-]
---
This mail was sent from the Corvallis Public Library
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 13:54:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender: bob.greenwade@klock.com
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: flight & pheromones
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 06:51 AM 8/5/97 -0400, TRandom@aol.com wrote:
>I have two totally unrelated questions that I would appreciate some help
>answering:
You have no idea what I thought when I saw the Subject header without
knowing what was in the actual message. :-]
>1) I want to create a character who is able to change (temporarily) the way
>other people react to his target. I can only imagine a special effect of
>magic or pheromones. Either way, it would look like this: Pheromage hits
>Superguy with mysterious looking effect. As far as SG knows, nothing
>happened. However, for X hours, everyone coming into contact with SG is
>predisposed towards a given emotion, love, anger, or whatever. Neither SG nor
>those around him should easily be able to figure out why. I'm having trouble
>figuring out how do this and could use any input. Thanks.
I'd make this a [Cumulative Major] Transform, giving the target a certain
level of Mind Control with Telepathic Command, Explosion, and 0 END
Persistent, up to the same number of Active Points as the original character
has in Transform, with Limitations for Always On (-1/4), Single Emotion
(-1), Mental Power vs CON (-1/2), and Must Be Smelled (-1/2).
>2) In a recent campaign, our GM had some trouble resolving a situation.
>During combat our mentalist (Web) mentally paralyzed a powerarmored opponent.
>The target had just activated flight boosters giving him (about to give him)
>200" of flight. At the time, he was approx. 200" up fighting my cyborg
>(Gauntlet). It was decided that the 200" of flight thrust would continue even
>though the guy in the suit couldn't control the direction. Gauntlet, wishing
>not to be an accessory in this guys going into the ground like a dart and
>liquifying himself, quickly grabbed the pwrarmored guy. He did so in the
>hopes of directing him to the ground more like a stone skipping on water.
>Gauntlet has 5" flight, clinging, 70 str, combat pilot, and acrobatics to
>help him do this. Our GM broke it down into Int and Dex rolls for each 60*
>turn involved, with appropriate minuses. Any comments?
I don't know why the INT Rolls were called for, but on the whole I'd say
it looks like the GM handled it appropriately. (Dunno what any character
would be doing with 200" of combat flight anyway.)
---
This mail was sent from the Corvallis Public Library
Date: Tue, 05 Aug 1997 14:02:17 -0700
From: Captain Spith <cptspith@teleport.com>
Reply-To: cptspith@teleport.com
Subject: Re: FISHY POWERS, PART I
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Fishy Powers Part II should be coming in about a day; My life is
teemingly busy right now with no apparent reason :-)>
Part II will deal with specific effects on Powers/Talents/Skills/etc.
--
-Capt. Spith
Savior of Humanity
Secular Messiah
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 17:21:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
On Tue, 5 Aug 1997, Bob Greenwade wrote:
> At 06:18 PM 8/5/97 +1000, jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
> >uh-huh? i mean real martial arts!! korean!! thai!! not that fuddy japanese
> >bujitsu riu crud!!
>
> 'Scooz me just a sec.... Korean and Thai martial arts in 1542 Japan?
> My memory of Japanese history is admittedly a bit shaky, but wasn't this
> somewhere around the height of Japanese isolationism?
Nope. After 1600 and the rise of Tokugawa to power did Japan seal itself
off. Still, the odds of seing anything Thai in Japan of 1542 is pretty
slim.
BTW: that should be: 'fuddy Japanese bujutsu ryu'
***************************************************************************
* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
***************************************************************************
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 18:55:34 -0400 (EDT)
X-Sender: jprins@interhop.net
From: jprins@interhop.net (John and Ron Prins)
Subject: Re: flight & pheromones
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
>>1) I want to create a character who is able to change (temporarily) the way
>>other people react to his target. I can only imagine a special effect of
>>magic or pheromones. Either way, it would look like this: Pheromage hits
>>Superguy with mysterious looking effect. As far as SG knows, nothing
>>happened. However, for X hours, everyone coming into contact with SG is
>>predisposed towards a given emotion, love, anger, or whatever. Neither SG nor
>>those around him should easily be able to figure out why. I'm having trouble
>>figuring out how do this and could use any input. Thanks.
Sounds like the advantages Continious, Uncontrolled (or Cont. Charges) and
Sticky to me. On either Transform or Mind Control. Transform would probably
be best.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"HEY! Give my nuclear warhead RIGHT BACK!!"
-Gold Digger #35
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
John D. Prins
jprins@interhop.net
From: BeerCarboy@aol.com
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 22:16:05 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At Tue, Aug 5, 1997 10:27 AM EDT boaters@ix.netcom.com wrote:
SNIP: excessively long quote.
>While my knowledge is limited in the Japan area I do know that had
>you not killed him and I was the gm you would have been shamed/and or
>removed from your position if anyone important ever found out that you
>took that cr** from a farmer.
Yes, because romance outweighs reality in our reconstructions. Besides all
Michael describe was player behavior, he did not describe what happened in
terms of role-playing, which is suspicious given the emphasis he places on
the value of roleplaying.
>The reason that we role play in different genres are so that we can get
>into the feel of what it was like to live back then or in a sci-fi or
>fantasy realm. If you do not follow the "rules of that world" then it
>is not truly that type of genre but a warped version of it.
Then you better be used to playing lowly peasants, slave laborers, oppressed
and hopeless people because that is what it was like for 99%+ of those who
did live back there. And I would like to know how you "discover" what it is
really like to live in a sci-fi or fantasy world. And I want to know what
you mean by warped version of that world? Is it inconceivable that in some
circumstances a hierarchical and despotic system like that we imagine for
medieval Japan-type worlds would spawn revolt? I am never going to simply
force my players to play according to standard of behavior I simply create
ex-nihilo, instead we share in creating the flavor of each campaign. Try it,
it might give you new reasons for playing rpgs, like having fun . . .
>I have to agree with Michael on this one.
And what world principle compels you to this?;>
Carter Humphrey
BeerCarboy@AOL.com
From: BeerCarboy@aol.com
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 22:25:02 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At Tue, Aug 5, 1997 11:04 AM EDT boaters@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>I think certainly that the gm has to know about the player's character
>and the player should certainly know about the type of campaign that he
>is getting in but if the player does not play in character, the gm
>should tell him that he is not playing in character. It is not the gm's
>position to go out of his way to give the character depth.
>If the player does not have a good depth to the character before the
>campaign ever starts it is not the gms job to give him one in the game.
>Now if the character just happens to be starting and has little history
>in the world as of yet then the gm should make sure that what the
>character does has some effect.
>ex. if the farmer was hanging around with a group of samurais then a.
>he should have never spoken against them or whined, and b. there would
>have been one hell of a reputation around the common folks. ("He is the
>farmer that fights with the samurais.") It is up to the player to do
>something with this to make actual character depth. The gm just has to
>make it available.
I don't disagree with this in any way, but as far as it goes it describes
tremendously static characters and the world. Characters should be given
room to grow and change and as a result of that the world itself should be
allowed to change in response to that. So trusted farmer sidekick of samurai
may one day become the rebel leader who overthrows part or all of the
repressive social system that put samurai in such a position over the common
herd. I'm not saying this should be a regular event but it should be a
possibility.
Carter Humphrey
BeerCarboy@AOL.com
From: BeerCarboy@aol.com
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 22:25:10 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At Tue, Aug 5, 1997 11:04 AM EDT boaters@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>I think certainly that the gm has to know about the player's character
>and the player should certainly know about the type of campaign that he
>is getting in but if the player does not play in character, the gm
>should tell him that he is not playing in character. It is not the gm's
>position to go out of his way to give the character depth.
>If the player does not have a good depth to the character before the
>campaign ever starts it is not the gms job to give him one in the game.
>Now if the character just happens to be starting and has little history
>in the world as of yet then the gm should make sure that what the
>character does has some effect.
>ex. if the farmer was hanging around with a group of samurais then a.
>he should have never spoken against them or whined, and b. there would
>have been one hell of a reputation around the common folks. ("He is the
>farmer that fights with the samurais.") It is up to the player to do
>something with this to make actual character depth. The gm just has to
>make it available.
I don't disagree with this in any way, but as far as it goes it describes
tremendously static characters and the world. Characters should be given
room to grow and change and as a result of that the world itself should be
allowed to change in response to that. So trusted farmer sidekick of samurai
may one day become the rebel leader who overthrows part or all of the
repressive social system that put samurai in such a position over the common
herd. I'm not saying this should be a regular event but it should be a
possibility.
Carter Humphrey
BeerCarboy@AOL.com
From: j.ward18@genie.com
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 97 02:42:00 GMT
X-genie-QK-From: J.WARD18
X-genie-QK-Id: 4280390
X-genie-Gateway-Id: 577012
Subject: 4 color, Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
THE PHEROMONES
I think Burns has it. Go with Transform that creates a distinctive feature.
GOOFY LINES
Darin -
I have an ex-professional wrestler villain, Hammerhand, who narrates his
fight as it happens. As he hits someone or vice versa, he talks like Cosell
narrating the fight. "And it looks bad for the Hammer, but wait! A reverse
suplex!" (That accompanies taking a blow and then using m. throw on
opponent.)
>>> LONG GENRE POST <<<
I still have a soft spot in my heart for the peasant hero.
(Disclaimer - I am not the lordly type, took a Unicorn in a LOFR campaign
because they seem to be the closest to "real" people. I may be fatally
prejudiced against arrogant lordly types.)
If you have a weak GM, who doesn't tie things in to "real" life, the lordly
types can become impossibly obnoxious to have around.
Case in point - I was playing in an Ars Magica campaign. I had a companion
who was a man of the soil, an earthy type, a social chameleon on the lower
end of the scale. He would enter a town first, sound out people, make
arrangements for the mages.
James had a necromancer (well, he was in effect, I forget what his magic
style was) and a companion and we all wished he would be out chasing girls
instead of coming to play, which happened lamentably little. The
necromancer was slimy and James purposely jinxed any dealings anyone made
talking to any NPC if he couldn't be center stage.
His companion (whom we called LHUHA - think Lord Crainiorectal Inversion for
clues) began to _always_ barge in on my cleverly-worded interrogations (such
as asking about Y when I wanted to hear about X and "reluctantly" letting
the informant tell me about the exciting X that had happened) asking "Tell
me about X" in an arrogant manner, at which point the peasant would clam up,
claiming ignorance. He ordered everyone he outranked around and generally
made life difficult. Finally, three grogs and I dosed his ale, stole his
armor and ancestral sword (spifty magic stuff), and threw them in the river.
Peasants used to gang up on lone Samurai when they could and then claim that
bandits did it. I suspect the GM in the Samurai game was as unwilling to
alienate characters as mine was. It's not like peasants instantly bow down
helpfully. They may well bow down but be very unhelpful in omission.
A Samurai, then, might have the right to act like a total Pratt, but if he
does, he might have trouble. Many Samurai would act kinder, thus insuring
cooperation from the "little people" that feed him, tie on his armor, etc.
"Genre" is no reason to act like a jerk.
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 22:55:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
On Tue, 5 Aug 1997 BeerCarboy@aol.com wrote:
> At Tue, Aug 5, 1997 10:27 AM EDT boaters@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> >While my knowledge is limited in the Japan area I do know that had
> >you not killed him and I was the gm you would have been shamed/and or
> >removed from your position if anyone important ever found out that you
> >took that cr** from a farmer.
>
> Yes, because romance outweighs reality in our reconstructions. Besides all
> Michael describe was player behavior, he did not describe what happened in
> terms of role-playing, which is suspicious given the emphasis he places on
> the value of roleplaying.
That depends. Some games may be romantic, others may emphasise reality.
This game tends to do the latter.
Now, the situation that 'could' have resulted in my cutting down the PC
farmer went like this:
The party consists of three samurai (Jiro [me], Junzo and Yabu). There is
a farmer (now promoted to ashigaru status) who is the 4th PC. There is
also our lord who is named Ogame. There is also a couple of servents from
Central Casting to fill out the group.
We enter into a village where everyone has been killed. We find three
men, dressed all in black and wearing broad basket hats (like the Storms
from "Big Trouble"). These guys inform us they have kileld the
inhabitants of the village for harboring a thief and preying on the local
lord's messangers and tax collectors. The three men then leave.
We are in no position to fight them because:
1) We need to get Ogame to Osaka as soon as possible
2) We have no authority to tell them they are wrong, this is *not* our
land.
3) We just *know* these guys could kick our collective butts. (Most of us
have seen "Shogun Assasin")
So, our only recourse is to bury the dead.
We look about the village, and discover that yes, there is a suit of
armor, and other evidence to prove that the villagers had killed one of
the local lord's messangers.
Jiro feeling sickened by this (not to mention uneasy as to how one should
feel about the deaths of possible innocents for the actions of others)
tells Farmer PC to "Gather the bodies to be buried."
Why? Tocuhing the dead in Japan (esp then) is a virtual taboo. There is
no way a samurai would stoop to dragging dead bodies about.
Farmer PC's response? "No, I don't have to, I don't have to listen to
you."
I honestly forget what I said next, although I do know that the PC did
actually do as he was told. Later I realised that if I hadn't been
talking to the GM over a point, I just might have made an Ego Roll to not
blow my cool (stretched pretty thin by the situation) haul out my naginata
and cut the farmer down. Something that is entiry appropriate within the
genre established by the GM.
Now, allow me to elaborate.
The Farmer PC had been told several times that he was not of equal status
as the samurai. I think we had even asked if he wanted to reconsider.
The player OTOH, had decided his character was the first coming of Bruce
Lee and didn't see the need to switch, since his character could
obviously whip any one of us.
As I have said before, the Farmer PC never did much to achieve clue. He
often didn't listen to tactical instruction, was given a spear but dumped
(I can't use it with my Martial Arts), was given armor (but dumped -
lowers my DCV) and then complained when he got hit and took body.
There, is that better?
> >The reason that we role play in different genres are so that we can get
> >into the feel of what it was like to live back then or in a sci-fi or
> >fantasy realm. If you do not follow the "rules of that world" then it
> >is not truly that type of genre but a warped version of it.
>
> Then you better be used to playing lowly peasants, slave laborers, oppressed
> and hopeless people because that is what it was like for 99%+ of those who
> did live back there. And I would like to know how you "discover" what it is
> really like to live in a sci-fi or fantasy world. And I want to know what
> you mean by warped version of that world? Is it inconceivable that in some
> circumstances a hierarchical and despotic system like that we imagine for
> medieval Japan-type worlds would spawn revolt? I am never going to simply
> force my players to play according to standard of behavior I simply create
> ex-nihilo, instead we share in creating the flavor of each campaign. Try it,
> it might give you new reasons for playing rpgs, like having fun . . .
Part of the interest I have in the Sengoku game is trying to play in a
'alien' environment. 1542 Japan has some very different ideas about
proper behaviour and conduct. The GM isn't forcing us to play according
to a strict code, but he is presenting a different fantasy world than any
I've ever been in. So, I want to have my character (Jiro Motoyoshi) act in
a manner that fits with the setting presented, not in a manner that seems
proper according to my modern sensabilities. And yes, I'm having fun,
because I am learning more about something I knew little about before
play.
***************************************************************************
* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
***************************************************************************
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 23:07:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
On Tue, 5 Aug 1997 BeerCarboy@aol.com wrote:
<Stuff about GM/Player depth snipped>
> >ex. if the farmer was hanging around with a group of samurais then a.
> >he should have never spoken against them or whined, and b. there would
> >have been one hell of a reputation around the common folks. ("He is the
> >farmer that fights with the samurais.") It is up to the player to do
> >something with this to make actual character depth. The gm just has to
> >make it available.
>
> I don't disagree with this in any way, but as far as it goes it describes
> tremendously static characters and the world. Characters should be given
> room to grow and change and as a result of that the world itself should be
> allowed to change in response to that. So trusted farmer sidekick of samurai
> may one day become the rebel leader who overthrows part or all of the
> repressive social system that put samurai in such a position over the common
> herd. I'm not saying this should be a regular event but it should be a
> possibility.
If the PC is willing, there is nothing stopping him from changing his
world in a great way. The GM has made it clear that the campaign is
almsot an 'epic movie' where the PCs (if the survive) will see great
battles, commit great deads, fight monsters, command armies and become
virtual legends. We will even interact with actual historical personages
of the time (although the three biggies uh.. Tokugawa and co have only
just gotten around to being born). There is even talk of the GM runnig a
20 years after the main game ends, where we get one last fling of glory
(and like 50 eps to pump our PCs).
Now the second half of your comment is a case of going against the genre.
If the Farmer PC got sick of getting kciked around he would other throw
the government and free everyone, he'd just try and become a governer
himself.
Your comment of :
"So trusted farmer sidekick of samurai may one day become the rebel leader
who overthrows part or all of the repressive social system that put
samurai in such a position over the common herd."
Smacks of playing out of genre and character. Instead of considering how
an actual Farmer might think (or what goals he might have) you are trying
to impose modern values on the situation. In the setting given, it would
be possible for a farmer to become a samurai, so why would he want to over
throw anything? Also, the religion of the time was very big into life
being preordained fate, so the farmer would probably accept his fate as
being a deserved one. Try to over throw the 'repressive social system'
smacks of a modern knee-jerk reaction to a historical situation you
probably don't agree with. It become a questionable PC motivation (and an
unrealistic one).
Or am I misunderstanding you?
***************************************************************************
* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
***************************************************************************
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 23:32:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
Subject: 4 Color Quotes
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Well, not quite. But this talk about what makes for good dialogue in a 4
Color game brought to mind some of the great lines I found in a book I
just read.
(And I thought people could use some levity after some of the posts around
here lately).
So, the book is "Njal's Saga" written around 1280 AD in Iceland. It is
actually a pretty good read (well, this prose edition was) and a must for
*anyone* who wants to run a game set in the late Dark Ages, esp with a
heavy Norse influence. So, among all the battles, lawsuits, raids and
what not, we get the following:
[The scene is a great battle fought at sea between two groups of Vikings]
At one stage, Kolsegg was taking a rest abord Gunnar's ship. Gunnar
noticed this and said, "You have been kinder to others than to yourself
today, for you have quenched their thirst forever."
[The scene is on a road between several farms]
Atil spurred his horse and galloped hard. When he met Kol he asked, "Is
the carting going well?"
"That's none of your business, you scum, nor anyone else's from your
place," replied Kol.
"You hardest task is still to come," said Atil. "You have yet to die."
[Atil kills Kol, then meets with some workmen]
"Go and see to that horse up there," said Atil. "Kol has fallen off its
back, and he's dead."
"Did you kill him?" they asked.
"Hallgerd will suspect he hasn't died of natural causes," said Atil...
[The scene is a wood. Hrapp has seduced Gudrun, only to be discovered
Asvard. Hrapp kills Asvard and then goes to tell Gudrun's father about
it.]
"Why is there blood on you axe?" asked Gudbrand.
"I have been curing Asvard's backache with it," he [Hrapp] replied.
"Not out of kindness," said Gudbrand. "I suppose you killed him?"
Yes," said Hrapp.
"Why?" asked Gudbrand.
"You may think a small cause," said Hrapp. "He wanted to cut off my leg."
[My favorite and probably the most famous line of the saga. Gunnar is in
his house and under assualt by numerous men. He strikes one, who then
staggers back to where the leader of the attacker's waits.]
Gizur looked up at him and asked, "Is Gunnar at home?"
"That's for you to find out," replied Thorgrim, "But his halberd [axe]
certainly is."
And with that he fell dead.
[a variant goes: "Of that I cannot say, but his axe sure is."]
===
Okay, so they may not fit to well with 4-color, but they sure do have a
ring to them, don't they?
***************************************************************************
* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
***************************************************************************
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 1997 23:41:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: 4 color, Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
On Wed, 6 Aug 1997 j.ward18@genie.com wrote:
> GOOFY LINES
> Darin -
> I have an ex-professional wrestler villain, Hammerhand, who narrates his
> fight as it happens. As he hits someone or vice versa, he talks like Cosell
> narrating the fight. "And it looks bad for the Hammer, but wait! A reverse
> suplex!" (That accompanies taking a blow and then using m. throw on
> opponent.)
Sounds like Commander Crusher. Typical Crusher fight dialogue:
"Headbutt!" <WHAM> Headbutt! <WHAM> "Atomic Drop!" <CRUNCH> "Betcha that
hurt, didn't it?"
> I still have a soft spot in my heart for the peasant hero.
>
> (Disclaimer - I am not the lordly type, took a Unicorn in a LOFR campaign
> because they seem to be the closest to "real" people. I may be fatally
> prejudiced against arrogant lordly types.)
>
> If you have a weak GM, who doesn't tie things in to "real" life, the lordly
> types can become impossibly obnoxious to have around.
