TRAVELLER Digest 569

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) What to do in jump... by Christopher_Griffen_at_DMC-SJ3@dmcwave.com (Christopher Griffen)
  2) Re: TRAVELLER digest 567 by t01bpa@abdn.ac.uk
  3) Tavonni by lewis@chara.gsu.edu (Lewis Roberts)
  4) Re: Keeping Track... by Rob Miracle <rwm@MPGN.COM>
  5) Reply to Rob Miracle by "Bob Brown" <Robert.Brown@newcastle.ac.uk>
  6) Dragons of Nutema by lewis@chara.gsu.edu (Lewis Roberts)
  7) Naval Review Board by Gsvenson@aol.com
  8) RE: TNE vs. CT/MT by That Computer Guy <darkstar@UDel.Edu>
  9) WHat Course Observations by anwfh@acad2.alaska.edu (William F. Hostman)
 10) Re: Tech vs Econ Superiority by Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
 11) 2300? by Lance Blyth <lrblyth@lamar.ColoState.EDU>
 12) Re: TRAVELLER digest 566 by Simon.Harding@vuw.ac.nz
 13) A New Campaign Era by Armand Suarez <suarez@on.rim.or.jp>
 14) Re: TNE vs. CT/MT by "David J. Golden" <goldendj@csn.net>
 15) Additional RSB Errata by angus.mclellan@almac.co.uk (ANGUS MCLELLAN)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 13:00:53 -0800
From: Christopher_Griffen_at_DMC-SJ3@dmcwave.com (Christopher Griffen)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: What to do in jump...
Message-ID: <10942430@MailXFER.DMCWAVE.COM>

It's funny that this subject came up since it's the bane of my existence trying
to convince the players that they already have plenty to do in jump that we
don't spend a lot of time covering in actual "roleplaying" time.

Most often, they attempt to train each other in various disciplines using
Instruction skill.  Since my current campaign is a mercenary campaign that's
been running just over a year now, you can probably see this causes problems for
me.  For one thing, on long trips after all the Instruction skill use, everybody
would end up with _huge_ skill increases after imparting experience points to
one another.  It got to be such a runaway problem for me that I had to put a cap
on it.  I determined that in order to gain a specified level of skill via
someone else's Instruction skill, the _square_ of the desired skill level in
experience points was required.  That toned them down a bit.

I also mentioned that maintenance of equipment, calisthenics, review of mission
parameters and other activities (not to mention leisure time -- e.g., zero-G
sex, watching holovids and reading cyberbooks) takes more time than they may
have thought.

On the other hand, a referee occasionally has to throw in some obligatory
in-jump roleplaying time as red herrings to counter those times you've actually
_planned_ for something to happen in jump.  Otherwise you have sarcastic players
saying, "Uh-oh, he's refereeing us in jump.  Something must have stowed away on
the ship or we're going to have a power plant meltdown or something!"

--Chris

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 21:09:04 +0000 (GMT)
From: t01bpa@abdn.ac.uk
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 567
Message-ID: <S9601262109.AA14642@sysc.abdn.ac.uk>


reply to conquest (mexico/ americas)
you have to remember the relative TL of each opponent favours the
home opponent that knows the terrain.  In the example of the
aztecs vs spain, then the aztecs did not have gunpowder or the wheel, or
the horse.  Spain had all three.
In the american independance, both groups were roughly equal in TL
the reason why one succeded was due to the vast resorces avaliable
to the american side, britian would have required to send more troops
accross the atlantic - possibly dangerous at that TL.
more recently you have the vietnam and korea conflicts.
both can be said to have favoured the home team.
And also to consider is the psychological effect of being far from home.


------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 Jan 96 16:11:12 -0500
From: lewis@chara.gsu.edu (Lewis Roberts)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Tavonni
Message-ID: <9601262111.AA16416@chara.gsu.edu>

HI,
I just finished reading the RICE paper on Tavonni, it was pretty good.
Am I wrong in guessing that this was from an old campaign, and that
the Count and associates were player characters?
If so do you have stats on them.  Is the current count the
same count that founded the planet.  He must be pretty old.
Lewis

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 16:11:16 -0500
From: Rob Miracle <rwm@MPGN.COM>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Keeping Track...
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960126211116.00719538@TanSoft.com>

At 03:52 PM 1/26/96 -0500, you wrote:
>Responding to Charles Collin:
>
>>>      I haven't been keeping closer track, but are you forgetting the
>people on the xboat list?  I think a wide majority of them are in the

>Yes, but don't forget that the xboat list comprises far fewer people.  At
least
>participation would indicate that.  My byte size alone, your average TML
message
>outsizes your average XTML message by a rate of about 5-7 to 1.

