
-------- TML Message #663 --------

Archive-Message-Number: 663
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 89 14:03:01 PDT
From: gazis@halley.arc.nasa.gov
Subject: musings inspired by recent geological activity



Greetings,

     Things are slowly getting back to normal out here in the Bay
Area.  A different form of normal, perhaps, than prevailed nine
days ago, but normal nonetheless.
     So far, my informal poll shows that the entire population of
Silicon Valley was on an editor at 5:04 last Tuesday.  About half
of them made a frantic effort to save their files and before they
took cover.  There's a lesson here about the the effects of training
and force of habit.  There's also a lesson about different forms of
reality.  One envisions a hapless starcrew frantically consulting a
manual as his vessel disintigrates around him:  "No, wait!  I did 
not mean to dodge into the flightpath of that missile!  Perhaps I
can recall an earlier version of my files in which the ship has not 
yet been destroyed!"

     The large-scale structural test which we conducted on our 
buildings last week raises an interesting question?  How many of
you folk incorporate random large-scale disasters in your game?
What form do these disasters take?  Galactic core explosions?
Supernovae?  Asteroid impacts?  Earthquakes?  Perhaps even local
school board elections?  What are the effects of these disasters?
On the hapless player characters?  On the unsung cast of millions
(or billions) of NPCs who suffer and die to provide the necessary
background?  Is it possible for player characters to influence the
course of events?  Do they?  For good or for ill?
     The last such event I recall in The Eight Worlds was the Great 
Allanlok Spaceport Fire.  This was an entirely accidental event for
which the PCs actually bore some responsibility:
     A vessel they were escorting lost power on liftoff from Mor,
the major (in fact the only) city on Allanlok.  The hapless pilot
lost control and crashed.  A random roll for location placed the
crash site in the middle of the spaceport fuel depot which, alas,
lacked the sophisticated safety devices such as might be found on
a more advanced world.  The liguid hydrogen tanks storage ruptured, 
vented their contents, and exploded one by one in a cataclysmic chain
reaction.  The resulting fires spread through the warehouse district
and the surrounding slums and shanties to reach the city itself.  
     The fires raged for three days.  One third of the city was 
destroyed.  More than 20,000 people lost thier lives.
     The PCs were extremely active in the relief effort.  They helped
to evacuate the city, they helped to build firebreaks, and they flew 
water-bombing missions.  Several PCs lost their lives, including three 
engineers who were aboard the doomed merchant ship (they knew the ship
had problems with its drives so they came on board to help with the 
liftoff, hence the responsibilty) when it performed its fatal
demonstration of Newtonian mechanics.

     Disasters provide an excellent (if somewhat macabre) source of
scenarios.  Consider the following example:
     The Imperial Naval Station on Decus VII receives word that the 
entire planet of Vanderleigh suffered a local school board election.  
The Imperial task force is not available:  Every ship is out of 
commision (excuse me... the ships are at Readiness Level Charlie) until 
necessary repairs can be conducted on their tomato peelers.  Vanderleigh 
is on its own... unless... a free trader can be pressed into service.  
As fate and the GM would have it, the only suitable vessel belongs to a 
set of player characters.  Over their protests, they are comissioned as 
members of the Imperial Auxiliary Transport Reserve and forced to fly a 
relief mission.  They have many adventures, humor, drama, and pathos 
abound, but last they are all consumed by local politics and die.  The 
players all abandon the game in anger.  Alone, forlorn, friendless, the 
luckless GM decides upon a scheme of world conquest.  He draws upon his 
expertise as a TRAVELLER GM to build a working time transport which he 
uses to travel to Post WWII Japan.  Working behind the scenes, he 
rebuilds the shattered nation into a major world economic power under 
his hidden but absolute control.  Soon he will be ready to implement 
the second phase of his sinister plan.  The only threat to his scheme 
for world domination come from a brave space physicist who attempts to 
conceal a warning in a humorous message regarding Role Playing Games.  
But before he can finish this warning he is bgjhvk;rqenblbl............