Except we didn't try to be lordly, pushy, obnoxious types. I mean, I'm
trying to plain within conception and in adhearence with how such a
character would act. In a PBEM game I'm in, my knight PC was ready and
willingto challenge another PC to a fight over the other PC's insuation
that she had acted impropery and was 'coldhearted'. I mean, I'm not going
to ignore insults and such that my character realisticly wouldn't *just
because* you are another PC.
> Peasants used to gang up on lone Samurai when they could and then claim that
> bandits did it. I suspect the GM in the Samurai game was as unwilling to
> alienate characters as mine was. It's not like peasants instantly bow down
> helpfully. They may well bow down but be very unhelpful in omission.
The GM was neutral. He didn't try to alienate anyone, he let the Farmer
PC do that all by himself.
> A Samurai, then, might have the right to act like a total Pratt, but if he
> does, he might have trouble. Many Samurai would act kinder, thus insuring
> cooperation from the "little people" that feed him, tie on his armor, etc.
> "Genre" is no reason to act like a jerk.
Repeat: I didn't. In fact, part of my character mentality is that he
doesn't tromp on the lower classes. OTOH, all of us were pretty sick of
the Farmer PC's actions by this time.
***************************************************************************
* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
***************************************************************************
X-Sender: wabbit@globaldialog.com (Unverified)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 01:24:59 -0500
From: Earl Kwallek <earl@thewarren.mil.wi.us>
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection (back on topic?)
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 04:24 PM 8/4/97 +1000, happyelf(sickjokedude)! wrote:
>>Obey the conventions of the genre (and of the campaign) is essential to
>>getting the utmost enjoyment out of the game. Delibertly
>>ignoring/flauntingthese rules/guidelines just spoils it for the rest of
>>us.
>>
>
>so i suppose you could say that conventions of the genre are valid limits-
>however, i would suggest that many of the 'conventions' of the 4-color
genre are not
>as constructive as this- mayhap they include a limit that does not add as
much to cohesion, or as such a limit should, to be considered valid?
The point (as I see it), is that players should not feel free to ignore
"genre conventions" that the GM has specifically said will apply. The GM on
the other hand, should try to limit the number of said conventions to only
those truly needed for his campaign's style. (In order to maximize player's
free choice)
I have had the misfortune of playing with people who ALWAYS ignore the
"genre assumptions" (like reluctant to kill - in most Supers games), and
believe me it makes for a really un-fun game...
Earl Kwallek - Wabbit@ExecPC.com
This year shall go down in history. For the first time a
nation has full gun control laws. Our streets will be safer,
our police more effective. Other nations will follow our lead
into the future.
- Adolph Hitler, 1935
A Man with a gun is a citizen; a man without a gun is a subject.
X-Sender: wabbit@globaldialog.com (Unverified)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 01:43:59 -0500
From: Earl Kwallek <earl@thewarren.mil.wi.us>
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Cc: champ-l@omg.org
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 12:10 AM 8/5/97 -0400, Michael Surbrook wrote:
(Snip)
>
>If the GM states that 'x' is a fact of life in his game, then to ignore
>'x' is a 'cop-out'. Abiding by 'x' is roleplaying.
>
>And prime examples of 'x'?
>
>In a four color game, I'd say it is "Heroes do not Kill"
>
>In a 50's SF game? "All aliens are bug-eyed monsters who want our women"
>
>In a modern horror game? "Any one can die at any time"
>
>In a Dark Champions game? "There are no good guys and no bad guys. There
> are just scum, the cops, and innocent people. And sometimes,
> these groups cross boundies"
>
>In the feudal Japan game? "Ninja are myths, and samurai can get away with
> murder"
>
>Genre conventions are called such because they define the setting (ie, the
>genre).
>
>Thus, in most supers games, *everyone* with superpowers wears a mask,
>looks good in tights and stops aging somewhere between 25 and 35.
>
>In a martial arts game, *everyone* is a martial artist (allow me to repeat
>myself - *everyone*!). If its an anime martial arts game, everyone can
>jump over the horizion too.
>
>If its a Call of Cuthulhu game (or any other horror setting) guns won't
>stop the monster, any one who goes off alone probably won't come back and
>reading that strange book you found is probably bad for you... *very* bad.
>
>I think I should stop now, since I'm obviously beginning to ramble...
>BTW: Does anyone other than Jones have any thoughts on my opinions?
>
I generally avoid this kind of post, but for what it's worth, I pretty
much agree with you. For the record I will state that your GM should have
made it clear to the "Farmer" player where that character would stand when
the character was created, if he did not- then at least part of the problem
can be handed to the GM.
Earl Kwallek - Wabbit@ExecPC.com
This year shall go down in history. For the first time a
nation has full gun control laws. Our streets will be safer,
our police more effective. Other nations will follow our lead
into the future.
- Adolph Hitler, 1935
A Man with a gun is a citizen; a man without a gun is a subject.
X-Sender: wabbit@globaldialog.com (Unverified)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 02:23:49 -0500
From: Earl Kwallek <earl@thewarren.mil.wi.us>
Subject: Re: flight & pheromones
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 02:46 PM 8/5/97 -0400, Eric Burns wrote:
>How about an aid or transform to give the target the following power:
>
>Mind Control: Nd6, AOE - Radius (+1), 0 END (+1/2), Continuous (+1),
>Personal Immunity (+1/4) [+2 3/4], Always On (-1/2),
>Only for command "You <emotion> me" (-1/2), Does not affect targets
>without sense of smell (-1/4) [-1 1/4]
>
>Or you could use minor transform to give the character an appropriate
>25pts distinctive feature.
>
This is about the "Pheremone" power mentioned previously - right?
The way we did this in my campaign (MANY years ago) was
Mind Control xd6
+1 NND - Defense is not semlling pheremones (ie hold breath/no nose/etc)
Various other obvious advantages/disads as stated above (I'm too lazy to
retype them all)
Earl Kwallek - Wabbit@ExecPC.com
This year shall go down in history. For the first time a
nation has full gun control laws. Our streets will be safer,
our police more effective. Other nations will follow our lead
into the future.
- Adolph Hitler, 1935
A Man with a gun is a citizen; a man without a gun is a subject.
X-Sender: rsimpson@svlhome1.beasys.com
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 10:50:56 +0000
From: Bob Simpson <rsimpson@beasys.com>
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Cc: champ-l@omg.org, Collie <collie@netcom.com&>
Scott Ruggels <scott.ruggels@3do.com>
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
<x-rich>>In a four-color comic book or campaign, the heroes generally believe
>in Good and Evil as palpable concepts that correspond to an external
>reality.
You know, when you first said "Good and Evil are things that Really Exist in the super-here world" what came to mind immediately was the actual, physical embodiment protrayed in 'mainstream' comics. You know, Lord Chaos, Master Order, Dream, Death, Destiny, Eternity, Infinity, etc. etc. etc. and all those other trademarked folks. It was interesting to watch the discussion rocket off in an ENTIRELY different direction... :-)
-- Bob Simpson
>>>>
<excerpt>
"Come, fellow Vindicators! We must stop Doctor Destroyer's latest plot,
which is in conflict with our cultural paradigm, as interpreted by the
Vindicators' microculture and within each of our own ideocultural
isolates!"
</excerpt><<<<<<<<
</x-rich>
From: boaters@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 11:07:19 -0400
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Michael Surbrook wrote:
> When I fianlly got a chance to look at the farmer's character sheet, I
> saw
> a lot of stuff that made me ask the GM "where did he *get* this from?"
>
> The GM said: "Hey, I got a character sheet out of him, I figured any
> more
> was pushing it." Yeah, some people are really hard-assed about
> wanting
> fully detailed backgrounds, but i cna understand the GM's position.
> And
> besides, the PCs get what they pay for. If I know nothing aobut your
> character, don't expect a lot of side plots involving you.
>
This is one of the problems with gaming. You sometimes want/need fresh
blood in your game and it is hard to get experienced players, because
they are the ones already in games. The only other option is to get
someone new, and sometimes it takes a while to get across that you need
more on the character than just a character sheet. I am having problems
with some/most of my players in my 4-color right now, because they all
want to be orphans. I tried to point out to them that in most cases
this is not true. Even alien characters have had parents (superman) and
even when the parents are dead someone took care of them (Aunt
Mae/Spiderman)
We recently added 3 new players to our fantasy campaign, and got lucky.
All three of them are excellent role players and had no problem coming
up with involved backgrounds and conceptions.
Darin
From: boaters@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 11:11:55 -0400
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
BeerCarboy@aol.com wrote:
> At Tue, Aug 5, 1997 11:04 AM EDT boaters@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>
> >I think certainly that the gm has to know about the player's
> character
> >and the player should certainly know about the type of campaign that
> he
> >is getting in but if the player does not play in character, the gm
> >should tell him that he is not playing in character. It is not the
> gm's
> >position to go out of his way to give the character depth.
>
> >If the player does not have a good depth to the character before the
> >campaign ever starts it is not the gms job to give him one in the
> game.
> >Now if the character just happens to be starting and has little
> history
> >in the world as of yet then the gm should make sure that what the
> >character does has some effect.
> >ex. if the farmer was hanging around with a group of samurais then
> a.
> >he should have never spoken against them or whined, and b. there
> would
> >have been one hell of a reputation around the common folks. ("He is
> the
> >farmer that fights with the samurais.") It is up to the player to do
>
> >something with this to make actual character depth. The gm just has
> to
> >make it available.
>
> I don't disagree with this in any way, but as far as it goes it
> describes
> tremendously static characters and the world. Characters should be
> given
> room to grow and change and as a result of that the world itself
> should be
> allowed to change in response to that. So trusted farmer sidekick of
> samurai
> may one day become the rebel leader who overthrows part or all of the
> repressive social system that put samurai in such a position over the
> common
> herd. I'm not saying this should be a regular event but it should be
> a
> possibility.
>
> Carter Humphrey
>
>
> BeerCarboy@AOL.com
I do not disagree with what you said here, I think that the
possibility should be available, but the farmer character would still
have to be careful. He should certainly never tell a samurai that "he
doesn't have to do what he said..."
I mean that would have been like an ensign telling Kirk that he won't
bring the log to him because he doesn't have to.
Darin
From: boaters@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 11:26:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Michael Surbrook wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Aug 1997 BeerCarboy@aol.com wrote:
>
> > At Tue, Aug 5, 1997 10:27 AM EDT boaters@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>
> >
> > Yes, because romance outweighs reality in our reconstructions.
> Besides all
> > Michael describe was player behavior, he did not describe what
> happened in
> > terms of role-playing, which is suspicious given the emphasis he
> places on
> > the value of roleplaying.
>
> That depends. Some games may be romantic, others may emphasise
> reality.
> This game tends to do the latter.
>
I have seen games where love is a theme and can out weigh all of the
other elements of the campaign. I have also seen campaigns where the gm
used history books and other non fiction books on the subject.
> Now, the situation that 'could' have resulted in my cutting down the
> PC
> farmer went like this:
>
> The party consists of three samurai (Jiro [me], Junzo and Yabu).
> There is
> a farmer (now promoted to ashigaru status) who is the 4th PC. There
> is
> also our lord who is named Ogame. There is also a couple of servents
> from
> Central Casting to fill out the group.
>
> We enter into a village where everyone has been killed. We find three
>
> men, dressed all in black and wearing broad basket hats (like the
> Storms
> from "Big Trouble"). These guys inform us they have kileld the
> inhabitants of the village for harboring a thief and preying on the
> local
> lord's messangers and tax collectors. The three men then leave.
>
> We are in no position to fight them because:
> 1) We need to get Ogame to Osaka as soon as possible
> 2) We have no authority to tell them they are wrong, this is *not* our
>
> land.
> 3) We just *know* these guys could kick our collective butts. (Most of
> us
> have seen "Shogun Assasin")
>
> So, our only recourse is to bury the dead.
>
> We look about the village, and discover that yes, there is a suit of
> armor, and other evidence to prove that the villagers had killed one
> of
> the local lord's messangers.
>
> Jiro feeling sickened by this (not to mention uneasy as to how one
> should
> feel about the deaths of possible innocents for the actions of others)
>
> tells Farmer PC to "Gather the bodies to be buried."
>
> Why? Tocuhing the dead in Japan (esp then) is a virtual taboo. There
> is
> no way a samurai would stoop to dragging dead bodies about.
>
> Farmer PC's response? "No, I don't have to, I don't have to listen to
> you."
>
> I honestly forget what I said next, although I do know that the PC did
>
> actually do as he was told. Later I realised that if I hadn't been
> talking to the GM over a point, I just might have made an Ego Roll to
> not
> blow my cool (stretched pretty thin by the situation) haul out my
> naginata
> and cut the farmer down. Something that is entiry appropriate within
> the
> genre established by the GM.
>
>
I do not disagree, even after this incident he should have been stripped
of any armor and weapons for a while. To talk back to a superior in
such a way in this genre...ouch.
> Now, allow me to elaborate.
> The Farmer PC had been told several times that he was not of equal
> status
> as the samurai. I think we had even asked if he wanted to reconsider.
>
> The player OTOH, had decided his character was the first coming of
> Bruce
> Lee and didn't see the need to switch, since his character could
> obviously whip any one of us.
>
> As I have said before, the Farmer PC never did much to achieve clue.
> He
> often didn't listen to tactical instruction, was given a spear but
> dumped
> (I can't use it with my Martial Arts), was given armor (but dumped -
> lowers my DCV) and then complained when he got hit and took body.
>
> There, is that better?
>
ooooooohhhhh one of those players. I do not think that the character
was thinking ooohhh I can not move just as fast in this armor than I can
without it. No I think that I do not need the armor thanks anyways.
> > >The reason that we role play in different genres are so that we can
> get
> > >into the feel of what it was like to live back then or in a sci-fi
> or
> > >fantasy realm. If you do not follow the "rules of that world" then
> it
> > >is not truly that type of genre but a warped version of it.
> >
> > Then you better be used to playing lowly peasants, slave laborers,
> oppressed
> > and hopeless people because that is what it was like for 99%+ of
> those who
> > did live back there. And I would like to know how you "discover"
> what it is
> > really like to live in a sci-fi or fantasy world. And I want to
> know what
> > you mean by warped version of that world? Is it inconceivable that
> in some
> > circumstances a hierarchical and despotic system like that we
> imagine for
> > medieval Japan-type worlds would spawn revolt? I am never going to
> simply
> > force my players to play according to standard of behavior I simply
> create
> > ex-nihilo, instead we share in creating the flavor of each
> campaign. Try it,
> > it might give you new reasons for playing rpgs, like having fun . .
> .
>
> Part of the interest I have in the Sengoku game is trying to play in a
>
> 'alien' environment. 1542 Japan has some very different ideas about
> proper behaviour and conduct. The GM isn't forcing us to play
> according
> to a strict code, but he is presenting a different fantasy world than
> any
> I've ever been in. So, I want to have my character (Jiro Motoyoshi)
> act in
> a manner that fits with the setting presented, not in a manner that
> seems
> proper according to my modern sensabilities. And yes, I'm having fun,
>
> because I am learning more about something I knew little about before
> play.
Even though I think that Michael pretty much covered it here, I will say
that there is nothing wrong in playing a warped version of some type of
campaign. Obviously, when you are playing a WWI game and there are
supes in it, the war will probably end the same way, but the fact that
there are supes in it does change the feel of the game. I mean most
people would not play a soldier if the others are superheroes. As far
as learning what it is like to live in the different times you yourself
can physically experience what it is like, but with some good
imagination and good character role playing you should have to make
decisions for your character that are very different morally and
culturally than where you live today. I am also not saying to force
your players to do anything, but in the case of the farmer can you
really say that he was playing smart? (For the record I have a great
deal of fun in my campaigns.)
Darin
From: boaters@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 11:31:06 -0400
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Michael Surbrook wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Aug 1997 BeerCarboy@aol.com wrote:
>
> <Stuff about GM/Player depth snipped>
>
> > >ex. if the farmer was hanging around with a group of samurais then
> a.
> > >he should have never spoken against them or whined, and b. there
> would
> > >have been one hell of a reputation around the common folks. ("He
> is the
> > >farmer that fights with the samurais.") It is up to the player to
> do
> > >something with this to make actual character depth. The gm just
> has to
> > >make it available.
> >
> > I don't disagree with this in any way, but as far as it goes it
> describes
> > tremendously static characters and the world. Characters should be
> given
> > room to grow and change and as a result of that the world itself
> should be
> > allowed to change in response to that. So trusted farmer sidekick
> of samurai
> > may one day become the rebel leader who overthrows part or all of
> the
> > repressive social system that put samurai in such a position over
> the common
> > herd. I'm not saying this should be a regular event but it should
> be a
> > possibility.
>
> If the PC is willing, there is nothing stopping him from changing his
> world in a great way. The GM has made it clear that the campaign is
> almsot an 'epic movie' where the PCs (if the survive) will see great
> battles, commit great deads, fight monsters, command armies and become
>
> virtual legends. We will even interact with actual historical
> personages
> of the time (although the three biggies uh.. Tokugawa and co have only
>
> just gotten around to being born). There is even talk of the GM
> runnig a
> 20 years after the main game ends, where we get one last fling of
> glory
> (and like 50 eps to pump our PCs).
>
> Now the second half of your comment is a case of going against the
> genre.
> If the Farmer PC got sick of getting kciked around he would other
> throw
> the government and free everyone, he'd just try and become a governer
> himself.
>
> Your comment of :
>
> "So trusted farmer sidekick of samurai may one day become the rebel
> leader
> who overthrows part or all of the repressive social system that put
> samurai in such a position over the common herd."
>
> Smacks of playing out of genre and character. Instead of considering
> how
> an actual Farmer might think (or what goals he might have) you are
> trying
> to impose modern values on the situation. In the setting given, it
> would
> be possible for a farmer to become a samurai, so why would he want to
> over
> throw anything? Also, the religion of the time was very big into life
>
> being preordained fate, so the farmer would probably accept his fate
> as
> being a deserved one. Try to over throw the 'repressive social
> system'
> smacks of a modern knee-jerk reaction to a historical situation you
> probably don't agree with. It become a questionable PC motivation
> (and an
> unrealistic one).
>
> Or am I misunderstanding you?
>
Now I do have a question about this, if the idea is epic movie and the
farmer had a reason to dislike the lord and its samurais then why
couldn't he overthrow one day the gov't. I mean it is not something
that would be done over night, but he could recruit some people from
each town that would one day be in his army. I mean some things do
happen in the movies that would never happen in real life. (This does
not mean that I think the farmer should have talked back. )
Darin
> ***************************************************************************
>
> * "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano
> Orbatos,Orion *
> * Michael Surbrook /
> susano@access.digex.net *
> * Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police /
> ESWAT *
> * Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of
> St.Mark *
> *********
> *****************************************************************
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 11:45:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
On Wed, 6 Aug 1997 boaters@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> I have seen games where love is a theme and can out weigh all of the
> other elements of the campaign. I have also seen campaigns where the gm
> used history books and other non fiction books on the subject.
The Sengoku game uses real history and historical ideas. I myself have
even gone so far as to buy a few Osprey "Men at Arms" and samurai hisroty
books to further my uderstanding.
<encounter with bad guys and farmer PC snipped>
> I do not disagree, even after this incident he should have been stripped
> of any armor and weapons for a while. To talk back to a superior in
> such a way in this genre...ouch.
As I said, he *could* have been killed. The GM is playing things very
'real'. One of the other PCs has already been challanged to a duel for
supposedly insulting another samurai's honor (he stepped over his swords,
or bumped him, I forget). One begins to realize that this is a
*dangerous* time and the GM isn't going to cut you any slack for being a
PC. (Now, the challange I mentioned was a setup by the GM, but the PC
fighting the duel also got some aid on the side.)
<snip>
***************************************************************************
* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
***************************************************************************
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 11:52:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
On Wed, 6 Aug 1997 boaters@ix.netcom.com wrote:
<stuff about character developement for the Farmer PC snipped>
> Now I do have a question about this, if the idea is epic movie and the
> farmer had a reason to dislike the lord and its samurais then why
> couldn't he overthrow one day the gov't. I mean it is not something
> that would be done over night, but he could recruit some people from
> each town that would one day be in his army. I mean some things do
> happen in the movies that would never happen in real life. (This does
> not mean that I think the farmer should have talked back. )
The Farmer had no real reason to dislike the lord of the samurai. He
wasn't mistreated or opressed, he just got stuck with all the things a
servant to three samurai would expect to get stuck with (taking care of
horses, cleaning clothing and gear, cooking dinner, carrying stuff).
Honestly, the PC was just being a jerk, since he wanted to play Bruce Lee,
while the rest of us were playing Toshiro Mifune. He wanted to be thought
ofas a badass merely since he character said he should be. Any attempt to
reality check his actions was lost on him.
As to rebeling, I can honestly say the farmer player would never have
thought of anything so complex. Besides, the lord's father's brother had
already taken over the lord's rightful land and declared us all outlaws
anyway...