Just for a "State of the List" update:

TML has 452 Subscribers
XBOAT has 357 Subscribers
There are 556 unique mail addresses between both lists which is about 250
duplicate addresses.  Considering that until recently all new Traveller
development was New Era based, and about half of each list is on the other
list, TML is going to have a much higher content ratio as compared to Xboat.


Rob
--
Rob Miracle (rwm@TanSoft.com)| GCS d-->--- !H s:++ !g !p au+ a34 w+ !v C++>++++
Tantalus Inc.  Key West, FL  | UU++++$ P--- L+ 3 E--- N+++ K-  W+ M-- V-- -po+
"You have a problem?  I have | Y-- t++ 5>++ jx R+++ G'''' tv+++ b D B- e++ u**
a plan!" -- Anton Devious    | h---- f r+++ n---- y++++


------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 21:24:55 +0000
From: "Bob Brown" <Robert.Brown@newcastle.ac.uk>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Reply to Rob Miracle
Message-ID: <199601262127.VAA11366@cheviot.ncl.ac.uk>

Yeah, absolutely right, keep it simple, that was the beauty of CT, MT
was getting it far too complicated for it's own good, nice idea
though,just over compicated rules. Then TNE came, well it happened,
but it was like "well let's re-invent traveller again and sell it to
a new audience", it was weak and hey life is about survival of the
fittest. So let's abandon TNE it was a shit idea, virus? do me a
favour (oh dear I've put a U in it) combine the ideas of MT, the
rules from CT, throw in snapshot/striker rules for general combat,
then take it on a few years and establish a factionalised new system,
hey presto new system, naughty in one place good in another where you
can't get arrested.
If any of you TNE maggots don't like it well in the words of Denis
Leary; " shut the f*** up"
love and kisses

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 Jan 96 15:50:05 -0500
From: lewis@chara.gsu.edu (Lewis Roberts)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Dragons of Nutema
Message-ID: <9601262050.AA16391@chara.gsu.edu>

Hi,
A few weeks ago, someone wrote up a RICE paper on Nutema,
(Sorry I forgot your name)
I liked it, but I was wondering were there any stats for the dragons.
Lewis

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 16:46:23 -0500
From: Gsvenson@aol.com
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Naval Review Board
Message-ID: <960126164621_207377104@emout04.mail.aol.com>

Hi,
I am working on some ship designs and have learned that there is a group
called the "Naval Review Board made up of members of the list. I would like
to submit my designs to the TML but would them to be reviewed first. Can
anyone tell me who to submit the ship designs to to have them reviewed?
Thanks,
Greg Svenson
gsvenson@aol.com

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 17:33:00 -0500
From: That Computer Guy <darkstar@UDel.Edu>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: RE: TNE vs. CT/MT
Message-ID: <199601262233.RAA20407@chopin.udel.edu>

In Reply to Your Message of Fri, 26 Jan 1996 14: 36:39 EST
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 17:33:00 -0500
From: That Computer Guy <darkstar@chopin.udel.edu>

: At 01:49 PM 1/26/96 -0500, you wrote:

[stuff deleted]

: GH's or NGH's doesnt matter, but if the publisher publishes standard
: materials, such as supplements and adventures that uses GearHead statictics,
: then the NGH's are hosed.  Having the ability to set and play for hours
: alone with FFS is cool (assuming of course that it was organized well and
: usable).  I consider myself a reasonably bright person, and I have never
: gotten a successful vehical built with FFS.  I built several vehical with
: MT.  The system was at least understandable, but it took too long.  Time is
: a precious comodity.  If I need a special starship for an adventure, I would
: rather spend the time on the deck plans and stocking it with "monsters and
: treasure" than figuring out if the theoretical reaction mass of the
: thrusters would be sufficient to permit navigation while leaving excess
: power to assure that the anti-grav plates would remain functional while
: having a hard enought hull to reject space debris.