Paul R. Gazis                        
gazis@hal.span.nasa.gov   or
gazis%hal.span@ames.arc.nasa.gov   or
(408) 736-0764 (h)


All opinions and material above is the responsibility of the originator.
Submissions: traveller@dadla.wr.tek.com, or uunet!dadla.wr.tek.com!traveller
Administrator: traveller-request@dadla.wr.tek.com (James Perkins)
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by Tektronix, Inc.

-------- TML Message #664 --------

Archive-Message-Number: 664
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 89 07:35:43 -0400
From: wrgate.wr.tek.com!uunet.uu.net!att!ihlpf!zonker@tektronix.TEK.COM
Subject: Re: The Horrors of Realistic Weapons


I had to respond to this article.  First let me say that I think that GDW
on the whole has produced some of the best combat gaming systems ever done.
For example: the Citadel, Avalanche, Crusader, Striker, Command Decision, 
Twilight 2000 and First Battles games all have very good combat systems.
So I think that I have to disagree with Mark on most of what he states in
his article.  But what constitutes a good system to me probably doesn't
touch base with Mark.  I prefer systems that emphasize the command side
of combat to the technological, it sounds like Mark prefers the opposite:
>For a start, I have had to develop my own damage system--based not on
>statistics, for the most part, but on (a) location of hit on a person's
>body and (b) the actual damage caused by the weapon.
Realism is subjective and most gamers seem to feel a system is realistic
only when they can be a Field Marshall and a Private in the same game.
(Well maybe that is a bit of an exaggeration, but hopefully you'll get my
drift).  There is also a problem (as you said) with encumbrance, the more
detailed you get with a set of rules the less playable it is.  For example,
TAC Force is an extremely realistic modern armor system, but it is
practically unplayable due to the detail i.e. a minimum of an hour to work
out a minute game time.  Given that a typical modern action lasts 15 to 20
minutes...  However, the game is very worthwhile as a reference.  If you
want to work out individual damage then you have will be limiting the size
of your games to probably the squad level.  Which may work fine for the
kind of campaign your running, but a publisher can't tailor their rules to
your situations only you can do that.

As for GDW specifically I have great respect for Frank Chadwick's work and less
for Mark Millers.  This is mainly due to the fact that Frank spends more time
tuning his systems by running them past outside playtesters.  He seems more open
to other peoples opinions and more in touch with his audience.

As for weapons ratings this is always subjective, and as for bows specifically
I believe the bow in the rules is meant to be the normal primitive short
bow.  I think stats were given in one of the JTAS for long bows and
composite bows.  We did quite a bit of low tech striker and that rating
works out correctly.  Why do you think everyone in the world threw these away
for smoothbore muskets which have an accuracy when shooting at a man of 30 feet?
With most bows large die mods should be needed to use them at all effectively.
Modern Hunting bows may be a different matter and if that is where you have
experience add an appropriate rule for it.

I don't think anyone has ever not had to make provisions in a game for what he
feels is the right balance.  The rules for Traveller are not meant to be a
Bible, only to be a guide or a base from which to start.  We constantly made
up new skills while playing Traveller.  I redesigned the computers when I ran
Traveller games, because I know about computers, they don't.  Their rules were
OK for most people, but since I have specific knowledge I expanded the rules
till I felt comfortable.  Even Frank Chadwick frequently makes up new rules
as we go along.  For example last winter we began running a Korean War
scenario for Command Decision called East of Chosen.  We were faced with
the problems of human wave assaults for the first time.  So we made up
rules that fit.  Now I don't know what Mark feels is improbable or wrong,
but I don't see how he can say they have no clue about what they're doing.
Especially since he offered us no reason to believe that he does.  If you
don't like a combat system and want to make up a new one that fits what you
feel is the way to go, so what?  This doesn't mean the old system is wrong,
it's not a black and white situation.  Especially since this is science fiction
and who really knows how it works or even if it could ever work.  If you don't
like the abstract damage system for wounds, then design your own.  There are
plenty of guides out there.  Twilight 2000 has a rating based on limbs, torso
and head.  There is even a game called Bio 1 which works out for bullets
what got hit and how much the character bleeds.