***************************************************************************
* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
***************************************************************************
From: Daniel Pawtowski <dpawtows@access.digex.net>
Subject: Re: 4 color super lines
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 12:48:47 -0400 (EDT)
Organization: VTSFFC
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Well, if you happen to have somebody who got their powers from some
ancient tomb, try this one:
Mr. Napalm: "I say we kill 'em all and let the archeologists sort
'em out."
Captain Pharoh: "Yeah." *flex muscles* "And I'm the archeologist."
You know there was a convoluted situation in a game awhile ago that
allowed somebody to get off the line:
"Fortunately, we brought an aborigine for just such an emergency."
(An attack by mercs in the park aboard a Babylon-5-sized space station).
Daniel Pawtowski
From: BeerCarboy@aol.com
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 12:50:00 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At Wed, Aug 6, 1997 9:11 AM EDT susano@access.digex.net (Michael Surbrook)
wrote:
>Your comment of :
>"So trusted farmer sidekick of samurai may one day become the rebel leader
>who overthrows part or all of the repressive social system that put
>samurai in such a position over the common herd."
>Smacks of playing out of genre and character. Instead of considering how
>an actual Farmer might think (or what goals he might have) you are trying
>to impose modern values on the situation. In the setting given, it would
>be possible for a farmer to become a samurai, so why would he want to over
>throw anything? Also, the religion of the time was very big into life
>being preordained fate, so the farmer would probably accept his fate as
>being a deserved one. Try to over throw the 'repressive social system'
>smacks of a modern knee-jerk reaction to a historical situation you
>probably don't agree with. It become a questionable PC motivation (and an
>unrealistic one).
>Or am I misunderstanding you?
This is a little overbearing on the part of the GM. To say there is no room
for variation within character motivation saps life out of the game and makes
PCs little more than NPCs. If a player simply plays himself or plays the
same character over and over again, that is pretty poor roleplaying. But to
suggest that it is impossible for a CHARACTER to imagine changing the way
things are is excessively restrictive. Peasants did kill samurai in real
history, the shogunate was overthrown in real history (and yes it was not in
the time period you are talking about and it was under a specific set of
circumstances that will not be duplicated in the game). Now the specific
farmer character may not be of the type to imagune changing the world, but
another might be. Let's take a look at your massacred village scene. Your
samurai orders the farmer to clear the bodies, he refuses, your samurai
(instead of tolerating this to some extent as you did) cuts the farmer down;
now he has to move the bodies himself the specific act he could not stand to
do before (oops). Alternative: your party comes to the village, meets the
villains who have slain everyone (by the way, the legendary samurai courage
was certainly evident here when you decided not to fight because you KNEW
they would kick your @ss, hmmn that may have been out of genre ;>) and they
justify their act they way they did. The samurai in the party accept this
justification even though they know it was excessive force and an attrocity.
Farmer character suddenly realizes that if he does become samurai he will be
endorses the same system of values that allows for this sort of thing and
decides that no, he will not simply perpetuate such a system and become part
of it, he will oppose that system and either the system or he will die.
Now why can't something like that happen? I'm not saying it is preferable to
the farmer doing something else, but to label it impossible seems unfairly
restrictive.
Carter Humphrey
BeerCarboy@AOL.com
X-Forwarding-Note: Was sent to herolist@october.com; forwarding to hero-l@omg.org
From: Opal@october.com (Opal)
Date: 06 Aug 97 17:21:00 GMT
Subject: flight & pheromones
X-Ftn-To: herolist@october.com
X-Listname: Hero
Reply-To: hero-l@october.com (Multiple recipients of Hero)
Path: october!opal
Organization: Fidonet: Red October Alpha * Hero Roleplaying * 408-629-4695 *
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 16
h > From: TRandom@aol.com
h > Subject: flight & pheromones
h > To: champ-l@omg.org
h >
h > 1) I want to create a character who is able to change (temporarily)
h > the way other people react to his target. I can only imagine a special
h > magic or pheromones. Either way, it would look like this: Pheromage
h > Superguy with mysterious looking effect. As far as SG knows, nothing
h > happened. However, for X hours, everyone coming into contact with SG
h > predisposed towards a given emotion, love, anger, or whatever. Neither
h > those around him should easily be able to figure out why. I'm having
h > trouble figuring out how do this and could use any input. Thanks.
Well you could hit your victim with a Transform to inflict a subtle
form of Distinctive Features on him. Depending on how extreme the
effect is this might range from cosmetic (there's a vague pre-disposition
towards a certain emotion, but nothing severely behavior altering) to
Minor (the emotion is definitely there, but anyone who stops to think
about it can overcome it) to Major (Overiding, make an EGO roll not to
react to the victim a certain way.
The other alternative is to throw a Sticky Mind Control or some such.
h > 2) In a recent campaign, our GM had some trouble resolving a
h > During combat our mentalist (Web) mentally paralyzed a powerarmored
h > opponent.
There's your problem. Never allow mental paralysis.
h > The target had just activated flight boosters giving him (about to
h > give him)
h > 200" of flight. At the time, he was approx. 200" up fighting my cyborg
h > (Gauntlet). It was decided that the 200" of flight thrust would
h > continue even
h > though the guy in the suit couldn't control the direction. Gauntlet,
h > wishing
h > not to be an accessory in this guys going into the ground like a dart
h > and
h > liquifying himself, quickly grabbed the pwrarmored guy. He did so in
h > the
h > hopes of directing him to the ground more like a stone skipping on
h > water.
h > Gauntlet has 5" flight, clinging, 70 str, combat pilot, and acrobatics
h > to
h > help him do this. Our GM broke it down into Int and Dex rolls for each
h > 60*
h > turn involved, with appropriate minuses. Any comments?
Sounds not unreasonable. Except of course that no one should have
Mental Paralyisis :)
___
* OFFLINE 1.58
X-Forwarding-Note: Was sent to herolist@october.com; forwarding to hero-l@omg.org
From: Opal@october.com (Opal)
Date: 06 Aug 97 17:31:02 GMT
Subject: Eat it?
X-Ftn-To: herolist@october.com
X-Listname: Hero
Reply-To: hero-l@october.com (Multiple recipients of Hero)
Path: october!opal
Organization: Fidonet: Red October Alpha * Hero Roleplaying * 408-629-4695 *
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 14
h > Feedback needed.
h >
h > How much of a disadvantage would you place on a power that had as its
h > delivery that it must be consumed. I have my own ideas but I want to
h > et
h > some other peoples perspectives. I am trying to duplicate the effct
h > of
h > potions that must be drunk to take effect.
You might actually do this as a trigger. If you want to make potions
that just anyone can drink any time for them to work, Trigger will let
you 'make a potion' each time you use the power. Whoever has the
potion can drink it to activate the Trigger (note this will also require
Area Effect or Sticky or UBO, or only the *potion* is affected by the
Triggered power)
If you have to drink a potion yourself in order to successfully use a
power, then it might be: OAF (potion), gestures (drinking
the potion).
If you have to feed someone else a potion to use a power on them, then
it's the above plus no range (if applicable for that power) and a
'limitted power' limitation: target must be tricked/persuaded/forced
to drink the darn potion -1 (?).
h > Another question. How much would you limit a power that requires the
h > presence of an object but not the possession of it? (ie. A character
h > whose
h > powers require a mirror as a focus but need not be in contact with the
h > mirror to use the power.)
This is just the old "Power only works when X" limitation. Base the
lim on how common 'mirrors' are. If any reflective surface works, then
it's a -1/4 or -1/2 (worth more in a primitive setting where standing
water and sword blades are the only common reflective surfaces). A
modern city is lousy with reflective surfaces.
If it has to be a mirror (silver or mercury-treated glass, right?) or
a particular size, you might get more of a limitation.
h >
h > Suggestions appreciated
h >
h > Patrick B.
___
* OFFLINE 1.58 * Goodmanized for your Frustration.
X-Forwarding-Note: Was sent to herolist@october.com; forwarding to hero-l@omg.org
From: Opal@october.com (Opal)
Date: 06 Aug 97 17:41:04 GMT
Subject: Re: Eat it?
X-Ftn-To: herolist@october.com
X-Listname: Hero
Reply-To: hero-l@october.com (Multiple recipients of Hero)
Path: october!opal
Organization: Fidonet: Red October Alpha * Hero Roleplaying * 408-629-4695 *
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 10
h > > Fantasy Hero uses the 'Gestures' limitation, assuming you 'want' to
h > drink
h > > the potion
h > >
h >
h > Hmm... what about poison that must be ingested? What kind of limit
h > would
h > you give a 4d6k flask of hemlock? ("I drank what?!!" -Socrates)
h >
h > -Eric
h > ---
Here's a generic poison. Note the use of the original 'Gradual'
limitation. This power does a 3d-1 KA aportioned over the
'Gradual' period, not happening multiple times at some interval,
like the HSA II version.
Injested Poison: This poison kills only those characters who actually
swallow it. It is planted in food or water and is dificult to detect.
Though it is not an NND, few characters will be able to defend
against it. Remember, most armor (in heroic games) doesn't cover the
character completely. One area it doesn't cover is the inside of his mouth!
You can't eat with a Force Field up so there's no danger of that stopping
the poison once its gone off. Those characters with unfocused Armor
or Damage resistance should get thier defenses after all,
if thier very skin can turn sword blades it's not that surprising
that a poison meant to kill normal humans wont work as well.
3d6-1 RKAp, Triggered: when eaten +1/4, Area Effect Hex +1/2, Invisible
to all but one sense group +3/4, Gradual: 1hr -2, IAF: poison ampule -1/2,
Only affects triggering characters -1/4, vs. Living only -1/2, not vs
creatures with wierd metabolisms/appropriate Life support/immunities -1/4,
4 chgs -1.
Active Cost: 100, Real Cost: 18
Note: the poison must be area effect or else it only damages the FOOD it
was planted in. Also since it's AE it doesn't take a hit location of head
(since its set off when you swallow it) or stomach, just a 'generalized' hit.
___
* OFFLINE 1.58 * Realism Kills
X-Sender: lizard@dnai.com
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 10:53:50 -0700
From: Lizard <lizard@dnai.com>
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 01:27 AM 8/4/97 -0500, Bryan Berggren wrote:
>And I'd point out, Spidey's origin is a good example of one of the 4-color
>Genre Conventions I mentioned earlier: that having superhuman abilities
>obligates one to take sides between Good and Evil, and attempting to remain
>"neutral" (including using your powers solely for mundane pursuits like
>legal profit) results in Bad Things.
>
One of the nifiter ideas of TORG was their 'reality rules', in which each
reality had fundemental rules hard-wired into it which enforced the genre.
IIRC, in the near-future Japanese cyberpunk reality, any group of more than
10 people would contain at least one traitor/spy, any group of over 100
people would contain at least one secret sub-group, etc. In the pulp
reality, you got a bonus for doing things in the most dramatic possible
fashion, etc. So genre conventions became laws of physics within the
appropriate reality.
X-Forwarding-Note: Was sent to herolist@october.com; forwarding to hero-l@omg.org
From: Opal@october.com (Opal)
Date: 06 Aug 97 17:58:06 GMT
Subject: Space Ship Combat
X-Ftn-To: herolist@october.com
X-Listname: Hero
Reply-To: hero-l@october.com (Multiple recipients of Hero)
Path: october!opal
Organization: Fidonet: Red October Alpha * Hero Roleplaying * 408-629-4695 *
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 13
h > I haven't used the vehicular rules much, especially since they have
h > such a bad reputation. However, I'm going to be running a space
h > opera adventure, somethink like Flash Gordon or Buck Rogers, and
h > ship-to-ship combat is a part of this.
h >
h > I need some advice about running this type of combat in a game. How
h > should I handle vehicular combat? Is the system in the book OK for
h > this?
OK? Maybe. Good? No. Either break out the maps and run it as
much like a normal combat among flyers as possible, or try using
the intercept combat presented. Season heavily with drama and common
sense.
h > Should I bother to design the ships with points and everything, or
h > should I just treat this as a plot device? I want to capture some of
h > the feel of "Millenium Falcon vs. Star Destroyer", that kind of
h > thing.
h >
h > Guy
Well, if you want the feel of Star Warsish space combat, you'll want
to build the ships. Not doing so will lead to a lot of player
frustration, as everything will seem arbitrary. Unfortunately,
the Vehicle rules just aren't that good, and there different enough
from the normal rules to be a pain.
One really good alternative for building Vehicles (and just about
anything else) is the so called 'Incomplete Rule' (incomplete
characters lack certain characteristics for instance, a vehicle lacks
INT & EGO, and must be piloted or it can't do anything).
The complete Incomplete rules can be found on the Gaming Philosopher's
Home Page http:/www.best.com/~jimalj/
(I think that's right.... if not it's in Shelley's Gratuitous links,
and even the links page of the new and improved Hero Games pages,
though you have to go in the back door: look for the 'Unoficial
Mage Plug-In' from there you'll see something like 'back to the
Philosopher's Home Page' or something.)
If you can't find it, I'll try to chop up my copy and email it
to you.
___
* OFFLINE 1.58 * I am not a Rules Lawyer...I'm a Rules Activist.
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 14:14:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
On Wed, 6 Aug 1997 BeerCarboy@aol.com wrote:
> At Wed, Aug 6, 1997 9:11 AM EDT susano@access.digex.net (Michael Surbrook)
> wrote:
>
> >Your comment of :
>
> >"So trusted farmer sidekick of samurai may one day become the rebel leader
> >who overthrows part or all of the repressive social system that put
> >samurai in such a position over the common herd."
>
> >Smacks of playing out of genre and character. Instead of considering how
> >an actual Farmer might think (or what goals he might have) you are trying
> >to impose modern values on the situation. In the setting given, it would
> >be possible for a farmer to become a samurai, so why would he want to over
> >throw anything? Also, the religion of the time was very big into life
> >being preordained fate, so the farmer would probably accept his fate as
> >being a deserved one. Try to over throw the 'repressive social system'
> >smacks of a modern knee-jerk reaction to a historical situation you
> >probably don't agree with. It become a questionable PC motivation (and an
> >unrealistic one).
>
> >Or am I misunderstanding you?
>
> This is a little overbearing on the part of the GM.
The GM has nothing to do with it. He didn't say there was no room for
variation of character motivation, *I* said that your described motivation
seemed unrealistic.
> To say there is no room
> for variation within character motivation saps life out of the game and makes
> PCs little more than NPCs. If a player simply plays himself or plays the
> same character over and over again, that is pretty poor roleplaying.
But I never said we were playing ourselves or the same characters over and
over. I said that your character developed seemed to be the effect of
someone outside looking and, noticing something wrong with the system and
latching onto that as a character goal.
> But to
> suggest that it is impossible for a CHARACTER to imagine changing the way
> things are is excessively restrictive. Peasants did kill samurai in real
> history, the shogunate was overthrown in real history (and yes it was not in
> the time period you are talking about and it was under a specific set of
> circumstances that will not be duplicated in the game).
I.m not arguing that. I just have a hard time believing the PC suddenly
wanting to become the next Joan of Arc (or Spartacus or...)
> Now the specific
> farmer character may not be of the type to imagune changing the world, but
> another might be. Let's take a look at your massacred village scene. Your
> samurai orders the farmer to clear the bodies, he refuses, your samurai
> (instead of tolerating this to some extent as you did) cuts the farmer down;
> now he has to move the bodies himself the specific act he could not stand to
> do before (oops).
Yeah, but my honor would have felt better... ^_^
> Alternative: your party comes to the village, meets the
> villains who have slain everyone (by the way, the legendary samurai courage
> was certainly evident here when you decided not to fight because you KNEW
> they would kick your @ss, hmmn that may have been out of genre ;>)
Which was reason number three on the list. I also mentioned that we had
no legal right to attack them. The GM had presented us with an
interesting moral quandry, which was sure to cause repercussions later
(like when we meet these guys again).
And I should point out that 'legendary samurai courage' at times was just
that; legendary. At one point I found a quote about what a samurai
considered the best way to take an enemy's house: Burn it down at night
and kill everyone that runs out. Gee, really noble and heroic, but true
to life...
> and they
> justify their act they way they did. The samurai in the party accept this
> justification even though they know it was excessive force and an attrocity.
> Farmer character suddenly realizes that if he does become samurai he will be
> endorses the same system of values that allows for this sort of thing and
> decides that no, he will not simply perpetuate such a system and become part
> of it, he will oppose that system and either the system or he will die.
I just don't see it. I f I was playing the Farmer I'd probably think:
"Man, these are some evil dudes, I hope they get theirs someday." As well
as "Damn samurai, always doing what they want, I hope they all get theirs
some day (like in their next life)..." I probably wouldn't try to
overthrow the system, but if I was told that service and loyalty could get
me out of the rat race and into upper class society, I'd probably join
rather then beat 'em. But that's just me.
> Now why can't something like that happen? I'm not saying it is preferable to
> the farmer doing something else, but to label it impossible seems unfairly
> restrictive.
It could, but it doesn't seem plausible (to me). That sort of reblliosu
feel seems more apropraite in a society where the rebel may have an idea
of a better life as seen else where. The framer has nothing to compare
his lot to and has no idea that anywhere else is different.
***************************************************************************
* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
***************************************************************************
Comments: Authenticated sender is <ghoyle1@mail.airmail.net>
From: "Guy Hoyle" <ghoyle1@mail.airmail.net>
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 18:21:21 +0000
Subject: Pulp Genre Conventions (was Re: 4 color principles)
Reply-to: guyhoyle@iname.com
Priority: normal
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
> At 10:53 AM 8/6/97 -0700, Lizard wrote:
> >One of the nifiter ideas of TORG was their 'reality rules', in which each
> >reality had fundemental rules hard-wired into it which enforced the genre.
> >IIRC, in the near-future Japanese cyberpunk reality, any group of more than
> >10 people would contain at least one traitor/spy, any group of over 100
> >people would contain at least one secret sub-group, etc. In the pulp
> >reality, you got a bonus for doing things in the most dramatic possible
> >fashion, etc. So genre conventions became laws of physics within the
> >appropriate reality.
>
This is great! I'm designing a pulp campaign myself; what other
bonuses could players get?
Extra experience for falling in love with your enemy's daughter,
sacrificing yourself so your companions can get away, using "period"
slang, etc.?
Guy
----------------------------------
Guy Hoyle (guyhoyle@iname.com)
http://web2.airmail.net/ghoyle1/
Visit The Gamemaster's Bookshelf
and the PANGAEA Project!
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 16:01:36 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
On Wed, 6 Aug 1997, Robert A. West wrote:
> > On the other hand, if I am trying to run a certain genre (and to reference
> > my last post, lets say it is feudal Japan circa 1542), I'd excpet the
> > players to have 9at least) a basic understanding of the genre being
> > presented and try to create characters that fit within the boundries of
> > that genre. So, if you want to play a ninja, that's fine, just don't
> > expect to be able to go running around in your night suit tossing shuriken
> > at everyone and not have anyone bat an eye. A ninja is at the *bottom* of
> > the social structure, in fact he doesn't even *count* in the social
> > structure of the time, and a known ninja will soon find himself very dead.
>
> All of which is well and good, but some players may come in with very
> different ideas. The GM and the more experienced players should help the
> neophyte to learn the setting, and should provide good advice on roleplaying
> options. Of course, Hero rules provide an excellent mechanism for making sure
> that people understand these restrictions, as the Ninja Package Deal should
> include things like:
>
> 20 Hunted by rival clans, intent to kill, 14-, but only identified as a
> Ninja (8- equivalent), more powerful, extensive NCI
> 15 Secret ID (Ninja code of secrecy)
> 20 Code of the Ninja (common, total)
> etc.
All of which are valid disads. Nad yes, my ninja/scout/ashigaru character
from the same game *does* have SID: Ninja in the employ of Lord Arai.
> > In the 1542 Japan game that I'm in, one of the PCs was a farmer while the
> > rest of us were samurai. After a while, the player complained about not
>
> ...having anything to do? What *was* this PC supposed to accomplish within
> the context of the campaign? How was this player *supposed* to have fun? If
> this was Hero-based, what did the player spend his points on, when the rest of
> you were buying Weapons, Armor, Wealth, Status and the like?
Allow me to pint out that
A) The player decided upon his choice of character
B) He was asked "Are you sure you want to play this?"
C) He spent a lot of points on trying to become an unarmed combat machine.
Now, as to having fun, it depends. If you really want to try for an epic
hero, you could. The genre (and history) allows for a lowly farmer to end
up a great general. As I've posted before the man who unified Japan
started out as a sandal bearer.
> > having any armor, getting stuck with all the dirty jobs and not having any
> > say in anything. Our response? "Hey, wake up dude! Your playing a
> > character from the bottom third of the social scale, we *don't* have to do
> > anything for you, PC or not!" And if the PC took offense and picked a
> > fight, we were perfectly in our own right (ie abiding by the genre
> > conventions of the game) to cut him down like the mad dog that he was.
> > Needless to say, thay player never did acheive clue and left that game.
