Re: DM: AARGH!

From: burgesmw@cnsvax.uwec.edu

Date: Tue, 01 Jun 1993 02:42:44 +0000

In article <uBNF5B1w165w@Micor.OCUnix.on.ca>, crip@Micor.OCUnix.on.ca (Garth Werner) writes:
> Thankfully, another power forward was recruited to fill the gap.
>  2nd round draft pick "Throws Up Bricks" was a high school talent at
> 6-14-19-6-16-4-5, but he needs a little working out at the gym to get him
> into game shape.  I've considered telling the team trainer to beef up on
> his strengths rather than balancing him out.  If he thinks the guy can
> make it to the show, I'd consider 6-14-19-9-21-4-11 as the most usefull
> training regiment; however, I really don't believe he has pro-potential
> so I figure why not make his college days the highlight of his life.
> This makes me think 6-18-19-6-20-4-10 as the most defensive forward in
> existance.  He will lead the league in Blocks, but his offensive talent
> will be non-existant.  Since his pro-potential is non-existant, I will
> continue his training schedule with increases to his will, deftness,
> strength, speed and wit before trying to develop any true basketball
> skills.
>
>         Any comments as to the validity of this approach, in character of
> this message, or just plain english, will be taken in the light this
> character deserves.

10-14-19-6-20-4-11  raise Will, Strength, then Deftness twice.  That is if he
is around that long.  :)

>
>         Mike and Matt (M&M) - I always have, and always will continue to
> run characters like the two mentioned above.  To me, the game is do the
> best with what you get.  Use the DA for the useless, but if they do have
> a chance to win at any level, at least give them a try.  Besides,
> warriors like this can humiliate the eventual Christines, M Lees and
> Donnies of the world early on.  You've got to rub there faces in it early
> on with the marginal characters, then clobber them in Primus with a few
> characters who are your best.  Just a thought.  AG would seem to be a
> simple let's win game.  Also, I really don't see the point in
> adventuring. OOH I (We) clobbered the computer.  This seems to go against
> your DM philosophy of beat the opposing manager as often and as severely
> as you can.

Well, that may be but due to the strict money constraints I have to choose
winning and getting what I feel is my moneys worth.  I tried far too many no
luck characters.  In example:

Wall of Steel -
   11-8-13-11-15-11-15  went 2-0 and DA'd
   13-7-10-11-19-9-15   died at 2-1
   12-12-13-11-17-7-12  DA'd at 5-0, was averaging 4 skills (20 skills)
                        a turn but had 10 parry and no expert.  Go figure.  8)

Those are just a few.  I didn't include the scum TP's...

Here are some of my experiments that didn't survive long enough to show their
true potential:

PL : 17-4-7-21-9-11-15  An incredible overview including being ambidextrous and
                        good damage.  Started with Advanced expert in attack
                        but died the first turn.
ST : 11-4-5-17-17-17-13 Good overview but did little damage (bummer).  Started
                        with expert in Decisiveness.  Died first turn also.
PL : 13-6-4-17-17-13-15 Good overview, Ambidex., but again little damage.
                        Started expert in attack and died at 4-3-1 (died in
                        bloodfued).
PS : 13-12-4-17-13-12-13 Good roll-up and did good damage.  Died at 9-8-1.
                         Once I started running like a Striker, I did good.
WS : 10-12-8-15-13-5-21 Great overview, normal damage.  Started with expert in
                        attack and got expert in Init in 1 and expert in Parry
                        in 2.  Died at 3-1.

Actually, this is a big reason why I quit the game.  I had these characters
(plus five other good ones) die in a four month period.  I said screw it and
got the AG rules to look at.

Yes, AG isn't like the "beat the team manager", but I find adventuring and
challenges just as fun.  There are some things you give up in AG and things you
gain.  I like playing games like D&D (although we don't use dice and such; it
is a mind game for us) and AG adventuring is like that.  I like fighting a huge
variety of monsters.  AG isn't a simple "let's win game".  Your main objective
is to advance your character the way you want.  Sure winning all the time in
the guild is fun, but not all designs are made for that.  In DM, winning is how
your character is judged (and could decide if you survive or die).  Most people
do not want to run a character that consistently loses in DM, but in AG if you
lose a lot you can go adventuring with a group and help the party win.
Challenges (single and team), death matches, and grotto fights are a way to get
that "beat the manager" feeling in AG.

If I had the money to spend on DM, would I play it again?  Yes.  If I had
the money and it would be a drop in the barrel of my income, I would play DM
again.  Of course, this would mean I would have to suffer with the customer
service and other problems, but the manager vs manager thing is fun.  The only
difference is that I wouldn't worry about getting that perfect roll-up and
would play just for the wars and insults.  I probably would retire characters
advancing to ADM unless they were very good.  I would eventually retire any
character who got all his skills and a certain amount of stat raises.

I would also like to play Legends, CTF-2187 (again), Evermoor II, etc...

Matt

>                 Crip
>
>
> **************************************************************************
>
> Crip    Member of the BHB, Alliance that rules North Fork
>
>         Mgr of Royal Flush (DM47), Open Sesame (DM50), and others...
>
>         "Honestly, Christine's not one of my favourite warriors"
>
> **************************************************************************

References

DM: AARGH!
crip@Micor.OCUnix.on.ca (Garth Werner)
Mon, 31 May 1993 17:10:17 +0000