					Non Cuniculus Est,
					    Tom H.

All opinions and material above is the responsibility of the originator.
Submissions: traveller@dadla.wr.tek.com, or uunet!dadla.wr.tek.com!traveller
Administrator: traveller-request@dadla.wr.tek.com (James Perkins)
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by Tektronix, Inc.

-------- TML Message #665 --------

Archive-Message-Number: 665
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 89 11:26 EST
From: METLAY@vms.cis.pitt.edu
Subject: Jim Cunningham, what's yer address?!


[I have been reaching Jim through the roundabout:
	jcunning%gsliss%gslisa@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu (-Jim Cunningham)
Good luck! -- James]

see above.

i want high passage 2 thru 5, dammit!

also, does dgp's early adventures reprint have the pages of #1 you're missing?

metlay

All opinions and material above is the responsibility of the originator.
Submissions: traveller@dadla.wr.tek.com, or uunet!dadla.wr.tek.com!traveller
Administrator: traveller-request@dadla.wr.tek.com (James Perkins)
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by Tektronix, Inc.

-------- TML Message #666 --------

Archive-Message-Number: 666
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 89 11:32 EST
From: METLAY@vms.cis.pitt.edu
Subject: On Mark's search for realism (ick) in combat



Mark:

I've used the GDW combat system for over ten years, and I agree that it has
a lot of gaps where combat realism is concerned. However, there are two 
considerations that override a greater attention to realism: first is the
up side that playability at the cost of realism makes gaming more fun in the
long run for groups that are more interested in role-playing than in realistic
combat per se, and second is the down side that a truly realistic combat system
involving anything more dangerous than paint pellet pistols would be gory,
painfully short, and no fun at all for anyone who cared about their characters.
This is the fundamental difficulty of RPGs involving combat; if they're at all
realistic, they may still be playable but they WON'T be fun. (I cite the game
of PHOENIX COMMAND by Leading Edge as a shining example of this; on average,
you lose your character on the first hit.)

I think the MegaTraveller combat system is a huge improvement over this, as it
deliberately breaks combat into two parts: the first, combat itself, deals in
broad strokes, dealing generalized damage and trauma that either knocks you 
out, kills you, or not. Then, after the fighting's over and the medics can get
to you, the extent and form of the damage is assessed. The Traveller's Digest
has a nifty article on what happens next (prostheses, cloning new body parts,
bionics, etc.). It's in Issue 13, I believe: the Terra issue. I'm not a realism
freak: Barry Nakazono broke me of that habit five years ago at a PHOENIX
COMMAND playtest. My parties avoid combat for all of the right reasons, and 
because the people in my game aren't in it for the combat anyway. 

If you insist on realism in the MegaTrav system, the Travellers' Digest 
articles are vital; the rules, as they are, won't tell you how to reassemble
a character who's been turned into taco filling. (Also, it provides a very 
clear, consistent, and time-efficient means of determining exactly what 
happens to a character who blows a survival roll during career generation, 
that improves upon "he has to muster out now" and really beats "oh dear, he's
dead, start over." Has anybody noticed that Scouts would have a 50% attrition
rate per year otherwise? The Navy and Marines have it easy!)

Good luck on your search for the ultimate in realistic combat systems: if you
find it, let me know, but I don't think it's worth searching for in my own
games.

metlay


All opinions and material above is the responsibility of the originator.
Submissions: traveller@dadla.wr.tek.com, or uunet!dadla.wr.tek.com!traveller
Administrator: traveller-request@dadla.wr.tek.com (James Perkins)
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by Tektronix, Inc.

-------- TML Message #667 --------

Archive-Message-Number: 667
Subject: library science and arms control
Date: Thu Oct 26 13:22:54 1989
From: richard@agora.hf.intel.COM (Richard Johnson)



{My apologies for forgetting your name... the "traveller relic"
with the old TD issues...}

I think it was James Cunningham mentioned that he was a humble
library science student majoring in arms control.  Anyone have
some thoughts on how arms control is working (and/or failing)
in the Imperium?