>
> It is always risky to be judgmental about a story that one is hearing in the
> compressed confines of a net.posting, and I hope that there is a simple
> explanation; however, I am forced to wonder who it was that was really
> clueless! Perhaps the GM and the other players?
If you've seen my other posts, you should have a clearer pciture by now.
Yeah, I should have given more explination at the outset.
> How in the name of the Ghods of Roleplaying did you *expect* the player to
> have fun in an extended campaign if his character has no combat abilities, no
> social status, no say in what happens, and no influence over events? Even if
> he made the choice allegedly knowingly, if he is not having fun in his
> assigned role, some reasonable accomodation should have been made.
The player had several choices in his case.
A) Start someone else. The GM was not going to care if he dropped farmboy
and started up with another character.
B) Stick it out. At one point he was 'promoted' to ashigaru (soldier)
status, given armor and a weapon. As I said before he then dropped both
for reason having nothing to do with the campaign or his character, but
due to game mechanics. I think in due time he would have been made a
samurai and been at the same level as everyone else.
> I have done low status characters in a weekend LARP -- heck, I have even
> played the family dog! In table-top games, I have played lower-status
> adventurers who had to bow and defer to higher-status characters, but they all
> had some compensation to them. The dog had license to do things that would
> have gotten other characters shot; all he risked was a kick out the door. In
> Chivalry and Sorcery, a lower-status character may be the most powerful PC
> magic user in the game, depending on die rolls.
>
> Of course, there may have been compensating factors in your campaign. Perhaps
> the low-social types were the only ones with magical spells, or the use of a
> network of household spies, or whatever. Perhaps you rotated roles, so that
> each of you took turns playing the no-name no-accounts, and he was simply
> unwilling to wait his turn.
Well, its not my campaign, so I'm uncertain if the GM was going to cut the
PC some slack in that regard. We certainly didn't rotate roles, we each
played the characters we had created.
I think part of my aggrivation was that the player was amazingly inert.
He quit not because of being a lower social class, but because he kept
getting injured in each battle. Our response? "Uh, when the GM gave you
armor you tossed it away saying it lowered your DCV... (yeah, by 1 whole
point)"
He also griped that he was always getting the serious damage, which we
then pointed out wasn't true, since another PC had taken 8 Body to his
*face* (and he only had 8), and another had taken something like 12 to his
head! (Splitting his helmet among other things).
Now, I don't know if the GM had said "are you sure?" when given the
character, I know I would have.
***************************************************************************
* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
***************************************************************************
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 13:52:54 -0700
From: "Robert A. West" <robtwest@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Michael Surbrook wrote:
>
>
> Genre conventions are not always valid 'limits'. Instead genre
> conventions help define the campaign itself. In a 4-color game, the genre
> conventions do not limit the characters, with the exception that one would
> not (or should not) find dark clad gun-totiing avengers of the night
> running about.
Actually, I would disagree somewhat. If it is to be a campaign convention
that (for example) normal life goes on only slightly modified by the existence
of super-powers, then it would, IMHO, be inappropriate for a player to insist
on having his character try to mass-market a pill that enables anyone to use
Mind Link, unless the GM is willing to undergo the attendant work of changing
the setting (which may be considerable). This is akin to the old problem of
players' claiming that they can invent gunpowder in a pseudo-medieval fantasy
setting.
Of course, with experience, a GM learns more subtle ways of communicating the
fact that the course will not be allowed to succeed, and can find ways to
prevent it that enhance the setting, but every now and again, you find that
someone will not listen or is on a totally different wavelength.
At that point, the GM has a choice: punish the deviant behavior in-game, or
have a GM-player conference, explaining why this apparently reasonable course
of action is outside of the campaign as conceived. Of course, this should be
done only very sparingly, and fair consideration should be given to following
the idea to see where it leads. Nevertheless, the GM is entitled to enjoy the
campaign as much as anyone else is, and not getting to tell the tales that
have been planned is not going to enhance the GM's fun.
>
> On the other hand, if I am trying to run a certain genre (and to reference
> my last post, lets say it is feudal Japan circa 1542), I'd excpet the
> players to have 9at least) a basic understanding of the genre being
> presented and try to create characters that fit within the boundries of
> that genre. So, if you want to play a ninja, that's fine, just don't
> expect to be able to go running around in your night suit tossing shuriken
> at everyone and not have anyone bat an eye. A ninja is at the *bottom* of
> the social structure, in fact he doesn't even *count* in the social
> structure of the time, and a known ninja will soon find himself very dead.
All of which is well and good, but some players may come in with very
different ideas. The GM and the more experienced players should help the
neophyte to learn the setting, and should provide good advice on roleplaying
options. Of course, Hero rules provide an excellent mechanism for making sure
that people understand these restrictions, as the Ninja Package Deal should
include things like:
20 Hunted by rival clans, intent to kill, 14-, but only identified as a
Ninja (8- equivalent), more powerful, extensive NCI
15 Secret ID (Ninja code of secrecy)
20 Code of the Ninja (common, total)
etc.
> In the 1542 Japan game that I'm in, one of the PCs was a farmer while the
> rest of us were samurai. After a while, the player complained about not
...having anything to do? What *was* this PC supposed to accomplish within
the context of the campaign? How was this player *supposed* to have fun? If
this was Hero-based, what did the player spend his points on, when the rest of
you were buying Weapons, Armor, Wealth, Status and the like?
> having any armor, getting stuck with all the dirty jobs and not having any
> say in anything. Our response? "Hey, wake up dude! Your playing a
> character from the bottom third of the social scale, we *don't* have to do
> anything for you, PC or not!" And if the PC took offense and picked a
> fight, we were perfectly in our own right (ie abiding by the genre
> conventions of the game) to cut him down like the mad dog that he was.
> Needless to say, thay player never did acheive clue and left that game.
It is always risky to be judgmental about a story that one is hearing in the
compressed confines of a net.posting, and I hope that there is a simple
explanation; however, I am forced to wonder who it was that was really
clueless! Perhaps the GM and the other players?
How in the name of the Ghods of Roleplaying did you *expect* the player to
have fun in an extended campaign if his character has no combat abilities, no
social status, no say in what happens, and no influence over events? Even if
he made the choice allegedly knowingly, if he is not having fun in his
assigned role, some reasonable accomodation should have been made.
I have done low status characters in a weekend LARP -- heck, I have even
played the family dog! In table-top games, I have played lower-status
adventurers who had to bow and defer to higher-status characters, but they all
had some compensation to them. The dog had license to do things that would
have gotten other characters shot; all he risked was a kick out the door. In
Chivalry and Sorcery, a lower-status character may be the most powerful PC
magic user in the game, depending on die rolls.
Of course, there may have been compensating factors in your campaign. Perhaps
the low-social types were the only ones with magical spells, or the use of a
network of household spies, or whatever. Perhaps you rotated roles, so that
each of you took turns playing the no-name no-accounts, and he was simply
unwilling to wait his turn.
--
<------------------------------------------------------->
Robert A. West /// "Censorship is tyranny."
Phone W:(215)466-3628; H:(215)348-9113
http://www.erols.com/robtwest
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 13:56:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender: bob.greenwade@klock.com
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 10:53 AM 8/6/97 -0700, Lizard wrote:
>One of the nifiter ideas of TORG was their 'reality rules', in which each
>reality had fundemental rules hard-wired into it which enforced the genre.
>IIRC, in the near-future Japanese cyberpunk reality, any group of more than
>10 people would contain at least one traitor/spy, any group of over 100
>people would contain at least one secret sub-group, etc. In the pulp
>reality, you got a bonus for doing things in the most dramatic possible
>fashion, etc. So genre conventions became laws of physics within the
>appropriate reality.
Hm. I wonder if we could come up with appropriate rules to this effect
for superheroic combat (that aren't already in the Hero rules)? Like +5 to
Skill Rolls for supers if success would save their own lives or those of
significant Normals? (Just as an example.)
---
This mail was sent from the Corvallis Public Library
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 14:18:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender: bob.greenwade@klock.com
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: Embodiments
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 10:50 AM 8/6/97 +0000, Bob Simpson wrote:
>>In a four-color comic book or campaign, the heroes generally believe
>>in Good and Evil as palpable concepts that correspond to an external
>>reality.
>
>You know, when you first said "Good and Evil are things that Really Exist
in the super-here world" what came to mind immediately was the actual,
physical embodiment protrayed in 'mainstream' comics. You know, Lord Chaos,
Master Order, Dream, Death, Destiny, Eternity, Infinity, etc. etc. etc. and
all those other trademarked folks. It was interesting to watch the
discussion rocket off in an ENTIRELY different direction... :-)
You know, I'd assumed the same thing. (The Living Tribunal is another
entity of this order that comes to mind.)
Say, does anyone know of any published or online game characters (in any
game system) along these lines?
---
This mail was sent from the Corvallis Public Library
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 17:21:54 -0400 (EDT)
From: aregalad@umiami.ir.miami.edu
Subject: Golden Age Module Help Needed
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Howdy Gang!
I'm writing a VERY light hearted Golden Age module and could use the
creative talents of the list.
The Premise: One of the PCs (Lady Opal) is celebrating her 21st B-Day and
her parents are throwing her a big high society party (yes they have
money, and yes she is spoiled). Most, if not all, of the PC team (anywhere
from 8-10 characters) will be present.
The Villany: The party is going to get crashed by a villainess. She is an
old, washed out actress who was once beautiful and beloved, but has now
lost her fame, fortune, figure and career. She has been relegated to doing
some Vaudeville stuff and is VERY unhappy. She wants to be loved by the
public again (especially men) and she desperately wants her youth back.
She sees her opportunity in an eccentric stage magician who is in her
troupe. This weirdo actually has a real magic book, and our Prima Donna
bonks him on the head and steals it. She learns just enough magic to plot
her comeback and THIS involves stealing the youth from some poor
unsuspecting young ladies. What better (and more dramatic) way of
ahcieving this than kidnapping the young society girls attending their
friend's well publicized B-Day party?
Her Plan:
-Use love potion on members of her troupe - hence gaining henchmen.
-Replace caterers at party with above henchmen.
-Have henchmen put potion in drinks. Potion will cause all men to fall
instantly in love with HER. This leaves all lovely young ladies
defenseless. It also makes 1/2 of the PC team her protectors.
-Have henchmen collect young ladies.
-Take them back to hideout.
-Perform ritual and become young and beautiful.
The Henchmen: In my GAC campaign there are not many mutants, but those
that DO apparently end up on Vaudeville.
-A bunch of acrobat dwarves - highly skilled, Martial Arts, Acrobatics
-A Cuban wrestler - very strong (bordering on superhuman) and wrestling
-An Italian opera singer (This guy has the most extravagant powers of the
"team." These include invulnerability and reflection powers -like the
blob- and voice powers (of course)
-I'm thinking of using Slapstick from CLOWN as well
The Help:
Basically I'm just looking for good ideas to enhance what I already have.
It should be a fun, light-hearted module (almost like a Warner Bros.
cartoon). Normally these guys do some pretty hard-hitting pulpy stuff, but
I wanted to give them a break.
You can provide:
-good gags
-good lines
-good names for the villains and henchmen (I'm bad with these)
-suggestions for different henchmen
-suggestions for powers for henchmen
-magical defenses/powers for Prima Donna (I think I'm going to name her
this). I don't want her to seem like a massive sorceress. She is really
quite the ameteur. I would like for her, however, to have a trick or
two up her sleeve.
Anyway, whatever you throw my way would be appreciated. Thanks in advance,
Dragonfly
P.S. Bryce and Bryant, I tried e-mailing you but it bounced back twice.
Whats up?
Comments: Authenticated sender is <ghoyle1@mail.airmail.net>
From: "Guy Hoyle" <ghoyle1@mail.airmail.net>
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 21:38:14 +0000
Subject: Space Ship Combat
Reply-to: guyhoyle@iname.com
Priority: normal
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 3
I haven't used the vehicular rules much, especially since they have
such a bad reputation. However, I'm going to be running a space
opera adventure, somethink like Flash Gordon or Buck Rogers, and
ship-to-ship combat is a part of this.
I need some advice about running this type of combat in a game. How
should I handle vehicular combat? Is the system in the book OK for
this?
Should I bother to design the ships with points and everything, or
should I just treat this as a plot device? I want to capture some of
the feel of "Millenium Falcon vs. Star Destroyer", that kind of
thing.
Guy
----------------------------------
Guy Hoyle (guyhoyle@iname.com)
http://web2.airmail.net/ghoyle1/
Visit The Gamemaster's Bookshelf
and the PANGAEA Project!
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 15:25:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender: bob.greenwade@klock.com
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: Golden Age Module Help Needed
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 05:21 PM 8/6/97 -0400, aregalad@umiami.ir.miami.edu wrote:
>Howdy Gang!
>
>I'm writing a VERY light hearted Golden Age module and could use the
>creative talents of the list.
>
>The Premise: One of the PCs (Lady Opal) is celebrating her 21st B-Day and
>her parents are throwing her a big high society party (yes they have
>money, and yes she is spoiled). Most, if not all, of the PC team (anywhere
>from 8-10 characters) will be present.
>
>The Villany: The party is going to get crashed by a villainess. She is an
>old, washed out actress who was once beautiful and beloved, but has now
>lost her fame, fortune, figure and career. She has been relegated to doing
>some Vaudeville stuff and is VERY unhappy. She wants to be loved by the
>public again (especially men) and she desperately wants her youth back.
>She sees her opportunity in an eccentric stage magician who is in her
>troupe. This weirdo actually has a real magic book, and our Prima Donna
>bonks him on the head and steals it. She learns just enough magic to plot
>her comeback and THIS involves stealing the youth from some poor
>unsuspecting young ladies. What better (and more dramatic) way of
>ahcieving this than kidnapping the young society girls attending their
>friend's well publicized B-Day party?
>
>Her Plan:
>
>-Use love potion on members of her troupe - hence gaining henchmen.
>
>-Replace caterers at party with above henchmen.
>
>-Have henchmen put potion in drinks. Potion will cause all men to fall
> instantly in love with HER. This leaves all lovely young ladies
> defenseless. It also makes 1/2 of the PC team her protectors.
>
>-Have henchmen collect young ladies.
>
>-Take them back to hideout.
>
>-Perform ritual and become young and beautiful.
>
>The Henchmen: In my GAC campaign there are not many mutants, but those
>that DO apparently end up on Vaudeville.
>
>-A bunch of acrobat dwarves - highly skilled, Martial Arts, Acrobatics
>-A Cuban wrestler - very strong (bordering on superhuman) and wrestling
>-An Italian opera singer (This guy has the most extravagant powers of the
> "team." These include invulnerability and reflection powers -like the
> blob- and voice powers (of course)
>-I'm thinking of using Slapstick from CLOWN as well
>
>
>The Help:
>
>Basically I'm just looking for good ideas to enhance what I already have.
>It should be a fun, light-hearted module (almost like a Warner Bros.
>cartoon). Normally these guys do some pretty hard-hitting pulpy stuff, but
>I wanted to give them a break.
>
>You can provide:
>-good gags
Well, for one thing, maybe the catering costumes don't quite fit the
villainess' henchmen -- least of all the dwarves.
Also, once things start boing badly, maybe the wrestler has a radiation
accident that temporarily gives him scads of Growth, so he grabs one of the
young ladies (maybe a DNPC) and climbs up the side of the nearest skyscraper
(say, the Empire State Building).
>-good lines
How can we get through a humorous scenario with a demented, washed-up
actress without the line, "I'm ready for my close-up, Mr. DeMille"?
>-good names for the villains and henchmen (I'm bad with these)
And me without any of my three Spanish dictionaries. If you want to run
the above King Kong reference, maybe you can call the wrestler whatever is
Spanish for "gorilla."
For the opera singer, perhaps "The Great Fularotti."
And the thought of limiting the drarves to three and calling them the
Lollipop Guild has all sorts of ideas.
>-suggestions for different henchmen
>-suggestions for powers for henchmen
Sorry, I have no ideas for these.
>-magical defenses/powers for Prima Donna (I think I'm going to name her
> this). I don't want her to seem like a massive sorceress. She is really
> quite the ameteur. I would like for her, however, to have a trick or
> two up her sleeve.
Mental Defense, Power Defense, and Flash Defense (especially Hearing
Flash Defense) seem appropriate. An Explosive AVLD vs Hearing Flash Defense
(with No Range and Personal Immunity) could work as she hits a high note
that stuns everyone standing nearby (as a one-time choir singer, I *know*
that this works at times in real life -- not just as a Hearing Flash, either).
---
This mail was sent from the Corvallis Public Library
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 15:42:22 -0700
From: "Robert A. West" <robtwest@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Variant Skills System for HSR
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
DocTough@aol.com wrote:
>
> In a message dated 97-08-04 01:45:11 EDT, Rob wrote:
>
> This allows for Pc to have decent Skill rolls without spending
> additional points that would otherwise go to Talents, Perks, Character
> Advantages, Equipments, Agents, etc. I firmly believe that Skills are very
> important to a character, but have experienced players that would shortchange
> their PCs and then wonder why they couldn't perform non-superpowered feats
> without them.
I have taken the other tack of suggesting, strongly, that people
emphasize their characters' skills at first, and designed opposition and
problems that rely on those skills heavily.
> Not all applications a skill as a
> Complimentary Skill are trully appropriate. Being a Chemist by education and
> lab experience (Medical), I find that my practical knowledge of general
> chemistry were already accounted for in more advanced topics, but help a
> little. The lack of a roll is meant to imply that you know that you know and
> your efforts should not be undermined by the "luck of the dice".
Well, it depends on what sort of feat we as discussing, and of course,
there is the bonus for extra time (+1/increment on the time chart). A
real-world chemistry problem might get a +5 bonus, meaning that only on a
roll of 18 will anyone who really has the skill solidly miss it -- we all
have blown simple tasks on rare occasion.
As for the "complementary" rule, I view using Chemistry as a
complementary skill to Nuclear Chemistry as a way to represent the fact
that general Chemistry skill is already in there. Thus, if you buy
(INT=13):
7 General Chemistry 15-
3 Physiochemistry 13-
The General Chemistry complementary roll will add to the Physiochemistry
roll as follows:
roll chance plus plus*chance
3 1:216 +7 +7/216
4-5 9:216 +6 +72/216
6-7 25:216 +5 +125/216
8-9 46:216 +4 +184/216
10-11 54:216 +3 +162/216
12-13 46:216 +2 +92/216
14-15 25:216 +1 +25/216
----------------------------------
Total +667/216 = +3.09
Mathematically, this is just a mechanism for giving a perpetual +3 to the
"subskill", and it lies entirely within existing Hero rules. In effect,
our character has Nuclear Chemistry 16-. Around 5% of the time, he can
manage a super-heroic feat, based on an adjusted value of 19- or 20-.
>
>
> >> There are a number of preset Subskills that cover the need for a
> > Profession Skill, (finally) account for "Kits", cover topics of History,
> > Inventor, etc.<<
>
> > Kits are already covered as either mobile labs or as Skill Levels OAF<
>
> Yes, they can be treated this way, but making them subkills was done to
> allow them to be include at the site of the Skill. Plus, I've generally had
> reservations about focussing non-combat Skill Levels. Cost turns out to
> about the same.
Why the reservations about focused skill levels? I see no reason to be
more leary of treating a laptop computer as
6 +3 to all KS: OAF laptop (universal, fragile)
than in writing up
6 +3 to Ranged Combat, OAF Gunsights
Does not count if 1/2 OCV applies (-1/4)
Shared focus with gun on which mounted (-0).
>
> I find the organization of the skill/subskill system reduces the
> confusion for players to locating the appropriate skill to use.
Well, that may be the best argument that you have made for your system!
I await details.
>
> >
> > Doc Tough
>
--
<------------------------------------------------------->
Robert A. West /// "Censorship is tyranny."
Phone W:(215)466-3628; H:(215)348-9113
http://www.erols.com/robtwest
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 16:02:02 -0700
From: "Robert A. West" <robtwest@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Eat it?
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Patrick Barden wrote:
>
> Feedback needed.
>
> How much of a disadvantage would you place on a power that had as its
> delivery that it must be consumed. I have my own ideas but I want to et
> some other peoples perspectives. I am trying to duplicate the effct of
> potions that must be drunk to take effect.
OAF if it is obviously a potion with powerful effects.
IAF if it is looks like a normal drink.
IIF if it is really hard to distinguish.
In any event, gestures, even in a superheroic campaign, seems to cover
most somatic preparations. If it has to be prepared in some way, or
opening the potion is an extra half-phase, etc., then Extra Time might be
appropriate.
>
> Another question. How much would you limit a power that requires the
> presence of an object but not the possession of it? (ie. A character whose
> powers require a mirror as a focus but need not be in contact with the
> mirror to use the power.)
If the mirrow allows the caster to project powers, this might convert an
accessible focus into an inaccessible one (you have my mirrow, but
I can still Energy Blast you through it), provided that taking the focus
out of LOS or some agreed distance would cancel the ability to use it.
