Scott Adams longshot at DARKTECH.ORG
Mon Jan 31 08:32:35 CET 2000

At 03:04 PM 1/30/00 -0800, you wrote:
>Hello All,
>    I'm glad to see that people are still playing P&P. I'm thinking of
>getting back into it, or even rewriting it to correct what I saw as some of
>its flaws.
>    Problems with P&P:
>        Steep learning curve (I have been playing RPGs since 1976 and had
>been writing one with the idea of selling it to Avalon Hill when P&P came
>out...So much for that idea...At first it looked worse than C&S for
>playability. It took me 3 weeks to fully grasp the rules and the elegance
>contained therein.) It is easier to learn with someone to guide you.

 Never had a problem teaching it...especially at conventions where you only
a very short time to even run a good adventure : to new players :)  But I run
26 rpg
systems so I am a bit experienced with knowing how players learn :)

>        Many who aren't comfortable with basic math probably are turned off
>P&P because the math requirement.

Well its time the US get back to learning math rather than depending on
calculators for
everything :)

>        Creatures and characters use different stats (that this is a problem
>takes awhile to figure out).

Different stats?

>        Magic is too powerful, too fast. (I don't mind world shaking magic,
>but I feel it is attained far too quickly in P&P. Not to mention some spells
>are out of whack).

Magic to play is the only hard part for most...since you have to read alot of
text to get
the spells down and learn the system..but otherwise its pretty simple..

>        Not enough support (new scenarios, rules, maps, et cetera).

Well we have the web site :)..but its a business so lack of AH support lack of
support :)

>    Despite these problems it is perhaps the best system using an abstract
>combat system (each attack being the effective result of so many seconds
>worth of attacks and parries). [Note: I think GURPS is the best non-abstract
>system and RuneQuest is the best intermediate system of those I'm familiar


>    I will join the list and perhaps (as time allows) attempt to do a
>rewrite of P&P for the enjoyment of us all. For this any files on P&P would
>be useful, particularly the Book I & II mentioned in the list.

Well post and submit your new stuff to the web site / list :)

Longshot - ZC of AdventureNet International Echomail Network
Fringe BBS - EWOG II - 904-733-1721
Telegard / Allfix Beta Site
Date:         Mon, 31 Jan 2000 23:29:59 -0800
Reply-To:     Powers and Perils Fantasy Roleplaying Game Mailing List
Sender:       Powers and Perils Fantasy Roleplaying Game Mailing List
From:         Alex Koponen <akoponen at MOSQUITONET.COM>
Subject:      Applied Training
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

A question for the list. In Book 1 p.40 is a section about training ability
scores. Is this properly used in character creation (before play)?

At 09:48 PM 1/31/00 -0800, you wrote:
> Beyond the methods specified previously, Characters can increase any
>modifiable characteristics through training. Training is . . .
>4.1) The maximum number of points that can be gained through training
>the Character's Native Ability PLUS (his assigned Multiplier times 2).
>Example-- A . . .
>4.2) For days of training . . .
>NOTE--Training requires dedicated effort to succeed. Failure to maintain
>regimen selected is the same as not doing it at all. In setting-up a
>Character, Players may train at 1/2 the cost specified above, i.e. receive
>one characteristic point per two Expertise Points allocated. No time is
>expended when players train at this time.
>I tried scanning it in but my OCR has problems. If you really need the rest
>I suppose I could type it but it doesn't add much.
> By spending my expertise points on training I'm giving up spending those
>points elsewhere (other skills). Granted I think that I'm spending them
>nearly as wisely as I can as the loss in skills is more than offset by
>improvement in magical capability. Works for all character types in that
>can spend some points improving stats that in turn improve starting levels
>in the skills bought with the rest of the points.
> Alex

I still don't see it for generation..if that was the case a character age 20
could spend 10 years training his stats and be maxed out quickly...its used
for AFTER as I
read it like the party while on the ship learned climan from one player
using applied
training rules...

If you want other GM opinions you could post in the pnp list and ask but I
think they'll
say the same thing :)

But I could be wrong...

Alex's counter argument:
1) It does specifically refer to use in "setting-up a Character." Thus it
was expected to be used in Character generation.
2) It takes 2-4 days training per point of increase in current ability. The
most one can train an ability is Native Ability + twice the Multiplier. This
is 4 to 31 points per ability, averaging 14 per, times 8 trainable abilities
equals roughly 112 total pts in training. Taking the maximum time (x4) still
takes less than one and a half years.
3) This rule is for training current abilities, not skills. Your comment
about learning Climan is off the mark.
4) By spending my expertise points on training I'm giving up spending those
points elsewhere (on other skills) during character generation.

More information about the pnp mailing list