It seems to be working with the Zhodani, but because *they*
don't care - humaniti is still hesitant.  It seems to be
a cosmic [sic] failure near Capital.

Obviously fracturing the Imperium for personal gain is not
popular.  War is not good economically (except for a few).
War is not good for the populous (except for a few).  War is not,
in general, good for humaniti.

Maybe Mr. Cunnignham (I sure hope I got it right) can share
some thoughts on arms control, and why people in the fture
are no more philospohically advanced than we.

Richard Johnson


All opinions and material above is the responsibility of the originator.
Submissions: traveller@dadla.wr.tek.com, or uunet!dadla.wr.tek.com!traveller
Administrator: traveller-request@dadla.wr.tek.com (James Perkins)
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by Tektronix, Inc.

-------- TML Message #668 --------

Archive-Message-Number: 668
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 89 20:30:29 -0500
From: (Mark Gellis) f3w@mentor.cc.purdue.edu



Ooops, missed the subject line...

Well, I'm glad that my comments on the combat system gathered responses,
even if they were negative.  Actually, that's probably my fault; I did 
come on a little strong.  (I must have been in a particularly bad mood.
My apologies.)

I thought I should add a little more to give people a better idea.  Basically,
the thing I object to is that, assuming the average character has 18 to 25
hit points, a single round from a pistol, and even from most rifles or shot-
guns, is not likely to do more than "wow, I've lost some hit points; gee,
maybe I shouldn't charge so many machinegun nests."

I am VERY aware of the reality-playability problem; one of my goals has been
to design a combat system that has as much of both as possible.  (I think
my bad mood was a result of some of the sacrifices I have had to make as far
as reality is concerned in order to manage the playability.  Of course,
ultimately, the playability is the primary concern.)

Suffice that now, if you shot or stabbed with anyone bigger than a 6 mm.
pistol (like a .25, but with actual killing power) or a boot knife, you can
be in serious trouble.  Just like real life.  Even the little weapons can
kill on a lucky shot.  Shotguns and rifles?  These were weapons designed
for (a) killing large animals like bears and (b) overkill on medium-sized
animals like humans.

On the up side, [D[D[D[C[C[Carmor (kevlar, etc.) is fairly cheap in my gameworld.  And
it will stop most small arms, or at least reduce a killing wound to a bruise
(and maybe a broken rib).  Also, hospitals in the future may still be run by
incompetent humans, but they have much better machines.  I'm a trained first
aider, so I consider "death" as "when your heart stops and your brain
starts to die from oxygen lack."  If someone dies and you get them to a
support unit in the first five or ten minutes, they will recover with no
problem.  (Hell, we can do that NOW.)  Also, just like in real life, if
you have a trained medic in the party, most wounds that would be fatal 
without medical attention can be treated to the point where they are no
longer life-threatening.  The character will have to go to the hospital
to finish patching things up, but they will live.  My basic rule of thumb
is that serious wounds without medical attention can kill up to 90% of
the time, but WITH medical attention, only kill about 10% of the time.
(By the way, it takes a long time to bleed to death unless you have been
hit in the aorta or femoral artery, so medics usually have plenty of time
to crawl over and work on people.)

Medical stuff...please use these ideas if you like them...Medical drug
slows bleeding (or stops it if it is minor) so medics have more time to
get to you; it also prevents shock.  Also, portable cranial support units
("brain boxes") are available to keep a brain alive when the body can't
do it anymore.  True, you have to wait for donor body to show up, but
at least you're alive.

Last but not least, and perhaps most interesting to you people, I hope,
is how all this affects the gaming.  There is a really interesting effect
when players know that violence is bad for their health...they think a lot
more.  The unspoken rules in my gameworld, one of the lessons I try to
teach, is that shooting and stabbing people are not really desirable things
(although they may sometimes be necessary).  Killing is dangerous, messy,
unpleasant, and even if you get out of the firefight, there can be legal
reprecussions.  (Often, these are more horrifying than the firefight, 
as anyone who has dealt with lawyers can tell you.)  So, I want people to
THINK before they get into a firefight.  And if they choose to do so,
they should THINK about how to get the first shot off (the second unspoken
rule is that if you have to kill someone, do it right).  