If the focus is already inaccessible, then I would probably treat this as
Only in Hero ID, or an IIF, or half-value for an OIF, all -1/4.
conceivably, it could turn into a special effect.
For mirrors that sit there and act as portals or scrying devices, treat
normally. If the mirror is nailed to the wall, OIF. If lying on a
table, OAF. If the Mirror of Galadriel, which can be disrupted by
causing ripples in the water, OAF Fragile. I imagine that you get the
idea by now.
> Suggestions appreciated
>
> Patrick B.
--
<------------------------------------------------------->
Robert A. West /// "Censorship is tyranny."
Phone W:(215)466-3628; H:(215)348-9113
http://www.erols.com/robtwest
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 16:08:27 -0700
From: RGSchwerdtfeger@directv.com (Richard G Schwerdtfeger)
Subject: Re[2]: Embodiments
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Bob Greenwade wrote:
>>At 10:50 AM 8/6/97 +0000, Bob Simpson wrote:
>>You know, when you first said "Good and Evil are things that Really Exist
>>in the super-here world" what came to mind immediately was the actual,
>>physical embodiment protrayed in 'mainstream' comics. You know, Lord
>>Chaos, Master Order, Dream, Death, Destiny, Eternity, Infinity, etc. etc.
>>etc. and all those other trademarked folks. It was interesting to watch
>>the discussion rocket off in an ENTIRELY different direction... :-)
>You know, I'd assumed the same thing. (The Living Tribunal is another
>entity of this order that comes to mind.)
>Say, does anyone know of any published or online game characters (in any
>game system) along these lines?
These characters are usually plot devices in the comics (or at least
were up til fairly recently). They should probably be treated as such
during the game as well.
For Instance: I have a character in my campaign world named Doctor
Anomaly, who is loosely based on The Phantom Stranger.
He might show up to give the characters a hint or order a quest, but
he is virtually unaffectable by them. After all, his point total would
probably be in the thousands. ;)
RichardReceived: from utilpo1.directv.com (198.205.78.115) by ccgate.directv.com with
SMTP
(IMA Internet Exchange 2.1 Enterprise) id 00031BD2; Wed, 6 Aug 97 15:52:33
-0700
Received: from utilpo1.directv.com ([198.205.98.10]) by utilpo1.directv.com
(Post.Office MTA v3.1 release PO205e ID# 100-35062U100L100S0)
with SMTP id AAA143 for <RGSchwerdtfeger@directv.com&>
Wed, 6 Aug 1997 15:52:32 -0700
Received: from 192.67.184.65 ([192.67.184.65]) by utilpo1.directv.com (InterScan
E-Mail VirusWall NT)
Received: by emerald (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id RAA27858; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 17:21:54 -0400
Received: from speedy.proaxis.com by emerald (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
id RAA27854; Wed, 6 Aug 1997 17:21:48 -0400
Received: from libpub14pc.ci.corvallis.or.us ([205.167.155.43]) by
speedy.proaxis.com (8.8.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id OAA07918 for <champ-l@omg.org&>
Wed, 6 Aug 1997 14:18:22 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 14:18:22 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <1.5.4.16.19970806142641.2817d9be@klock.com>
X-Sender: bob.greenwade@klock.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (16)
Mime-Version: 1.0
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: Embodiments
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 16:16:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender: bob.greenwade@klock.com
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: Re[2]: Embodiments
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 04:08 PM 8/6/97 -0700, Richard G Schwerdtfeger wrote:
> >You know, I'd assumed the same thing. (The Living Tribunal is another
> >entity of this order that comes to mind.)
> >Say, does anyone know of any published or online game characters (in any
> >game system) along these lines?
>
>
> These characters are usually plot devices in the comics (or at least
> were up til fairly recently). They should probably be treated as such
> during the game as well.
>
> For Instance: I have a character in my campaign world named Doctor
> Anomaly, who is loosely based on The Phantom Stranger.
>
> He might show up to give the characters a hint or order a quest, but
> he is virtually unaffectable by them. After all, his point total would
> probably be in the thousands. ;)
Good point. It's a little like trying to determine point totals for
Jehovah (hoping this doesn't become the spark for yet another religious
flame war).
---
This mail was sent from the Corvallis Public Library
From: Daniel Pawtowski <dpawtows@access.digex.net>
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 20:16:42 -0400 (EDT)
Organization: VTSFFC
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
> Hm. I wonder if we could come up with appropriate rules to this effect
> for superheroic combat (that aren't already in the Hero rules)? Like +5 to
> Skill Rolls for supers if success would save their own lives or those of
> significant Normals? (Just as an example.)
Extra PD, only if you stand facing your opponent with your hands on
your hips and grinning broadly. Followed by a Vulnerability to Thrown
Handguns. :-)
Daniel Pawtowski
Comments: Authenticated sender is <ghoyle1@mail.airmail.net>
From: "Guy Hoyle" <ghoyle1@mail.airmail.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 01:16:43 +0000
Subject: Gadgets
Reply-to: guyhoyle@iname.com
Priority: normal
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 8
I'm putting together some gadget rules for my Justice Inc. campaign,
and I wanted to get some opinions on one topic. When you have a
character who can crank out such things as potions, gas bombs, etc.,
the process used to make the item can be distinguished from the item
itself. Any Modifiers that apply to the creative process (like extra
Time, skill rolls, etc.) would not necessarily apply to those who
actually used the item themselves, and vice versa. If it takes you
an hour to build something, it does not necessarily take you an hour
to use it.
Suppose Dr. Whitney Cain, aka Blind Justice, wants to be able to put
together some small gadgets, like "blackout bombs" (an inky black
cloud); he wants to be able to make enough to give out to friends.
It takes Cain about an hour to crank out 6 bombs, which takes
his complete concentration throughout the process. Obviously, it
takes a Chemistry skill roll to prepare the blackout solution;
otherwise, he detonates the bombs.
So, the process required to make the bomb gets a Concentrate (-1),
Extra Time, 1 hour, Side Effects (the bombs blow up) (-1), and
Requires a (Chemistry) Skill Roll. I put these limitations on one of
Heromaker's closed Packages. Any Modifiers that went into the
Darkness power itself I put on that slot within the Package.
However, none of those modifiers apply to the bombs themselves. When
the crimefighting chemist hands out his little goodies, they operate
as an IIF, universal (because you can conceal them easily); since the
process creates six of the pellets, Charges is also appropriate here.
(I wondered about whether this goes on the pellets or the process,
and decided to put it on the pellets. Would this be right?)
At any rate, here's what I came up with in Heromaker (slightly
modified by hand).
(Best viewed with a monospaced font)
3 PKG,"Blackout Bombs (makes 6)",
Concentrate(-1),0 DCV,constant
concentration,Extra Time(-2
1/2),time: 1 hour,Side Effects
(-1); Requires Skill Roll (-1/2)
(17) 3" Darkness,IAF(-3/4),
unbreakable,hard to recover,5-6
Charges(-0), Continuing, Duration:
1 minute
This means that Cain would be able to crank out 18 grenades in 3
hours, or however many he wanted to spend the time for.
My question is, does this look like I have accomplished what I
intended? If not, is there a better way to do this?
Thanks,
Guy
----------------------------------
Guy Hoyle (guyhoyle@iname.com)
http://web2.airmail.net/ghoyle1/
Visit The Gamemaster's Bookshelf
and the PANGAEA Project!
Cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-6,8,17-22
From: dwtoomey@juno.com (David W Toomey)
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 22:00:02 EDT
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 2
>How in the name of the Ghods of Roleplaying did you *expect* the
>player to
>have fun in an extended campaign if his character has no combat
>abilities, no
>social status, no say in what happens, and no influence over events?
I've played in more than one campaign where 1-2 of the players were Noble
types, and
the rest of us were lackeys. Being a lackey was great fun, you got to do
all sorts of things that the noble would never 'lower' himself to, plus
you had the challenge of doing such things without being caught, and thus
beaten (not killed, this was european fantasy, not oriental) Usually,
the noble characters were run by less than subtle players, who only saw
the power and prestiege of the position, and sometimes chafed a bit under
social restrictions, while lackeys were played by people who understood
the society of the time, with some loosening for everybody (it is a GAME,
after all), and enjoyed having to be clever and play around restrictions.
David W Toomey
dwtoomey@juno.com
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 13:18:48 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 5
At 07:15 AM 8/5/97 -0400, you wrote:
>> i was simply suggesting a way you could have made 'farm boy' more
>> of a "player" in one sence of the word. And it developed as a means
>> of unarmed warfare- or at the very least you must admit that
>> this was an important rtend.
>
>And the farmer *was* a 125 point master of the martial arts. And having
>combat skill doesn't make one 'more' of a player, interaction does.
>
i meant a *player*, as in a valid combatant.
>> anyone can get killed by the GM at any time-
>
>Yes. But only in certain horror games does it usually happen
>indiscriminatly. You don't see people dropping like flies in 4-color
>games do you?
>
i meant i horror genre- players don't get to kill heaps of peoploe, only
the gm's goolies *g*
>> >In a Dark Champions game? "There are no good guys and no bad guys. There
>> > are just scum, the cops, and innocent people. And sometimes,
>> > these groups cross boundies"
>>
>> i would argue that this is 'false'- as in it isn't true, so much
>> as this is the twisted, cynical attitude expoused by the players, which isn't
>> any more valid than captain whitebread's view- otherwise, the '4-color hero
>> arging like spidey does with punnny' type thing is just comic relief
> with the chronically naieve- where it should be a battle of ideology of
>sorts, IMHHO. .
>
>And I would argue that the Punusher I remeber (late 80s) had this *exact*
>world view.
>
i know, but it isn't "true" it's his opinion, argued with bullets.
This is the conflict i was talking about.
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 13:26:42 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: Space Ship Combat
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 6
At 09:38 PM 8/6/97 +0000, you wrote:
>I haven't used the vehicular rules much, especially since they have
>such a bad reputation. However, I'm going to be running a space
>opera adventure, somethink like Flash Gordon or Buck Rogers, and
>ship-to-ship combat is a part of this.
>
>I need some advice about running this type of combat in a game. How
>should I handle vehicular combat? Is the system in the book OK for
>this?
>
>Should I bother to design the ships with points and everything, or
>should I just treat this as a plot device? I want to capture some of
>the feel of "Millenium Falcon vs. Star Destroyer", that kind of
>thing.
>
>Guy
>
>----------------------------------
>Guy Hoyle (guyhoyle@iname.com)
>http://web2.airmail.net/ghoyle1/
>Visit The Gamemaster's Bookshelf
>and the PANGAEA Project!
>
please contact me if you'd like a copy of my 3DAIR champions combat rules-
it plots ship combat in three dimensions, with lots of hit locations and stuff- basically a BIG character sheet with many fun uses!
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 13:37:48 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: Re[2]: 4 color super lines
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 7
At 01:33 PM 8/5/97 -0700, you wrote:
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>Content-Description: cc:Mail note part
>
> One of my groups' favorite lines is the immortal
>
> "We've come to kick a$$ and chew bubblegum.
> And we're all out of bubblegum!"
>
> Richard
>
>
hows about:
"we've come about the smoking rubble"
"what smok-
POW!
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 21:47:23 -0700
From: "Robert A. West" <robtwest@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 1
Michael Surbrook wrote:
>
>
> If you've seen my other posts, you should have a clearer pciture by now.
> Yeah, I should have given more explination at the outset.
Not necessarily, and subsequent posts (which I downloaded at the exchange
where my message was sent) clarified things greatly. Sounds like this
guy was no loss when he left.
As GM, I have seen players who seemed incapable of understanding a
trade-off. Players design combat-monsters with almost no non-combat
skills -- they even refuse to buy up their Professional Skill -- then
complain about having nothing to do when the story line involves
investigation. Others insist on having all Fully Invisible 0 END
attacks, then complain that it costs 15 points per die of EB.
I had one player take a 25-point Phys Lim: Unfamiliar with Earth Culture,
and then start lecturing another, in character, on the details of police
procedure.
Sigh!
> > network of household spies, or whatever. Perhaps you rotated roles, so that
> > each of you took turns playing the no-name no-accounts, and he was simply
> > unwilling to wait his turn.
>
> Well, its not my campaign, so I'm uncertain if the GM was going to cut the
> PC some slack in that regard. We certainly didn't rotate roles, we each
> played the characters we had created.
I was thinking about a C&S campaign I once heard of where the players all
had a principal, high-status character that belonged to them, and a
number of low-status types as secondary characters. As a character
acquired more status and lands, the duties devolving from them would
interfere with advanturing -- each adventure, at least one principal
character would be unavailable, and that player would play the lackies
for the other PCs to lord over.
>
> I think part of my aggrivation was that the player was amazingly inert.
> He quit not because of being a lower social class, but because he kept
> getting injured in each battle. Our response? "Uh, when the GM gave you
> armor you tossed it away saying it lowered your DCV... (yeah, by 1 whole
> point)"
As I said above, no great loss.
>
> ***************************************************************************
> * "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
> * Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
> * Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
> * Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
> ***************************************************************************
--
<------------------------------------------------------->
Robert A. West /// "Censorship is tyranny."
Phone W:(215)466-3628; H:(215)348-9113
http://www.erols.com/robtwest
X-Originating-IP: [206.186.110.67]
From: "Rob Leuschen" <battleguy@hotmail.com>
Subject: Poly shapeshifter Cont.
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 23:22:07 PDT
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 9
This is what I am currently playing with, in regards to the polymorphic
shapeshifter posted on here earlier. I gave up on Variable Power pools,
as GM's nearly always rule them out - plus I'm hoping the Multipower
pool will suit it better, as I want limits on the amount of points in
some of the powers.
This is what I have so far.
-1/2 powers only change when form changes
-1/2 powers only as appropriate to form assumed
-1/2 linked to shapeshift
(If you notice me doing the math wrong, yell at me. :)
Multipower Framework - shapeshifter, no body, always in a form (is this
always in a form a limit, or a disadvantage???)
real Active
100 250 (just so I can use shrinking, shapeshift + another)
10 24 (120) Shrink 60pts, persistant, 0end
2 5 (60) Shapeshift 30pts any shape, pers, 0end
9 23 (113) Entangle 50pts, +1.25 area, any area, x2 hex
4 9 (45) Armor 45pts=30 = 15pd, 15ed
4 10 (50) Telepathy 50pts, not knowingly does it, only surface
thoughts, knowledge of home/job/friends/skills
Only used to get the skills needed, and names of
friends and such for impersonation (-2, very
limited, no real control - just grabs to mimic uncons)
2 4 (20) Clinging +30str
2 4 (20) Density
2 4 (20) Flight 10"
2 4 (20) growth
2 4 (20) Running 10"
2 4 (21) HA (horns, antlers, fists, claws (not hka?)
2 4 (20) Swimming 20"
2 6 (30) Tunneling 3", 5def
2 4 (20) Swinging 20"
--------------
147pts. - If the math is right. :)
So hows this look? From this I want to make insects, rhino, elephant,
any human, inaminate objects, anything pretty much - but only get the
appropriate powers of course.
Now I need to add the characteristics. I've bought them all down to 0,
and -25 for the strength which I'm calling 0str. Kept a point of the
ones like body, int, stun, etc.
Now, Do i stick these in some kind of Variable power pool????
As for the skills - I had a great suggestion from here on buying all the
skills as familiars, then buying several overall levels to use with them
- only as the mimiced being "lets" me use them. Now, can I stick these
in a package deal called a shapeshifter package, and buy them down with
disadvantages such as only the appropriate ones activate or some such
thing?? I also am going to buy acting, disguise and mimicry as
infallible, 19-....cost 23pts each. I want to stick these all in a
package, as only a couple are active at any given time. Possible??
Also adding in the non-framework powers, such as enhanced senses, extra
limbs, and the like laters. But the above is the stuff I need verified
and ideas for.
Thanks in Advance! And thanks for previous help, Eric and David and
Garth!
Rob.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 1997 23:34:30 -0700
From: "Robert A. West" <robtwest@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 4
David W Toomey wrote:
>
> >How in the name of the Ghods of Roleplaying did you *expect* the
> >player to
> >have fun in an extended campaign if his character has no combat
> >abilities, no
> >social status, no say in what happens, and no influence over events?
>
> I've played in more than one campaign where 1-2 of the players were Noble
> types, and
> the rest of us were lackeys. Being a lackey was great fun, you got to do
I agree that being one of the many lackeys in such a game, especially if
the less experienced players were the nobles, could be great fun. The
problem would arise if one were playing the ONLY (or one of the very few)
lackeys in a game dominated by PCs of Noble rank. In such a case, there
would need to be specific reasons made by the GM to play a lackey.
A similar problem can arise when a new (250-point) character enters a
long-running campaign dominated by 400-point behemoths. Unless the GM
makes sure that the character can contribute, the player is apt to become
bored and unhappy. I have seen GMs suggest character types that are
underrepresented in the campaign, deliberately salt the campaign with a
few powerful types that are vulnerable to the unique special-effect of
one of the newcomer's attacks, and so on.
In the instant case, it appears that the GM had arranged opportunities
for the farmer to be useful, just that the player couldn't see fit to
accept them.
>
> David W Toomey
> dwtoomey@juno.com
--
<------------------------------------------------------->
Robert A. West /// "Censorship is tyranny."
Phone W:(215)466-3628; H:(215)348-9113
http://www.erols.com/robtwest
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 01:02:54 -0600
From: Curtis Gibson <Mhoram@apeleon.net>
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 11
Robert A. West wrote:
>
> As GM, I have seen players who seemed incapable of understanding a
> trade-off. Players design combat-monsters with almost no non-combat
> skills -- they even refuse to buy up their Professional Skill -- then
> complain about having nothing to do when the story line involves
> investigation.
When this is done out of ignorance and the player whines you are right.
But you can get into the situation where that is part (at least of the
beginning) of the character concept. I have a Martial Artist (Black
Cat); total combat monster. She has no direct investigative skills, but
I keep her involved in mysteries by having her ask 'stupid' or 'novice'
questions, that, as a player, I know will get some usefull information.
As an aside the Detective in the campaign is the Brick. She is a Private
Eye in secret ID. She's the one with all the detective skills. When the
Brick (Gibralter) and Black Cat were designed we were trying to break
away from 'classic archtypes' IE the stupid brick and the stealthy
skillfull martial artist. Adds some nice color.
--
-Mhoram
Why is it a penny for your thoughts, but you have to put your
two cents in. Somebody's makin' a penny somewhere. -Stephen Wright
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 17:14:00 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 12
At 01:54 PM 8/5/97 -0700, you wrote:
>At 06:18 PM 8/5/97 +1000, jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
>>uh-huh? i mean real martial arts!! korean!! thai!! not that fuddy japanese
>>bujitsu riu crud!!
>
> 'Scooz me just a sec.... Korean and Thai martial arts in 1542 Japan?
>My memory of Japanese history is admittedly a bit shaky, but wasn't this
>somewhere around the height of Japanese isolationism?
>---
>This mail was sent from the Corvallis Public Library
>
>
yes, that's exactly what i meant. i was suggesting that exactily- how silly of me!!
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 17:15:54 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 15
At 05:21 PM 8/5/97 -0400, you wrote:
>On Tue, 5 Aug 1997, Bob Greenwade wrote:
>
>> At 06:18 PM 8/5/97 +1000, jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
>> >uh-huh? i mean real martial arts!! korean!! thai!! not that fuddy japanese
>> >bujitsu riu crud!!
>>
>> 'Scooz me just a sec.... Korean and Thai martial arts in 1542 Japan?
>> My memory of Japanese history is admittedly a bit shaky, but wasn't this
>> somewhere around the height of Japanese isolationism?
>
>Nope. After 1600 and the rise of Tokugawa to power did Japan seal itself
>off. Still, the odds of seing anything Thai in Japan of 1542 is pretty
>slim.
>
>BTW: that should be: 'fuddy Japanese bujutsu ryu'
>
*sigh* once again, i was simply suggesting a set of martial arts evolved in
an environment in which their wielders were at a weapons-tech disadvantage.
and both spellings are valid, or are we back to that again? *g*
>***************************************************************************
>* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
>* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
>* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
>* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
>***************************************************************************
>
>
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 17:45:47 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 17
At 02:14 PM 8/6/97 -0400, you wrote:
>> Now why can't something like that happen? I'm not saying it is preferable to
>> the farmer doing something else, but to label it impossible seems unfairly
>> restrictive.
>
>It could, but it doesn't seem plausible (to me). That sort of reblliosu
>feel seems more apropraite in a society where the rebel may have an idea
>of a better life as seen else where. The framer has nothing to compare
>his lot to and has no idea that anywhere else is different.
>
we're not back at cultural relitivism are we? *eg*
Let's face it: it *is* a game, we have no clue about 'reality', and i think the guy
should have been cut slack- if they were all outlawed anyway, a good story would have been to describe the group stepping through the normal boundries of class so they
DON'T GET THEIR ASSES KICKED!! it would have taken way less time if they all helped, if they really were outlawed they should have been in a rush , IMHHO. . .
