Search SJML Archives! (Powered by Google)

Previous Message: Re: GURPS Current conversions and a revision
Next Message: Re: GURPS Current conversions and a revision
Month Index: May, 1997


From:     John Dye <jcd@????????????.net>
Date:     Mon, 12 May 1997 09:46:15 -0400
Subject:  Re: GURPS Current conversions and a revision
Donald Dean wrote:
>
> On Sun, 11 May 1997, David Starner wrote:

> > The average sphere has far more creatures than that. Not only that, why
> > should elves, humans, and tinker gnomes be the only land races in space?
> > Surely dwarves and all the other races would have gone too. (Tinker Gnomes
> > make sense???) Scro are also a very good space race, in part as a
> > replacement for all the humanoids the average party slaughters on land.
> > On a side note, I frankly prefer diversity in my campaign and feel that it
> > would exist where we have all these enormous number of spheres. To say the
> > entire AD&D space universe only contains 5 creatures is pretty limiting.
> > David Starner - deos@????.net
> > ***************************************************************************

Donald Dean wrote

>What about the arcane? and the negoi(sp?)?  They seem to be excellent
choices of what you might find out in "space"!

and Also
> I had forgotten about the scro completely. But I agree that you need more
> than just five races, and for the beholders. I din't know they seem to be
> so much more interested in doing away with themselves, that I don't mind them much.

I would think that the Arcane, whom I know little, would be excellent
choices.  However, the Neogi seem to be more "semi smart" cannon fodder
everyone loves to hate.  Like Beholders, whose existance seems to be
there "just because", I am not overly fond of them.  Every race should
have some kind of depth to them (except tinker gnomes, they exist for
laughs, but watch out the laugh might be on you!).

With the Illithids, their unsavory habits could easily be explained away
by their biology.  The Beholders seem to be fake.  A very intelligent,
non tool using magical creature who kills, well, because.

I am not saying to limit your campaigns in any way.  I just thought that
the races I listed seemed to have the most consistancy, with the most
vermissiltude.  Neogi, beholders, kender (sorry) et al, don't have that.

What did people think about my other part of the post.  Any interest in
the Illithid piece, or the conversion?


Previous Message: Re: GURPS Current conversions and a revision
Next Message: Re: GURPS Current conversions and a revision
Month Index: May, 1997

SubjectFromDate (UTC)
GURPS Current conversions and a revision    John Dye    11 May 1997 13:05:50
Re: GURPS Current conversions and a revision    David Starner    12 May 1997 00:08:28
Re: GURPS Current conversions and a revision    John Dye    12 May 1997 03:50:09
Re: GURPS Current conversions and a revision    Donald Dean    12 May 1997 06:43:37
Re: GURPS Current conversions and a revision    Donald Dean    12 May 1997 06:47:50
Re: GURPS Current conversions and a revision    John Dye    12 May 1997 13:46:15
Re: GURPS Current conversions and a revision    gantr@???.edu    12 May 1997 14:33:28
Re: GURPS Current conversions and a revision    Kahsir@???.com    12 May 1997 18:29:08
Re: GURPS Current conversions and a revision    Nicholas Knoepfle    12 May 1997 21:29:35
Re: GURPS Current conversions and a revision    Ziggy    12 May 1997 22:39:38
Re: GURPS Current conversions and a revision    David Starner    12 May 1997 22:37:10
Re: GURPS Current conversions and a revision    John Dye    13 May 1997 00:54:44
Re: GURPS Current conversions and a revision    Patrick Stutzman    13 May 1997 18:39:51

[ SPJ-L@Cornell.edu ] [ Spelljammer@Leicester.ac.uk ] [ Spelljammer@MPGN.com ] [ Spelljammer-L@Oracle.Wizards.com ]