By the way, I don't run my world with the intention to slaughter my player
characters.  My gameworld is dangerous, but if you use common sense, even
in "commando" scenarios where you know there will be a lot of shooting
(NPCs are usually people with skills at the nominal level, and most of 
them are of only average intelligence and physical abilities), you have
an excellent chance of coming out without a scratch.

Well, I've rambled on far too long.  Take care, all; I look forward to
further discussions.

    Mark

Disclaimer: I accept the responsibility...but not the blame.


All opinions and material above is the responsibility of the originator.
Submissions: traveller@dadla.wr.tek.com, or uunet!dadla.wr.tek.com!traveller
Administrator: traveller-request@dadla.wr.tek.com (James Perkins)
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by Tektronix, Inc.

-------- TML Message #669 --------

Archive-Message-Number: 669
From: (Adrian Hurt) adrian%cs.heriot-watt.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk
Subject: Re: The Horrors of Realistic Weapons
Date: Sun, 24 May 37 8:49:46 BST


> I would be interested in hearing how the people on the mailing list have
> reacted to the various combat systems created by GDW, and the modifications
> they have come up with to deal with aspects they did not like.

I'm  probably in a minority here, but I am not much interested in exactly where
a character gets hit. I quite liked the old Striker/Azhanti High Lightning
systems, in which you rolled 2D for damage, modified by weapon penetration and
target armour, and got a result of No Effect, Wounded, Unconscious or Dead. The
only concession to detail I made was that instead of applying those literally,
I used the damage die codes from Mercenary, and applied damage to PC stats. It
may not have been very realistic, but it was quick, and it worked to the extent
that a big tough PC could take more punishment than a little wimpy PC. Instead
of using the original GDW method, I simply added the character's STR and END
together for hit points to unconsciousness, and used DEX as further hit points
before death. Finally, the damage taken was multiplied by a factor depending on
the penetration roll. If the penetration table said "Wounded", the factor was
1; for "Unconscious", it was 1.5; for "Dead", it was 2. The main effect of this
was that even a slight hit from a PGMP now became lethal.

If a location was needed, it'd be referee's discretion, based upon such things
as how good the damage roll was, what would suit the story best, and whether or
not the referee was feeling mean at the time.

Maybe we didn't have characters queuing up in front of the medic knowing just
where they'd been hit; but it meant we could get the fight over with relatively
quickly, and get on with the next bit.

 "Keyboard? How quaint!" - M. Scott

 Adrian Hurt			     |	JANET:  adrian@uk.ac.hw.cs
 UUCP: ..!ukc!cs.hw.ac.uk!adrian     |  ARPA:   adrian@cs.hw.ac.uk

All opinions and material above is the responsibility of the originator.
Submissions: traveller@dadla.wr.tek.com, or uunet!dadla.wr.tek.com!traveller
Administrator: traveller-request@dadla.wr.tek.com (James Perkins)
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by Tektronix, Inc.

-------- TML Message #670 --------

Archive-Message-Number: 670
From: (Steven J Owens) scratch@unix.cis.pitt.edu
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 89 10:49:08 EDT
Subject: Arms Control in Traveller


>I think it was James Cunningham mentioned that he was a humble
>library science student majoring in arms control.  Anyone have
>some thoughts on how arms control is working (and/or failing)
>in the Imperium?

	From several of the traveller campaigns I've seen, if you're talking
about firearms, control is non-existent! :-)  On the other hand, the No-Nukes
laws seem very firmly in place... even in the campaign I'm in now, in which the
players are caught between two power forces - two contenders for the imperial
throne.  On the other hand (hey, this is traveller, we can have three handed
aliens...) the fighting hasn't gotten truly intense yet, and the players are
avoiding the whole mess (or trying to) so we may never know.