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 17:52:45 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 18
At 10:00 PM 8/6/97 -0400, you wrote:
>I've played in more than one campaign where 1-2 of the players were Noble
>types, and
>the rest of us were lackeys. Being a lackey was great fun, you got to do
>all sorts of things that the noble would never 'lower' himself to, plus
>you had the challenge of doing such things without being caught, and thus
>beaten (not killed, this was european fantasy, not oriental) Usually,
>the noble characters were run by less than subtle players, who only saw
>the power and prestiege of the position, and sometimes chafed a bit under
>social restrictions, while lackeys were played by people who understood
>the society of the time, with some loosening for everybody (it is a GAME,
>after all), and enjoyed having to be clever and play around restrictions.
>
>
>
>David W Toomey
>dwtoomey@juno.com
>
i would sugest that this sort of fun was not on the agenda: he was too busy
picking up bodies, mayhap?
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 17:56:29 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 19
At 11:34 PM 8/6/97 -0700, you wrote:
>In the instant case, it appears that the GM had arranged opportunities
>for the farmer to be useful, just that the player couldn't see fit to
>accept them.
>
and this is the players fault? i would suggest that this oftem becomes a matter of cliche- how many times can you bust up your 'designated token villan' or whatever before getting frustrated?
>>
>> David W Toomey
>> dwtoomey@juno.com
>
>--
><------------------------------------------------------->
>Robert A. West /// "Censorship is tyranny."
>Phone W:(215)466-3628; H:(215)348-9113
>http://www.erols.com/robtwest
>
>
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 18:00:53 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 20
At 01:02 AM 8/7/97 -0600, you wrote:
>As an aside the Detective in the campaign is the Brick. She is a Private
>Eye in secret ID. She's the one with all the detective skills. When the
>Brick (Gibralter) and Black Cat were designed we were trying to break
>away from 'classic archtypes' IE the stupid brick and the stealthy
>skillfull martial artist. Adds some nice color.
>--
>-Mhoram
>Why is it a penny for your thoughts, but you have to put your
> two cents in. Somebody's makin' a penny somewhere. -Stephen Wright
>
now we should ask this: are such cliche-breakers allowed in campaigns with
"strong" genre conventions? Isn't that what it comes down to, a set of cliches,
limiting the player's options? any comments, which don't refer to me as 'jones'?
*l*
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 03:45:18 -0600
From: Curtis Gibson <Mhoram@apeleon.net>
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 21
jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
>
> At 01:02 AM 8/7/97 -0600, you wrote:
> >As an aside the Detective in the campaign is the Brick. She is a Private
> >Eye in secret ID. She's the one with all the detective skills. When the
> >Brick (Gibralter) and Black Cat were designed we were trying to break
> >away from 'classic archtypes' IE the stupid brick and the stealthy
> >skillfull martial artist. Adds some nice color.
> >--
> >-Mhoram
>
> now we should ask this: are such cliche-breakers allowed in campaigns with
> "strong" genre conventions? Isn't that what it comes down to, a set of cliches,
> limiting the player's options? any comments, which don't refer to me as 'jones'?
> *l*
The thing is, while they are cliche-breakers, they are _not_ genre
breakers. There are examples of smart bricks in the source lit, as well
as non-stealthy martial artists. They are just uncommon. The cliches
stem more from game supplements than from comics (note 'more from' not
exclusevely from').
--
-Mhoram
Why is it a penny for your thoughts, but you have to put your
two cents in. Somebody's makin' a penny somewhere. -Stephen Wright
X-Forwarding-Note: Was sent to herolist@october.com; forwarding to hero-l@omg.org
From: "Guy Hoyle" <ghoyle1@mail.airmail.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 09:58:43 +0000
X-To: hero-l@october.com
Subject: Re: Space Ship Combat
X-Listname: Hero
Reply-To: hero-l@october.com (Multiple recipients of Hero)
X-Smtp-Ip-Host: mail.airmail.net ip 206.66.12.40
X-Smtp-Mail-From: ghoyle1@mail.airmail.net
Comments: Authenticated sender is <ghoyle1@mail.airmail.net>
X-Reply-To: guyhoyle@iname.com
Priority: normal
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 33
I found it, thanks! I remember discussing the Spirit Rules with you
and James a couple of years ago on Red October, and these have turned
out nicely.
Guy
----------------------------------
Guy Hoyle (guyhoyle@iname.com)
http://web2.airmail.net/ghoyle1/
Visit The Gamemaster's Bookshelf
and the PANGAEA Project!
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 09:20:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 24
On Thu, 7 Aug 1997 jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
> At 11:34 PM 8/6/97 -0700, you wrote:
> >In the instant case, it appears that the GM had arranged opportunities
> >for the farmer to be useful, just that the player couldn't see fit to
> >accept them.
>
> and this is the players fault? i would suggest that this oftem becomes a
matter of cliche- how many times can you bust up your 'designated token
villan' or whatever before getting frustrated? >
So if the player disregards chances for his character to interact with
other PCs, and then complains because he isn't getting anything to do,
it's the GM's fault?
***************************************************************************
* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
***************************************************************************
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 09:27:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Surbrook <susano@access.digex.net>
cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 22
On Thu, 7 Aug 1997 jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
> At 01:02 AM 8/7/97 -0600, you wrote:
> >As an aside the Detective in the campaign is the Brick. She is a Private
> >Eye in secret ID. She's the one with all the detective skills. When the
> >Brick (Gibralter) and Black Cat were designed we were trying to break
> >away from 'classic archtypes' IE the stupid brick and the stealthy
> >skillfull martial artist. Adds some nice color.
>
> now we should ask this: are such cliche-breakers allowed in campaigns with
> "strong" genre conventions? Isn't that what it comes down to, a set of
cliches,
> limiting the player's options? any comments, which don't refer to me as
'jones'?
Cliches do not limit a player's options. Cliches (or character
stereotypes) define certain types of characters. Examples are: the
strong, slow brick; the fast, stealthy martial artist; the normal human
detective; the scientist in powered armor; the super-soldier serum
creation... etc. Breaking cliches by playing a super-smart brick with
detective skills isn't breaking genre, it's simply reworking a cliched
character.
Breaking genre would be introducing a character obviously (and jarringly)
out of place to the setting described. This is hard to do in most
superhero games, although it can be done (an example might be some sort
of high-tech supersoldier in a WWII "Goldern Age of Champions" game).
Another example would be a Japanese samurai in a Tolkienish high-fantasy
game.
Or a European in 1541 Japan.
Or an alien in a Wild West game.
Unless you are really playing wierd games with the setting and universe,
these character break genre and don't fit.
Breaking cliches on the other hand would be just great.
***************************************************************************
* "'Cause I'm the god of destruction, that's why!" - Susano Orbatos,Orion *
* Michael Surbrook / susano@access.digex.net *
* Attacked Mystification Police / AD Police / ESWAT *
* Society for Creative Anachronism / House ap Gwystl / Company of St.Mark *
***************************************************************************
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 1997 09:27:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Reply-To: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@iii.com>
Subject: Re: Poly shapeshifter Cont.
Cc: champ-l@omg.org
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 39
Rob Leuschen writes:
> This is what I am currently playing with, in regards to the polymorphic
> shapeshifter posted on here earlier. I gave up on Variable Power pools,
> as GM's nearly always rule them out - plus I'm hoping the Multipower
> pool will suit it better, as I want limits on the amount of points in
> some of the powers.
> This is what I have so far.
> -1/2 powers only change when form changes
This isn't a -1/2...it is maybe a -1/4.
> -1/2 powers only as appropriate to form assumed
This limitation only applies to _control_ costs of variable power pools; it
does not affect the costs of powers at all, only the cost to change a pool.
> -1/2 linked to shapeshift
The 'linked' limitation has always been badly implemented, but if you are
dealing with linking and frameworks, you must link _one_ power in the framework
to _one_ power outside of it. You cannot link powers within a framework at
all, and you cannot link more than one multipower slot to the same outside
power. In addition, this limitation is redundant with the first limitation.
As such, your entire multipower has a total limitation of -1/4, not -1.5...
> Multipower Framework - shapeshifter, no body, always in a form (is this
> always in a form a limit, or a disadvantage???)
Neither. This means you should take the shapeshift _out_ of the multipower.
>
> real Active
> 100 250 (just so I can use shrinking, shapeshift + another)
This is closer to 200 real points.
> 2 5 (60) Shapeshift 30pts any shape, pers, 0end
There is no reason for this power to be in the multipower at all.
Cc: champ-l@omg.org
Subject: Re: Gadgets
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-46,49,51,53-58
From: dwtoomey@juno.com (David W Toomey)
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 1997 12:27:36 EDT
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 38
>Suppose Dr. Whitney Cain, aka Blind Justice, wants to be able to put
>together some small gadgets, like "blackout bombs" (an inky black
>cloud); he wants to be able to make enough to give out to friends.
>
>It takes Cain about an hour to crank out 6 bombs, which takes
>his complete concentration throughout the process. Obviously, it
>takes a Chemistry skill roll to prepare the blackout solution;
>otherwise, he detonates the bombs.
>
>So, the process required to make the bomb gets a Concentrate (-1),
>Extra Time, 1 hour, Side Effects (the bombs blow up) (-1), and
>Requires a (Chemistry) Skill Roll. I put these limitations on one of
>Heromaker's closed Packages. Any Modifiers that went into the
>Darkness power itself I put on that slot within the Package.
>
>However, none of those modifiers apply to the bombs themselves. When
>the crimefighting chemist hands out his little goodies, they operate
>as an IIF, universal (because you can conceal them easily); since the
>process creates six of the pellets, Charges is also appropriate here.
>(I wondered about whether this goes on the pellets or the process,
>and decided to put it on the pellets. Would this be right?)
>
>At any rate, here's what I came up with in Heromaker (slightly
>modified by hand).
>
>(Best viewed with a monospaced font)
>
> 3 PKG,"Blackout Bombs (makes 6)",
> Concentrate(-1),0 DCV,constant
> concentration,Extra Time(-2
> 1/2),time: 1 hour,Side Effects
> (-1); Requires Skill Roll (-1/2)
>(17) 3" Darkness,IAF(-3/4),
> unbreakable,hard to recover,5-6
> Charges(-0), Continuing, Duration:
> 1 minute
>
>This means that Cain would be able to crank out 18 grenades in 3
>hours, or however many he wanted to spend the time for.
>
>My question is, does this look like I have accomplished what I
>intended? If not, is there a better way to do this?
>
This looks pretty abusive to me....
My biggest problem is that you've packed a 30 point power into 3 points!
If this was as a multi slot, no problem, but you are implying that the
limitations above are worth a
combined total of -9! Sorry, but I just don't see that....I'd just put a
-1/4 to -1 limitation
on the grenades (takes time, procedures) to produce, and decide what
procedures were necessary.
David W Toomey
dwtoomey@juno.com
X-Forwarding-Note: Was sent to herolist@october.com; forwarding to hero-l@omg.org
From: Opal@october.com (Opal)
Date: 07 Aug 97 17:32:46 GMT
Subject: RE: Gadgets
X-Ftn-To: herolist@october.com
X-Listname: Hero
Reply-To: hero-l@october.com (Multiple recipients of Hero)
Path: october!opal
Organization: Fidonet: Red October Alpha * Hero Roleplaying * 408-629-4695 *
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 43
h> 3 PKG,"Blackout Bombs (makes 6)",
h> Concentrate(-1),0 DCV,constant
h> concentration,Extra Time(-2
h> 1/2),time: 1 hour,Side Effects
h> (-1); Requires Skill Roll (-1/2)
h> (17) 3" Darkness,IAF(-3/4),
h> unbreakable,hard to recover,5-6
h> Charges(-0), Continuing, Duration:
h> 1 minute
h> This means that Cain would be able to crank out 18 grenades in 3
h> hours, or however many he wanted to spend the time for.
h> My question is, does this look like I have accomplished what I
h> intended? If not, is there a better way to do this?
h> Thanks,
h> Guy
h> ----------------------------------
I don't understand what the "PKG" part is supposed to be. Is it
like 'create' from the old Fantasy Hero?
I'd think the way to do what you describe (within the standard 4th
Ed rules) would be to buy the heavily limited darkness power with
the advantage: Trigger. You'd spend your time in the lab putting
the Triggered Darkness on the little bomb thingies. To use them,
all someone has to do is set up the triggering circumstance and
the Darkness pops up, centered on the blackout bomb. Of course,
in this case, the bombs themeselves aren't technically foci, there
just the targets of the Triggered power, but you could still get
a focus limitation for whatever equipment you need to activate
the power.
Finally, because of the use of Triggered, here, limitations like
Concentrate and Extra time will most likely be at halved value.
enjoy!
From: john.desmarais@ibm.net
Date: Thu, 07 Aug 97 14:45:15 -0400
Subject: Re: Space Ship Combat
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 44
In <m0wwIHm-0002gIE@mail.airmail.net&> on 08/06/97
at 09:38 PM, "Guy Hoyle" <ghoyle1@mail.airmail.net> said:
>I haven't used the vehicular rules much, especially since they have such
>a bad reputation. However, I'm going to be running a space opera
>adventure, somethink like Flash Gordon or Buck Rogers, and ship-to-ship
>combat is a part of this.
>I need some advice about running this type of combat in a game. How
>should I handle vehicular combat? Is the system in the book OK for
>this?
>Should I bother to design the ships with points and everything, or
>should I just treat this as a plot device? I want to capture some of the
>feel of "Millenium Falcon vs. Star Destroyer", that kind of thing.
Something that can be found at several archive site (Red October being one
of them) is a second edition of Star Hero which includes improved starship
combat rules (usually available as a separate file). Well worth reading.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
john.desmarais@ibm.net
-----------------------------------------------------------
From: BCBattle@aol.com
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 08:41:15 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 46
<Within the universe of the comic book he is a hero, in reality he would be a
self-indulgent little twit. He has no measurable positive effect on crime
and he has wasted not only his scientific genius (how many applications might
their be to his web fluid if he had patented it and made it generally
available) but has also found the perfect way for his powers to mean nothing
(this is an argument about if he existed in the real world, not how he should
behave in the comics). Clearly similar arguments could be made about any
major 4-color character (and despite what Batman was when Kane created him,
he is definitely four color now).>
That is just patently ridiculous. If you're going to argue from the
standpoint of "reality", then in "reality" (assuming that metahuman heroes
and villains are real), if someone of Spider-Man's abilities, Batman's skill
or even Superman's power were to show up in a given city, the criminals of
that city (whether superpowered or not) would most likely get out of town so
fast, it would make a kitchen light roach scatterfest look like a slow motion
car wreck.
Comic books of the kind that you mention are published by companies that want
to make a buck. Nothing wrong with that but the bottom line is that many
feel a status quo must be maintained. If changes even on the scale of what
we as a race experience every day were to occur in comics (aging, raising
families, pursuing/changing careers, changing health conditions, mutable
social circles, changing styles in fashions, etc.) with any reasonable
frequency, you would soon find that there would be little about the setting
of a given title that you could truly depend upon from issue to issue.
If comic books reflected "reality", think how many common people like you and
me would be slaughtered every day as fallout from the latest super battle.
people would have to abandon the big cities like rats from a sinking ship.
World War II would most likely have occured by now and the very structure of
society as we know it would be radically different to accommodate these
god-like beings. It's rarely a good idea to argue the validity of super
hero from the standpoint of "reality". The four-color comic book is more
than a creative use of chromatics. It includes psychological and
philosophical conventions that are not generaly held by real human beings and
indeed could not be held. In truth, if, today, the advent of super powers
became a reality, how many people do you think would truly put on a costume
and try to maintain secret identity in the same ways as, say, Clark Kent,
Peter Parker or Bruce Wayne as opposed to how many people would just say f***
it and take to the skies in their three piece suits and sun dresses?
"From this day forward, I shall call myself...RADIOACTIVE MAN!!!"
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 11:56:26 -0300 (ADT)
From: Trevor Barrie <tbarrie@ibm.net>
X-Sender: tbarrie@drollsden
Subject: Re: Embodiments
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 51
On Wed, 6 Aug 1997, Bob Greenwade wrote:
> You know, I'd assumed the same thing. (The Living Tribunal is another
> entity of this order that comes to mind.)
> Say, does anyone know of any published or online game characters (in any
> game system) along these lines?
Trickster from Classic Organizations. As a general rule, though, there's
not much point to doing actual stats for cosmic beings.
From: BeerCarboy@aol.com
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 11:22:49 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 52
At Fri, Aug 8, 1997 8:41 AM EDT BC Battle wrote:
<Snip quote of my post regarding the difference between comic book and real
ethics>
>That is just patently ridiculous. If you're going to argue from the
standpoint of >"reality", then in "reality" (assuming that metahuman heroes
and villains are real), >if someone of Spider-Man's abilities, Batman's skill
or even Superman's power >were to show up in a given city, the criminals of
that city (whether superpowered >or not) would most likely get out of town so
fast, it would make a kitchen light >roach scatterfest look like a slow
motion car wreck.
>Comic books of the kind that you mention are published by companies that
want to >make a buck. Nothing wrong with that but the bottom line is that
many feel a >status quo must be maintained. If changes even on the scale of
what we as a race >experience every day were to occur in comics (aging,
raising families, >pursuing/changing careers, changing health conditions,
mutable social circles, >changing styles in fashions, etc.) with any
reasonable frequency, you would soon >find that there would be little about
the setting of a given title that you could >truly depend upon from issue to
issue.
>If comic books reflected "reality", think how many common people like you
and me >would be slaughtered every day as fallout from the latest super
battle. people >would have to abandon the big cities like rats from a
sinking ship. World War II >would most likely have occured by now and the
very structure of society as we >know it would be radically different to
accommodate these god-like beings. It's >rarely a good idea to argue the
validity of super hero from the standpoint of >"reality". The four-color
comic book is more than a creative use of chromatics. It >includes
psychological and philosophical conventions that are not generaly held by
>real human beings and indeed could not be held. In truth, if, today, the
advent of >super powers became a reality, how many people do you think would
truly put on a >costume and try to maintain secret identity in the same ways
as, say, Clark Kent, >Peter Parker or Bruce Wayne as opposed to how many
people would just say f*** it >and take to the skies in their three piece
suits and sun dresses?
DOH! <smacking self upside the head> Have I really been this obscure? What
you have written here is essentially my point, though you have accessed real
world concerns a bit more than I did. I am not arguing that there is
ANYTHING with these comix because they are unrealistic, I am arguing that
certain of the differences between reality and the comic books clearly show
that the nature of good and evil in four color comics is radically at odds
with its nature in reality. This is not a statement that I want that to
change, it is merely part of the whole discussion regarding what are the
essential priniciples of four-color comics that differe from the essential
principles we find in reality.
Carter Humphrey
BeerCarboy@AOL.com
From: Eric Burns <burns@cug.dorm.usm.maine.edu>
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 11:39:59 -0400 (EDT)
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 53
> That is just patently ridiculous. If you're going to argue from the
> standpoint of "reality", then in "reality" (assuming that metahuman heroes
> and villains are real), if someone of Spider-Man's abilities, Batman's skill
> or even Superman's power were to show up in a given city, the criminals of
> that city (whether superpowered or not) would most likely get out of town so
> fast, it would make a kitchen light roach scatterfest look like a slow motion
> car wreck.
>
Yes, but what if superheroes appeared in all major cities? I'm no
criminologist, but I suspect that some people are just career criminals,
with little knowledge about how to do anything else. Superheroes might
actually encourage crime, since Superman is powerful enough so that he
does not have to shoot to kill. If you are robbing a 7-11 and waving a
gun around, the police might decide to shoot before you can take a hostage
or kill someone. Supes (old powers) could just go in with blinding speed
and take your gun away. You'd go to jail, but you wouldn't be dead or
injured (except your pride).
> If comic books reflected "reality", think how many common people like you and
> me would be slaughtered every day as fallout from the latest super battle.
> people would have to abandon the big cities like rats from a sinking ship.
> World War III would most likely have occured by now and the very
> structure of
> society as we know it would be radically different to accommodate these
> god-like beings.
Speaking just for myself, I think this would be a more interesting read.
I wish that there were some comic-worlds that tried to project how a
society would be changed by super-powers.
> It's rarely a good idea to argue the validity of super
> hero from the standpoint of "reality". The four-color comic book is more
> than a creative use of chromatics. It includes psychological and
> philosophical conventions that are not generaly held by real human beings and
> indeed could not be held. In truth, if, today, the advent of super powers
> became a reality, how many people do you think would truly put on a costume
> and try to maintain secret identity in the same ways as, say, Clark Kent,
> Peter Parker or Bruce Wayne as opposed to how many people would just say f***
> it and take to the skies in their three piece suits and sun dresses?
>
Sun dresses?!! I see your point that few people would bother getting
skin-tight costumes and calling themselves by goofy names, but sun
dresses? Don't get me wrong, women flying around in sun dresses would be
pretty cool, but I think most supers would opt for practical costumes,
like military uniforms and leotards, rather than everyday clothing, to
battle crime. That's assuming they have nigh-invulnerability. Elsewise,
they might resort to bullett-proof vests and such.
> "From this day forward, I shall call myself...RADIOACTIVE MAN!!!"
>
"From this day forward, I shall call myself...TURKEY VOLUME GUESSING MAN!!!"
-Eric
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 09:44:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender: bob.greenwade@klock.com
From: Bob Greenwade <bob.greenwade@klock.com>
Subject: Re: Space Ship Combat
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
X-Status:
X-Keywords:
X-UID: 54
At 09:38 PM 8/6/97 +0000, Guy Hoyle wrote:
>I haven't used the vehicular rules much, especially since they have
>such a bad reputation. However, I'm going to be running a space
>opera adventure, somethink like Flash Gordon or Buck Rogers, and
>ship-to-ship combat is a part of this.
>
>I need some advice about running this type of combat in a game. How
>should I handle vehicular combat? Is the system in the book OK for
>this?
>
>Should I bother to design the ships with points and everything, or
>should I just treat this as a plot device? I want to capture some of
>the feel of "Millenium Falcon vs. Star Destroyer", that kind of
>thing.
My recommendation for this would be to go ahead and design the vehicles,
but use the optional Dogfight and Intercept Combat rules for most fights,
reserving mapped combat for only those situations that specifically call for
that much detail.
---
This mail was sent from the Corvallis Public Library
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 1997 10:25:15 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 03:45 AM 8/7/97 -0600, you wrote:
>jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
>>
>> At 01:02 AM 8/7/97 -0600, you wrote:
>> >As an aside the Detective in the campaign is the Brick. She is a Private
>> >Eye in secret ID. She's the one with all the detective skills. When the
>> >Brick (Gibralter) and Black Cat were designed we were trying to break
>> >away from 'classic archtypes' IE the stupid brick and the stealthy
>> >skillfull martial artist. Adds some nice color.
>> >--
>> >-Mhoram
>>
>> now we should ask this: are such cliche-breakers allowed in campaigns with
>> "strong" genre conventions? Isn't that what it comes down to, a set of cliches,
>> limiting the player's options? any comments, which don't refer to me as 'jones'?
>> *l*
>
>The thing is, while they are cliche-breakers, they are _not_ genre
>breakers. There are examples of smart bricks in the source lit, as well
>as non-stealthy martial artists. They are just uncommon. The cliches
>stem more from game supplements than from comics (note 'more from' not
>exclusevely from').
>--
>-Mhoram
>Why is it a penny for your thoughts, but you have to put your
> two cents in. Somebody's makin' a penny somewhere. -Stephen Wright
>
agreed: i'd argue a whole bunch of extra chliche's we add in
with reguards to teams, and 'powergamers' and so forth-
i'd say however, that most genre conventions are really just
restrictions on, not only the players actions, but the potential that
the *player* can interact with the genre admirably in a way unforseen by
the gm- by limiting behaviour, you show mistrust of your players,
and act like they are superfluous to the game- tho you
could argue that it's a matter of how 'tight' the ocnventions of genre are. . .
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 1997 10:33:11 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 09:20 AM 8/7/97 -0400, you wrote:
>On Thu, 7 Aug 1997 jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
>
>> At 11:34 PM 8/6/97 -0700, you wrote:
>> >In the instant case, it appears that the GM had arranged opportunities
>> >for the farmer to be useful, just that the player couldn't see fit to
>> >accept them.
>>
>> and this is the players fault? i would suggest that this oftem becomes a
> matter of cliche- how many times can you bust up your 'designated token
>villan' or whatever before getting frustrated? >
>
>So if the player disregards chances for his character to interact with
>other PCs, and then complains because he isn't getting anything to do,
>it's the GM's fault?
>
yes- because the GM isn't letting him find their OWN FUN- this is the possible scenario:
GM: "okay, here is the campaign, and several things yo can and cannot do"
P1: "cool!"
P2: "cool!"
P3: " erm. . . .hypothetically, would my character be allowed tio do >X<?"
GM: "no"
P3: "how's about >Y<?
GM: "no, both those things break the conventions of genre
P3: "well, what do i get to do?"
GM: "oh, don't worry, i've got several entertaining plots lined up for you-
first you teach some other peasantsw the glories of crop rotation,
then you pick up all the bodies and struggle with grief and the confineas of your culture, then you make your own pitchfork, then you pick up some more bodies. . .
sorry for the misplaced satire, but my point is the gm may find such plots fascinating-
but it doesn't mean the player will- whoose fault is that, seeing as how the gm
is effectively 'blocking' most of the suggestions the player himself makes?
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 1997 10:42:51 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 09:27 AM 8/7/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Cliches do not limit a player's options. Cliches (or character
>stereotypes) define certain types of characters. Examples are: the
>strong, slow brick; the fast, stealthy martial artist; the normal human
>detective; the scientist in powered armor; the super-soldier serum
>creation... etc. Breaking cliches by playing a super-smart brick with
>detective skills isn't breaking genre, it's simply reworking a cliched
>character.
>
i would argue that the games 'gnere' is usually just the gm's chliche approach to a certain situation- historically accurate or not(like that 'high cool pc's act like navy seals' nonsence a while ago. . )
>Breaking genre would be introducing a character obviously (and jarringly)
>out of place to the setting described. This is hard to do in most
>superhero games, although it can be done (an example might be some sort
>of high-tech supersoldier in a WWII "Goldern Age of Champions" game).
>
so what's hi-tech? captain america had a super-science shield
and was pumped up on combat drugs. . . . .
what about a time-traveler, from a furure where hitler won,
or an alien ally, like in champ3d?
>Another example would be a Japanese samurai in a Tolkienish high-fantasy
>game.
>
this is a rather common concept now, and most people consider it
interesting- i know i do ..
>Or a European in 1541 Japan.
>
done, done, done! this is the origin of many a martial arts white-guy-
i think you're sti8cking to the easy ones, historical situations only.. . .
>Or an alien in a Wild West game.
>
did you see bruce campbells "adventures of cisco county, jr?"
and i've seen this elsewhere- it was suggested in predator2,
if you were hunting an alien, would it really not be a western anymore?
>Unless you are really playing wierd games with the setting and universe,
>these character break genre and don't fit.
>
your logic seems to be: "since all my examples are based on easily
recognisable historical archetypes, anything deviating from them
is breaking the genre"
>Breaking cliches on the other hand would be just great.
>
>
genre is chliche- or almost always is, the original example is
still debatable, however.
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 1997 10:49:43 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 08:41 AM 8/8/97 -0400, you wrote:
>If comic books reflected "reality", think how many common people like you and
>me would be slaughtered every day as fallout from the latest super battle.
> people would have to abandon the big cities like rats from a sinking ship.
> World War II would most likely have occured by now and the very structure of
>society as we know it would be radically different to accommodate these
>god-like beings. It's rarely a good idea to argue the validity of super
>hero from the standpoint of "reality". The four-color comic book is more
>than a creative use of chromatics. It includes psychological and
>philosophical conventions that are not generaly held by real human beings and
>indeed could not be held. In truth, if, today, the advent of super powers
>became a reality, how many people do you think would truly put on a costume
>and try to maintain secret identity in the same ways as, say, Clark Kent,
>Peter Parker or Bruce Wayne as opposed to how many people would just say f***
>it and take to the skies in their three piece suits and sun dresses?
>
>"From this day forward, I shall call myself...RADIOACTIVE MAN!!!"
>
i think the point is- the original statement ignores far more
signifigant genre conventions than it supports. I would argue that it's
okay to try for more 'realistic' heroes, whatever that may mean to us, as long
as we don't happen to be in a game where the GM has labeled his own chliche perceptions as "genre conventions" and hence limited our a**'s off. *l*
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 1997 10:56:37 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 11:22 AM 8/8/97 -0400, you wrote:
<entire argumens snipped, making it impossible to get the point*g*>
>DOH! <smacking self upside the head> Have I really been this obscure? What
>you have written here is essentially my point, though you have accessed real
>world concerns a bit more than I did. I am not arguing that there is
>ANYTHING with these comix because they are unrealistic, I am arguing that
>certain of the differences between reality and the comic books clearly show
>that the nature of good and evil in four color comics is radically at odds
>with its nature in reality. This is not a statement that I want that to
>change, it is merely part of the whole discussion regarding what are the
>essential priniciples of four-color comics that differe from the essential
>principles we find in reality.
>
>Carter Humphrey
>
>
>
yes, but in the '4 color genre' discussion, you point about patents, ect
looses out- this sub-strand seemed to be invalidating another potential
convention, suggestions it was unrealistic to do X (act heroic ect),
was BASED on the assumption of real world concepts which are actually
genre conventions- ie how crime goes on in a super-setting, you
failed to realise that it WOULDN"T do so in the potential "real world",
and hence it would be an *immense* aid to a city- hence it wouldn't
be a waste of his powers at all, ect al. . blah, blah. . .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> BeerCarboy@AOL.com
>
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 1997 11:02:38 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 11:39 AM 8/8/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Yes, but what if superheroes appeared in all major cities? I'm no
>criminologist, but I suspect that some people are just career criminals,
>with little knowledge about how to do anything else. Superheroes might
>actually encourage crime, since Superman is powerful enough so that he
>does not have to shoot to kill. If you are robbing a 7-11 and waving a
>gun around, the police might decide to shoot before you can take a hostage
>or kill someone. Supes (old powers) could just go in with blinding speed
>and take your gun away. You'd go to jail, but you wouldn't be dead or
>injured (except your pride).
>
you suggest the threat of death dissuads criminals?
well, i suppose it's only an argument, but your logic sways a bit
close to hicksville for my liking. . .*g*
>
>Speaking just for myself, I think this would be a more interesting read.
>I wish that there were some comic-worlds that tried to project how a
>society would be changed by super-powers.
>
i agree. But the problem is that you end up second-guessng-
"do villans neutralise heros?", ect, i expect the most
important point is that they *try*, as opposed to saying
"this is how it is", as do certain "realistic" games
like those based on millitary experence (not to mention- ack! the sca. )
>
>Sun dresses?!! I see your point that few people would bother getting
>skin-tight costumes and calling themselves by goofy names, but sun
>dresses? Don't get me wrong, women flying around in sun dresses would be
>pretty cool, but I think most supers would opt for practical costumes,
>like military uniforms and leotards, rather than everyday clothing, to
>battle crime. That's assuming they have nigh-invulnerability. Elsewise,
>they might resort to bullett-proof vests and such.
>
once again, this is a concept often being at-least-sorta addressed
in several modern comics. .
>> "From this day forward, I shall call myself...RADIOACTIVE MAN!!!"
>>
>
>"From this day forward, I shall call myself...TURKEY VOLUME GUESSING MAN!!!"
>
>-Eric
>
erm. . . .. shouty boy? anything but "jones". . *l*
From: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 1997 11:12:40 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 06:06 PM 8/8/97 -0700, you wrote:
>Those were high tech, but they were the 1940s version of what high-tech
>would be, so it works in the genre. I think it would break genre to introduce
>someone based on today's science-fiction, like for example nano-technology.
>
wouldn't a time-traveler be at the nanotch level? that's also the best
explanation fer caps shield i can think of-
you mean *overtly* nanotech? gee, for those with micro-vision?
>This gives me an idea for a Golden Age character: Future Boy. He has travelled
>from the far future of...1997! With night vision gogles, a modern sniper rifle,
>etc, etc he'd be pretty effective. And I can just see the roleplaying:
>
>Captain Democracy: Jeepers, Future Boy, you really come from 1997?
>
>Future Boy: That's right.
>
>CD: You must have computers as big as the Empire State Building, right?
>
>FB: Well, not exactly, you see....
>
>CD: And personal rocket belts! Why didn't you bring a rocket belt into the past with you?
>
>FB: Well, it's a funny thing...
>
>CD: Do you have a house on the moon? Huh? Huh?
>
>FB: AaaahhhhH!! Shut up you primitive screw-head!
>
> -Sam
>
see? cool, cool, cool!! i could also argue that by introducing
an element *foreign* to the genre, you really place an emphasis
on the genre in question- it's the old alien thing, y'know?
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 22:49:19 -0400 (EDT)
X-Sender: jprins@interhop.net
From: jprins@interhop.net (John and Ron Prins)
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
>yes- because the GM isn't letting him find their OWN FUN- this is the
possible >scenario:
<snip!>
>sorry for the misplaced satire, but my point is the gm may find such plots
>fascinating-
>but it doesn't mean the player will- whoose fault is that, seeing as how the gm
>is effectively 'blocking' most of the suggestions the player himself makes?
Sigh. I can't help but wonder if I'm about to assist in the beating of a
dead horse, but I think the player in the aforementioned Samurai/Peasant
story was the one at fault. In the first place, the GM lined up what kind of
campaign this would be - fairly realistic 16th century Japan. When the
player wanted to play a peasant, he was told that he'd face restrictions. He
was probably told all about the samurai's right to kill anyone of lower
station for any reason at all.
Now, are these restrictions 'unfair' to the player? I really don't think so
- and if they are, they're restrictions that are 'realistic' to the setting.
I can still think of many avenues available to such a peasant PC in that
particular setting; just as Disadvantages provide opportunites for
roleplaying, so do genre restrictions. But any peasant that goes around
ticking off samurai is eventually going to get hacked open!
It's not a matter of the GM 'not allowing' a player to find 'his own fun'.
In this case, it's a matter of a PC not choosing a proper player type for
the setting and his personality/play style with which to 'have fun'.
Look, if I said "We're going to be playing a modern police campaign set in
Toronto, Canada. It will be easiest if all the players are either officers
of the Ontario Provincial Police or Metro Toronto Police, or their
associated offices (coroner, legal prosectution, etc.)."
So Joe Schmoe decides he wants to play a janitor from the Skydome.
Now, it is _really_ the GM's fault if he has difficulty always working Joe
into plotlines that involve crime in and around Toronto? Does Joe really
have cause for complaint when the game gets rolling and he has:
A.) No gun
B.) No bulletproof vest
C.) No right to be on a crime scene
D.) No combat skills
E.) No criminological skills
and he's pretty much left out of the action? I'd say no. A player does have
the right to build the character he wants (and the GM does have the right to
veto it, but often won't to avoid alienating the player), but garbage in,
garbage out.
A peasant's role in fuedal Japan is limited. As you noted, he does have some
options, like:
A.) become a soldier and work his way up to samurai
B.) organize a peasant rebellion (not easy, but possible in any epic campaign)
C.) become a samurai's lackey
D.) become a spy
E.) etc., etc.
But pissing off Samurai isn't a career choice for a peasant (unless he's
backed up by aforementioned peasant army). Though probably a better solution
than death would have been a severe beating or something - but that was the
other player's call.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"HEY! Give my nuclear warhead RIGHT BACK!!"
-Gold Digger #35
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
John D. Prins
jprins@interhop.net
From: "Sean Pavlish" <pavlish@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 1997 23:51:40 -0400
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
> >> At 11:34 PM 8/6/97 -0700, you wrote:
> >> >In the instant case, it appears that the GM had arranged opportunities
> >> >for the farmer to be useful, just that the player couldn't see fit to
> >> >accept them.
> >>
> >> and this is the players fault? i would suggest that this oftem becomes a
> > matter of cliche- how many times can you bust up your 'designated token
> >villan' or whatever before getting frustrated? >
> >
> >So if the player disregards chances for his character to interact with
> >other PCs, and then complains because he isn't getting anything to do,
> >it's the GM's fault?
> >
>
>
> yes- because the GM isn't letting him find their OWN FUN- this is the possible
scenario:
> GM: "okay, here is the campaign, and several things yo can and cannot do"
> P1: "cool!"
> P2: "cool!"
> P3: " erm. . . .hypothetically, would my character be allowed tio do >X<?"
> GM: "no"
> P3: "how's about >Y<?
> GM: "no, both those things break the conventions of genre
> P3: "well, what do i get to do?"
> GM: "oh, don't worry, i've got several entertaining plots lined up for you-
> first you teach some other peasantsw the glories of crop rotation,
> then you pick up all the bodies and struggle with grief and the confineas of your
culture, then you make your own pitchfork, then you pick up some more bodies. . .
>
> sorry for the misplaced satire, but my point is the gm may find such plots
fascinating-
> but it doesn't mean the player will- whoose fault is that, seeing as how the gm
> is effectively 'blocking' most of the suggestions the player himself makes?
>
Ok, I have to throw my two cents in on this particular situation. The player in
question defies all known laws. He was given every opportunity to (1) play a
character that was suitable to the theme of the campaign and (2) when that wasn't
good enough for him, the GM went out of his way to allow him to play what he
"wanted" to play. It isn't that the GM blocked whatever he did or didn't want to
do. It was simple out and out stubborness on his part to not play the genre.
Granted, he doesn't know much about the genre, but then "Hey" neither did I. Yet, I
have been getting along fairly well. Why, because I asked questions, posed what
if's etc.... Did he. No, his idea of fun was to complain about everything he
couldn't do and not concentrate on what he could do. Actually, in the game we have
been playing his character was a really good addition to the group. He was playing
a simple peasent that could have gotten around in places that three Samurai would
never have been able to go without raising a huge commotion. Yet, he wouldn't let
that work. So what did he do. Sat there during gaming sessions until a combat
occured, then fight for a phase or two until he was unconscious.
Of course this entire disscussion is mute, as I still believe he didn't have fun in
the game for the simple reason that the GM was playing STR at two character points
per point instead of the rules quote of one per one. He really couldn't stand
that....
:)
Sean
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 1997 14:15:22 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
From: Happyelf! <jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 10:49 PM 8/8/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Sigh. I can't help but wonder if I'm about to assist in the beating of a
>dead horse, but I think the player in the aforementioned Samurai/Peasant
>story was the one at fault. In the first place, the GM lined up what kind of
>campaign this would be - fairly realistic 16th century Japan. When the
>player wanted to play a peasant, he was told that he'd face restrictions. He
>was probably told all about the samurai's right to kill anyone of lower
>station for any reason at all.
>
i was speaking in general -
>Now, are these restrictions 'unfair' to the player? I really don't think so
>- and if they are, they're restrictions that are 'realistic' to the setting.
>I can still think of many avenues available to such a peasant PC in that
>particular setting; just as Disadvantages provide opportunites for
>roleplaying, so do genre restrictions. But any peasant that goes around
>ticking off samurai is eventually going to get hacked open!
>
yes, but isn't he eventually going to "tick samurai off" (or whatever)
unless he's just a walking chliche? once again, i' speaking generally,
if someone isn't playing the GM's way, in many games he's bound to
get killed eventually- it gets very frustrating being a piece of furnature. .
>It's not a matter of the GM 'not allowing' a player to find 'his own fun'.
>In this case, it's a matter of a PC not choosing a proper player type for
>the setting and his personality/play style with which to 'have fun'.
>
my point is- if the gm won't let the player find his own fun, it's his job to find the player fun things to do, within the genre in question- the gm is the only one who really knows what his setting is. . - it's not the players fault if he doesn't enjoy the GM's setting, i would argue too often the gm acts like it is.
>Look, if I said "We're going to be playing a modern police campaign set in
>Toronto, Canada. It will be easiest if all the players are either officers
>of the Ontario Provincial Police or Metro Toronto Police, or their
>associated offices (coroner, legal prosectution, etc.)."
>
>So Joe Schmoe decides he wants to play a janitor from the Skydome.
>
. . .. who the gm could make into an informant? or a witness needing protection?
or the gm could just decide he suxs. . . .
>Now, it is _really_ the GM's fault if he has difficulty always working Joe
>into plotlines that involve crime in and around Toronto? Does Joe really
>have cause for complaint when the game gets rolling and he has:
>
>A.) No gun
>B.) No bulletproof vest
>C.) No right to be on a crime scene
>D.) No combat skills
>E.) No criminological skills
>
A) he's a hostage, or perhaps a bystander?
B) same thing- cops don't always wear vests- in a good cop game, it shouldn't be just
a continuous firefight, in fact there should be hardly any situations needing this stuff at all. .
C) "now, Mr, shmoe, if you could just retrace your steps once we get to the base- huh? something's happened to the elevator!
D) would you believe shmo-san, or joe the mutant? i know, not in genre,
but that's my point- you lot seem to see genre as "not this sort of character, not that sort either", instead of "can i have this sort of character and preserve the genre?
(like future-boy with his night-vision goggles)
E) who says? seen murder she wrote recently? oh, or is your campaing more 'realistic' than that? despite the supposedly constant firefights?
>and he's pretty much left out of the action? I'd say no. A player does have
>the right to build the character he wants (and the GM does have the right to
>veto it, but often won't to avoid alienating the player), but garbage in,
>garbage out.