>It seems to be working with the Zhodani, but because *they*
>don't care - humaniti is still hesitant.  It seems to be
>a cosmic [sic] failure near Capital.

	What do you mean, "they don't care?"  I'm running a Zhodani character
right now, (and doing it accurately, I think) and while "we" aren't too worried
about the internal power struggles of you imperials, that's dependent upon just
that point - internal.  On the other hand, I have the feeling the Consulate 
would have strong interests if the fighting spilled over, accidentally or on
purpose, into Zhodani space.  

>Maybe Mr. Cunnignham (I sure hope I got it right) can share
>some thoughts on arms control, and why people in the fture
>are no more philospohically advanced than we.

	I'd be interested in Mr. Cunningham's thoughts also, but I have the
only answer that counts for your last point - if the people in the future were
more philosophically advanced than we are, nobody would be playing Traveller.
After all, why are we doing this?  For fun!  And let's face it, a world where
everything is perfect isn't much fun to role-play in.  Most campaigns are based
on conflict, between the players and other forces.  Remove the conflict, and
you remove the basis for the campaign.

	Besides which, I'm not so sure that simply being further along the
time-line must mean that they are more philosophically advanced.  Granted, our
civilization is in many ways nicer than civilization a few hundred years ago 
(for example, nicer about children & old folks, about racial equality, etc) but
is this necessarily a factor of how much time w've had for philsophical
advancement, or couldn't it simply be a factor of convenience - most cultures
weren't too attached to young kids because it was too likely they'd die young.
As medicine and living conditions have improved, the death rate has decreased,
and parents become more attached to their kids, etc.  


   Steven J. Owens  |  Scratch@PITTVMS  |  scratch@unix.cis.pitt.edu

"Okay, Major Jonathan "Wrong-Is" Wright rubs his magic ring of Imperial
 Intervention and twenty stormtroopers with battledress and gauss rifles
 pop out of the microwave oven..." 
 
	- Sean T. Grape, in a truly bizarre traveller campaign...



All opinions and material above is the responsibility of the originator.
Submissions: traveller@dadla.wr.tek.com, or uunet!dadla.wr.tek.com!traveller
Administrator: traveller-request@dadla.wr.tek.com (James Perkins)
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by Tektronix, Inc.

-------- TML Message #671 --------

Archive-Message-Number: 671
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 89 11:55:28 EDT
From: (Dan Corrin) dan@engrg.uwo.ca
Subject: Re: The Horrors of Realistic Weapons


I agree with Adrian, that most people (in a game) don't care exactly
where they get hit, however I do find that a hit location system important
to some characters.

(e.g. The Sternmetal villain reaches for the alarm button, Susan shoots with
her snub pistol...(roll, roll)...and wounds the director, who proceeds to 
press the button anyway)

This type of situation calls for a method of hit location, either as an
"I aim for the director's hand" or "He's not hit criticaly, where do you 
hit?...(roll)...you hit his arm, the button is not pressed!"

However, you wouldn't need it every time. Quite often in a games that has
hit location, I ignore it unless it is important at that time.

	-Dan
	
dan@engrg.uwo.ca   Dan Corrin, System Manager, Mechanical Engineering, UWO
...!watmath!julian!engrg!dan  "Friends don't let friends drive Chryslers" -JPS

All opinions and material above is the responsibility of the originator.
Submissions: traveller@dadla.wr.tek.com, or uunet!dadla.wr.tek.com!traveller
Administrator: traveller-request@dadla.wr.tek.com (James Perkins)
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by Tektronix, Inc.

-------- TML Message #672 --------

Archive-Message-Number: 672
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 89 11:45:14 -0500
From: wrgate.wr.tek.com!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!gslisa!gsliss!jcunning@tektronix.TEK.COM
Subject: arms control and things





As far as arms control in the Traveller universe goes, I don't recall
anyone ever presenting anything along those lines. The closest thing
I can remember is that there are demilitarized zones between the
Imperium and the Zhodani. The Fifth Frontier War began for the
Imperium with the shocking news that a Zhodani fleet was present
at Ruie/Regina, and to get there said fleet would have violated the
zone. See the news reports from Journal 9, which were also reprinted
in a later issue (about 17ish) and in the rules manual of the Fifth
Frontier War board game.