>
yes- and the GM reserves the right to label a character garbage- and THAT's where the garbage enters the equasion- the gm is not a comp, no matter how many want to blame the player for whatever goes wrong.
>A peasant's role in fuedal Japan is limited. As you noted, he does have some
>options, like:
>
>A.) become a soldier and work his way up to samurai
>B.) organize a peasant rebellion (not easy, but possible in any epic campaign)
>C.) become a samurai's lackey
>D.) become a spy
>E.) etc., etc.
>
how about:
F retire to a mountain convent during an interlude and become mystically inclined,
G win the samurais over and be treated as an equal
H kill them while they're sleeping
I poison them
J sell them out
K ect, ect
my point is that if the GM gets pompous about the "genre" then they will
start missing the validity of slightly 'off centre' contributions-
they won't feel the need to give a player air time, because they simply
decide the player is "missing the point" when potentially it's the GM who
is doing this- once again, i'm speaking GENERALLY. . .
>But pissing off Samurai isn't a career choice for a peasant (unless he's
>backed up by aforementioned peasant army). Though probably a better solution
>than death would have been a severe beating or something - but that was the
>other player's call.
>
oh, i see, so now it's the other players freedom at stake? this doesn't wash-
i would suggest that most GM's wouls not have allowed the farmer to kill a samurai,
say if he got him alone, ect, but would have placed a standard "deus" into the
plot, so it couldn't happen. I know, this wasn't the case, but once again i speak generally, and most people wouldn't be honest about that sort of stuff, anyway. . .
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 1997 14:31:02 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
From: Happyelf! <jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
X-Sender: jonesmj@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
At 11:51 PM 8/8/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Ok, I have to throw my two cents in on this particular situation. The player in
>question defies all known laws. He was given every opportunity to (1) play a
>character that was suitable to the theme of the campaign and (2) when that wasn't
>good enough for him, the GM went out of his way to allow him to play what he
>"wanted" to play. It isn't that the GM blocked whatever he did or didn't want to
>do. It was simple out and out stubborness on his part to not play the genre.
>Granted, he doesn't know much about the genre, but then "Hey" neither did I. Yet, I
>have been getting along fairly well. Why, because I asked questions, posed what
>if's etc.... Did he. No, his idea of fun was to complain about everything he
>couldn't do and not concentrate on what he could do. Actually, in the game we have
>been playing his character was a really good addition to the group. He was playing
>a simple peasent that could have gotten around in places that three Samurai would
>never have been able to go without raising a huge commotion. Yet, he wouldn't let
>that work. So what did he do. Sat there during gaming sessions until a combat
>occured, then fight for a phase or two until he was unconscious.
>
was that a truly valid option? once again, speaking generally
(especially since this guy sounds like the player from hell)
a gm must be willing to really try to get a player interested
>Of course this entire disscussion is mute, as I still believe he didn't have fun in
>the game for the simple reason that the GM was playing STR at two character points
>per point instead of the rules quote of one per one. He really couldn't stand
>that....
>
>:)
>
>Sean
>
oh, so now the truth is revealed! *l*
From: "Sean Pavlish" <pavlish@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 1997 02:31:44 -0400
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
> At 11:51 PM 8/8/97 -0400, you wrote:
> >Ok, I have to throw my two cents in on this particular situation. The player in
> >question defies all known laws. He was given every opportunity to (1) play a
> >character that was suitable to the theme of the campaign and (2) when that wasn't
> >good enough for him, the GM went out of his way to allow him to play what he
> >"wanted" to play. It isn't that the GM blocked whatever he did or didn't want to
> >do. It was simple out and out stubborness on his part to not play the genre.
> >Granted, he doesn't know much about the genre, but then "Hey" neither did I.
Yet, I
> >have been getting along fairly well. Why, because I asked questions, posed what
> >if's etc.... Did he. No, his idea of fun was to complain about everything he
> >couldn't do and not concentrate on what he could do. Actually, in the game we
have
> >been playing his character was a really good addition to the group. He was
playing
> >a simple peasent that could have gotten around in places that three Samurai would
> >never have been able to go without raising a huge commotion. Yet, he wouldn't
let
> >that work. So what did he do. Sat there during gaming sessions until a combat
> >occured, then fight for a phase or two until he was unconscious.
> >
>
> was that a truly valid option? once again, speaking generally
> (especially since this guy sounds like the player from hell)
> a gm must be willing to really try to get a player interested
>
Sure it was... and still is. But you are right... he is the player from hell. Too
bad he isn't playing with us anymore... <sarcasm mode turned off>
>
>
> >Of course this entire disscussion is mute, as I still believe he didn't have fun
in
> >the game for the simple reason that the GM was playing STR at two character
points
> >per point instead of the rules quote of one per one. He really couldn't stand
> >that....
> >
> >:)
> >
> >Sean
> >
>
> oh, so now the truth is revealed! *l*
>
Yeah, he is the kind of guy that looks at the book and says that isn't in there.
So, it isn't valid... I don't care if you ARE the GM.
::sign::
From: Dazzle489@aol.com
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 1997 06:24:58 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
> That is just patently ridiculous. If you're going to argue from the
> standpoint of "reality", then in "reality" (assuming that metahuman heroes
> and villains are real), if someone of Spider-Man's abilities, Batman's
skill
> or even Superman's power were to show up in a given city, the criminals of
> that city (whether superpowered or not) would most likely get out of town
so
> fast, it would make a kitchen light roach scatterfest look like a slow
motion
> car wreck.
>
Yes, but what if superheroes appeared in all major cities? I'm no
criminologist, but I suspect that some people are just career criminals,
with little knowledge about how to do anything else. Superheroes might
actually encourage crime, since Superman is powerful enough so that he
does not have to shoot to kill. If you are robbing a 7-11 and waving a
gun around, the police might decide to shoot before you can take a hostage
or kill someone. Supes (old powers) could just go in with blinding speed
and take your gun away. You'd go to jail, but you wouldn't be dead or
injured (except your pride).
> If comic books reflected "reality", think how many common people like you
and
> me would be slaughtered every day as fallout from the latest super battle.
> people would have to abandon the big cities like rats from a sinking
ship.
> World War III would most likely have occured by now and the very
> structure of
> society as we know it would be radically different to accommodate these
> god-like beings.
Speaking just for myself, I think this would be a more interesting read.
I wish that there were some comic-worlds that tried to project how a
society would be changed by super-powers.
> It's rarely a good idea to argue the validity of super
> hero from the standpoint of "reality". The four-color comic book is more
> than a creative use of chromatics. It includes psychological and
> philosophical conventions that are not generaly held by real human beings
and
> indeed could not be held. In truth, if, today, the advent of super powers
> became a reality, how many people do you think would truly put on a
costume
> and try to maintain secret identity in the same ways as, say, Clark Kent,
> Peter Parker or Bruce Wayne as opposed to how many people would just say
f***
> it and take to the skies in their three piece suits and sun dresses?
>
Sun dresses?!! I see your point that few people would bother getting
skin-tight costumes and calling themselves by goofy names, but sun
dresses? Don't get me wrong, women flying around in sun dresses would be
pretty cool, but I think most supers would opt for practical costumes,
like military uniforms and leotards, rather than everyday clothing, to
battle crime. That's assuming they have nigh-invulnerability. Elsewise,
they might resort to bullett-proof vests and such.
> "From this day forward, I shall call myself...RADIOACTIVE MAN!!!"
>
"From this day forward, I shall call myself...TURKEY VOLUME GUESSING MAN!!!"
-Eric >>
Isn't this getting a little silly now ??
From: Chris Lynch <chris@lynch1.demon.co.uk>
MMDF-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at punt-2.mail.demon.net
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 1997 16:06:03 +0100
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE Engine V4.71.0544.0
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type>
<HTML><META content='"Trident 4.71.0544.0"' name=GENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT size=2>If you want a good example of how the
world might be if supers REALLY existed, try reading Alan Grants Watchmen, or
The Psycho a limited series from DC.<BR>
<BR>
TTFN from Chris!<BR>
<A href="http://www.lynch1.demon.co.uk">http://www.lynch1.demon.co.uk</A>
</FONT></FONT>
</BODY></HTML>
</x-html>Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 97 11:55:32 -0400
From: John P Weatherman <asahoshi@nr.infi.net>
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
>> yes- because the GM isn't letting him find their OWN FUN- this is the
>> possible scenario:
This whole thread is getting ridiculous. By the standards being held for
"genre restrictiveness" the rules themselves limit a player..."What do you
mean a beginning character only gets 250 points, I want 2000!" When
playing
ANY game there have to be mutually decided upon limits as to what is and
is
not allowable. If 4 people, including the GM, are involved and 3 say "we
want a relatively realistic, even heavily realistic, feudal Japan
campaign"
then the players ALL have an obligation to work within that framework.
Retiring to a monastery and becoming "mystically inclined" is not an
option, it's not "heavily realistic". Leading a successful revolt, in
that
timeframe, is not "heavily realistic", although an unsuccessful one could
be interesting. If the player has a problem with the defined genre, or
the "how thing work" rules, they have three completely valid options.
1) Try to convince the others to modify the framework or have a
"secondary"
campaign more in line with what he wants. This usually isn't as
difficult as it might seem, at least in my experience.
2) Start his own campaign. Many GMs I've played with got started GMing
for
this very reason. Several groups I've played with have multiple GMs
who
rotate though so everyone gets the opportunity to see the kind of
campaign
they want.
3) Just don't play with those people. If their ideas and your's are
diametrically opposed, nobody's having fun anyway.
But it is the GMs job to cater to the majority, not to lay awake
sleepless
at night to try to keep uncooperative people happy when they are
obviously
trying to hinder the enjoyment of everyone else.
From: Eric Burns <burns@cug.dorm.usm.maine.edu>
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 1997 13:52:24 -0400 (EDT)
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
> >Yes, but what if superheroes appeared in all major cities? I'm no
> >criminologist, but I suspect that some people are just career criminals,
> >with little knowledge about how to do anything else. Superheroes might
> >actually encourage crime, since Superman is powerful enough so that he
> >does not have to shoot to kill. If you are robbing a 7-11 and waving a
> >gun around, the police might decide to shoot before you can take a hostage
> >or kill someone. Supes (old powers) could just go in with blinding speed
> >and take your gun away. You'd go to jail, but you wouldn't be dead or
> >injured (except your pride).
> >
>
> you suggest the threat of death dissuads criminals?
> well, i suppose it's only an argument, but your logic sways a bit
> close to hicksville for my liking. . .*g*
>
For the record, I'm NOT advocating death for criminals (I oppose the death
penalty), I just think that the potential danger of robbing a 7-11
(getting shot by the police) might discourage some potential criminals
from doing so, while the less lethal methods of Superman might only do so
to a lesser extent. And, no, this is not a criticism of the police; I
realize they have to use guns to protect themselves and others, at least
in this country where guns are so common.
And just because I'm a backwoods hick from Maine doesn't mean I have to be
a violent one (actually, Maine is one of about 10 states without the death
penalty, and no, I am not trying to start a flame war about the death
penalty).
-Eric
From: Eric Burns <burns@cug.dorm.usm.maine.edu>
Subject: Re: 4 color principles
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 1997 13:59:19 -0400 (EDT)
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
> > "From this day forward, I shall call myself...RADIOACTIVE MAN!!!"
> >
>
> "From this day forward, I shall call myself...TURKEY VOLUME GUESSING MAN!!!"
>
> -Eric >>
>
> Isn't this getting a little silly now ??
>
Your point...? ;-)
-Eric
From: Eric Burns <burns@cug.dorm.usm.maine.edu>
Subject: AoE/Invisible Mental Powers
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 1997 14:07:08 -0400 (EDT)
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
If you have an area of effect mental power, do you have to make an ECV
roll to hit a target in that area? Is the power still invisible to
normal senses? If you have AoE Telepathy, can you ask a question of every
person in that area?
If someone uses an Invisible mental power like telepathy or mind control
on you, can you still make ECV rolls to resist it?
-Eric
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 1997 14:02:09 -0700
From: "Robert A. West" <robtwest@erols.com>
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
John P Weatherman wrote:
>
* * *
>
> But it is the GMs job to cater to the majority . . .* * *
I would agree with your above statement if the players are paying
customers. In most campaigns, the GM is a volunteer who puts in (in my
experience) two to four hours of preparation time for every hour of
running time. This is a serious committment.
A campaign is, for me, most exciting when the GM has a literary vision
that he wants to express via the campaign. He then invites the players
to explore that vision with him. When the players join the campaign,
part of the contract is to try to cooperate with the GM in exploring his
story, within reasonable limits. In turn, the GM's responsibility is to
define the limits of the campaign as narrowly as possible for the story
that he wishes to tell and to cooperate with the players in bringing
their ideas to the table.
It is the responsibility of the GM to be true to his own vision, rather
than to "cater" to the majority of players. Any role-player worthy of
the name should be able to find a satisfying role within any well-run
campaign, even if the setting is somewhat (or even completely) cliched.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Snide aside:
I will agree that some players have a jones ;-) about proving their own
cleverness, and see their mission in life as busting up cliches. What
they fail to see is that they are too late! The cliches were busted up
and put back together again long before Dave Arneson started running a
fantasy setting called Blackmoor using the Chainmail rules!
-----------------------------------------------------------------
But, to return to my original point, it is generally far easier for the
players to adapt to what the GM has in mind than vice-versa, because they
have a far lesser stake in both time and emotion in the campaign. I
would therefore dispute that the GM has the responsibility of "catering"
to the majority of players.
--
<------------------------------------------------------->
Robert A. West /// "Censorship is tyranny."
Phone W:(215)466-3628; H:(215)348-9113
http://www.erols.com/robtwest
From: "\"qts\" <qts@nildram.co.uk>
\"Eric Burns\"" <qts@nildram.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 09 Aug 97 21:41:36
Reply-To: "qts" <qts@nildram.co.uk>
Priority: Normal
Subject: Re: AoE/Invisible Mental Powers
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
On Sat, 9 Aug 1997 14:07:08 -0400 (EDT), Eric Burns wrote:
>If you have an area of effect mental power, do you have to make an ECV
>roll to hit a target in that area? Is the power still invisible to
>normal senses? If you have AoE Telepathy, can you ask a question of every
>person in that area?
>
>If someone uses an Invisible mental power like telepathy or mind control
>on you, can you still make ECV rolls to resist it?
The way I've done this (as a fear aura) was to roll the dice once at
the start nad then apply that to all who came into the area of effect.
qts
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 1997 17:49:25 -0400 (EDT)
X-Sender: jprins@interhop.net (Unverified)
From: jprins@interhop.net (John and Ron Prins)
Subject: Re: Champions Genre Selection
Errors-To: owner-champ-l@omg.org
Sender: owner-champ-l@omg.org
X-Hero: champ-l
To: champ-l@omg.org
>>Now, are these restrictions 'unfair' to the player? I really don't think so
>>- and if they are, they're restrictions that are 'realistic' to the setting.
>>I can still think of many avenues available to such a peasant PC in that
>>particular setting; just as Disadvantages provide opportunites for
>>roleplaying, so do genre restrictions. But any peasant that goes around
>>ticking off samurai is eventually going to get hacked open!
>>
>
>yes, but isn't he eventually going to "tick samurai off" (or whatever)
>unless he's just a walking chliche? once again, i' speaking generally,
>if someone isn't playing the GM's way, in many games he's bound to
>get killed eventually- it gets very frustrating being a piece of furnature. .
I get the impression that you think that 'playing the GM's way' is
necessarily restrictive. I don't see the the peasant as truly being
restricted by the genre - rather, he's challenged by it. I'd think such an
environment would make for _better_ roleplaying.
That said, in an epic samurai campaign, a PC playing a peasant should
probably get some Disadvantage points for it (like Wealth: Poor, and
Physical Limitation: Peasant (Frequent, Greatly)).
>my point is- if the gm won't let the player find his own fun, it's his job
to >find the player fun things to do, within the genre in question-
Ah, but in this particular instance, I don't think the GM had failed at
that. The peasant PC was an unarmed combat machine and was offered the
promotion to foot soldier. The fact that the PC _had_ to obey orders from
the samurai PCs doesn't reflect on the GM, really (IMHO) - that's one of the
downsides to being a peasant in ancient Japan.
>the gm is the only one who really knows what his setting is. . - it's not
the >players fault if he doesn't enjoy the GM's setting, i would argue too
often the >gm acts like it is.
But it's not really the GM's fault either - and too often the player acts
like it is. In fact, I'd say that it is the players fault, as he can't adapt
his playing style to the reality around him.
>>Look, if I said "We're going to be playing a modern police campaign set in
>>Toronto, Canada. It will be easiest if all the players are either officers
>>of the Ontario Provincial Police or Metro Toronto Police, or their
>>associated offices (coroner, legal prosectution, etc.)."
>>
>>So Joe Schmoe decides he wants to play a janitor from the Skydome.
>>
>
>. . .. who the gm could make into an informant? or a witness needing
>protection?
>or the gm could just decide he suxs. . . .
I said _janitor_. He might be a witness in need of protection, but an
informant? That's clutching at straws. I'm not saying it's impossible to
play a janitor in a police drama RPG, but your avenues are limited. The GM
will have to work five times as hard to accomodate the one player - which
isn't fair to the others at all.
>A) he's a hostage, or perhaps a bystander?
>
>B) same thing- cops don't always wear vests- in a good cop game, it
shouldn't >be just
>a continuous firefight, in fact there should be hardly any situations
needing >this stuff at all. .
Of course not, but any police drama is going to eventually involve guns
(especially those climactic capture scenes) where Joe Janitor will be
standing around saying 'go get them, boys!'
>D) would you believe shmo-san, or joe the mutant? i know, not in genre,
>but that's my point- you lot seem to see genre as "not this sort of
character, not that sort either", instead of "can i have this sort of
character and preserve the genre?
The martial arts 'nobody' isn't rediculous to the genre (quite the
contrary), but the genre does require the realistic bent - unless you want
to go the X-Files route or something. BUT, I think it's important that not
every GM wants, needs, or should consider 'bending' a genre! It's not a
crime for the GM to want (and insist upon) playing true to the particular
genre in question. In fact, it's his _right_ to do so - GM'ing being a major
investment in time and effort.
>E) who says? seen murder she wrote recently? oh, or is your campaing more
>'realistic' than that? despite the supposedly constant firefights?
Yes, and if I knew Jessica Fletcher, I'd move to another country, change my
name, and have plastic surgery, because everyone this woman touches DIES.
Which _is_ staple for the 'murder mystery' genre, I'll point out. People are
constantly dying near the intrepid PCs. Just as in a Police Drama that
crimes (not necessarily gunfights) are continiously being perpetrated that
must be solved, stopped, or averted. But Joe Shcmoe lacks the skills to
solve, stop, or avert a crime. So what fun will he have?
>yes- and the GM reserves the right to label a character garbage- and THAT's
>where the garbage enters the equasion- the gm is not a comp, no matter how
many >want to blame the player for whatever goes wrong.
While others want to blame the GM.
>>A peasant's role in fuedal Japan is limited. As you noted, he does have some
>>options, like:
>how about:
>
>F retire to a mountain convent during an interlude and become mystically
>inclined,
Nice, but doesn't that sort of put him out of the action?
>G win the samurais over and be treated as an equal
Possible, and a worthy challenge - as it would be next to impossible (most
samurai have those pesky total psych lims about duty and honor and so
forth). Anyway, the PC obviously didn't think of this...
>H kill them while they're sleeping
>I poison them
>J sell them out
Possible too - which would destroy the campaign. We both ignored the real
option, though which is to make a new character. If you aren't having fun
with what you've got, it's never too late to start over.
>my point is that if the GM gets pompous about the "genre" then they will
>start missing the validity of slightly 'off centre' contributions-
There's a thin line between 'off center' and 'out of genre'.
>they won't feel the need to give a player air time, because they simply
>decide the player is "missing the point" when potentially it's the GM who
>is doing this- once again, i'm speaking GENERALLY. . .
Which obscures your argument to a degree.
>>But pissing off Samurai isn't a career choice for a peasant (unless he's
>>backed up by aforementioned peasant army). Though probably a better solution
>>than death would have been a severe beating or something - but that was the
>>other player's call.
>oh, i see, so now it's the other players freedom at stake? this doesn't wash-
>i would suggest that most GM's wouls not have allowed the farmer to kill a
>samurai, say if he got him alone,
Bull. If mr. martial arts peasant got a samurai alone (and especailly,
unarmed), I strongly doubt any GM would interfere and fiat rule that the
peasant 'couldn't' kill the samurai. There's a big difference between the GM
'suggesting' a course of action than handing out the big 'NO'.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"HEY! Give my nuclear warhead RIGHT BACK!!"
-Gold Digger #35
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
John D. Prins
jprins@interhop.net
Web Page created by Text2Web v1.3.6 by Dev Virdi
http://www.virdi.demon.co.uk/
Date: Wednesday, March 31, 1999 10:54 AM