Arms control could certainly be an interesting topic to explore.
Thinking about it, I see a major problem: verification would be
impossible, just as it was in the major naval treaties in the
1920s. In fact, it is only with the advancement of recon satellites
that any form of verification is possible here and now at all, and
even this is not perfect-- nuclear warheads are easy to hide, and
there is no way to peek into the warhead buses of missiles (which 
aren't as easy to hide) to see how many warheads are actually in 
there (you have to guess).

I see some interesting adventuring possibilities here. A team
of adventurers could be hired to investigate the faith of a
nation or world (independent by position or because of the
Rebellion) which has a treaty with its neighbor. All kinds of
neat spy stuff.

I'll probably come up with some more ideas in the months ahead,
as I'll be finishing my library degree in December and starting
my second masters (real world? Hah! Forget it!) in political science
specializing in arms control. Right now I work in the library here
at U of I which houses the Arms Control Collection. Pays the rent.


As far as HP back issues goes, all I need is $1 each to cover
postage. I've got a few copies of each issue here with me; if
I run out I'll have to get some next time I visit my folks.
They'll be happy-- the boxes of issues are piled up in the garage,
and I refuse to part with them. Please note that I'll need your
"real" address to send you anything. My "real" address is:

Jim Cunningham
1604 Coronado Drive #7
Champaign, IL  61820


Have a good weekend folks.



All opinions and material above is the responsibility of the originator.
Submissions: traveller@dadla.wr.tek.com, or uunet!dadla.wr.tek.com!traveller
Administrator: traveller-request@dadla.wr.tek.com (James Perkins)
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by Tektronix, Inc.

-------- TML Message #673 --------

Archive-Message-Number: 673
From: d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se (Bertil Jonell)
Subject: Re: The Horrors of Realistic Weapons
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 89 8:11:35 MET DST


[This came to traveller-request@dadla.wr.tek.com, looks like it was
meant for traveller@dadla.wr.tek.com.  Watch those automatic reply
headers! -- James]

> I would be interested in hearing how the people on the mailing list have
> reacted to the various combat systems created by GDW, and the modifications
> they have come up with to deal with aspects they did not like.

About a year ago I remade the MegaT combatsystem with the Twilight system
as an pattern. I'll try to dig it up somtime after the exams are done.

Very shortly it went like this:
To hit is, like before, a task and the difficulties per range are the same
with one exeption: All long weapons have Difficult on Short range.
(Try handling a rifle when wrestling!) Also, to separate the weapons alittle,
they had extra positive DM's on some ranges for some weapons
(Actually more simple than it sounds)
When you hit someone (or somebeing B-) the damage done was random. (ie: 4D
was "Toss 4 dice" and not "4 woundpoints") The damage the person sustained
was what was left when you subtracted what the armor absorbed.
There were also hit locations with capacities based on the UPP of the target.

This system worked quite well for small-scale combat, < 10 participants
on each side and not too many Autofire weapons with Dangerspace.

> (I have a feeling that 
> for the most part, however, people will agree that GDW combat systems leave
> something to be desired.)

Yupp!

>      Mark

- -bertil-

- -- 
Bertil K K Jonell @ Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg
NET: d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se 
VOICE: +46 31 723971 / +46 300 61004     "Don`t worry,I`ve got Pilot-7"
SNAILMAIL: Box 154,S-43900 Onsala,SWEDEN      (Famous last words)      
"There's Medellin. Drugs 'R Us, all in that one little city in the valley.
One nuke could settle things..." Tom Clancy 'Clear and Present Danger'

All opinions and material above is the responsibility of the originator.
Submissions: traveller@dadla.wr.tek.com, or uunet!dadla.wr.tek.com!traveller
Administrator: traveller-request@dadla.wr.tek.com (James Perkins)
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by Tektronix, Inc.

-------- End of TML Messages --------