Well, time for some more of my change to go rattling around.  You
don't have to consider yourself hosed.  If you take FFS stats for
ships and just use their Battle Rider stats, you can take have a quick
reference for any ship that provides about as much detail as the old
USP's.  The only thing is keep the damage values consistent between BL
and BR (thus, you would list a weapon's damage as per BL/FFS instead
of converting it to BR).  This gives you a quick overview of the ship
that isn't too detailed, and provides all of the necessary information
for quick gameplay.

: Sorry, give me a 200 ton hull, the engines that go J2 2G and let me get busy
: drawing....

All too often I find people that hamstring themselves by the rules.
Sometimes you should just make it and leave it at that.  If the
deckplans and layout are more important, then concentrate on those.
Let everything else about the ship just magically happen.  I never
bother with this much detail unless I plan on doing some type of write
up about said ship or unless I'm purposefully creating a ship (FFS is
a great way to spend a rainy day).

: Finding the proper mix between reality and playability is a rough thing for
: a game developer to find.  I don't consider TNE playable.  MT was pushing
: the threshold a bit more than I liked.  With TNE I purposly avoided space

I always found MT and TNE combat to be rather "developed".  That's why
I propose a slimmer combat system with an advanced section that allows
you to add all of the other bells and whistles when you want.  For
now, I just strip it down to the most important things.  Move, fire,
duck.  If something is really crucial then we worry about it with all
the rules.  The problem isn't that there's too much data, it's just
that it hasn't been presented in either a parsimonious version or
digestible "chunks".

: The players that I ref and game under are Role players.  We are concerned
: with the story and playing the game.  We arn't concerned with real-world
: physics.  We have to deal with enough of that during our Real lives.  Even
: in our Real Lives we don't want to think of a lot of these problems as well.
: I don't care what the hull strength of my mini-van is, or the excess power
: produced from the alternator.  Does it get me from here to there and haul
: what I need hauled.  What are my expenses in operating it, lets go.  I don't
: care what the foot-pound power of the shell, and the arc factor's of a
: handgun that I am buying.  Will it defend me, and when I shoot that terrible
: four footed drool dog, will it no longer bother me.

Then don't worry about it!  Let the information be there for the
people that do want it or are interested.  Skip over it.  Just look at
the chart that says "Pen/Dam/Price".  It's all there in TNE just like
it was in MT.

: I want a game where the publisher is going to spend their creative energies
: providing a way cool place to adventure and not get caught in the
: micro-management of everyday items.  Lets see more background supplements on
: NPCs and planets.  Things like the RICE papers done here are increadble
: examples of what I would like to see in Traveller.  My group is going to
: Efate, what can I as a DM describe to them is there.

I agree!  However, there is no reason why we can't balance both.  If
you're worried about TMI (too much information) then what are you
going to do when your worldbook/rice paper has WBH stat's (and you
thought FFS was lumbering).

: I don't want to say "You are in Efate.  Its a world.  You cross the path of
: someone who doesn't like you.  A fight breaks out, you pull out your TL15
: Advanced Combat Rifle with APFSDSDU rounds and fire a burst of three rounds.
: Lets see, the first hits his kevlar vest and 890 foot/pounds of force are
: lost, leaving 280 foot/pounds.  This causes a grade three nural damage to an
: area 13 cm around the impact area.  This causes a small trickle of blood to
: emminate from his mouth as he collapses to the ground.
:
: Its better (IMO) to say "You have travelled to Efate.  Its a world under
: policial seige by the Jhymkara Rebals.  They spot you leaving the starport,
: and mistake your starburst symbol for a faction of the Church of the One
: True Way, and begin a fight.  You pull out your ACR with APFSDSDU rounds and
: fire.  You dropped a rebal and now can escape.

Then do that.  Quick example of combat around my part.

GM: "You've travelled to Efate.  It's a world under political seige by the
Jhymkara Rebels.  As you're leaving the starport, they spot you and
mistake your starburst symbol for a faction of the Church of the One
True Way, and decide to fight."

Player: "I pull out my generic-big-gun and take a shot at them."

GM: "Roll for Average difficulty, if you hit, roll for some damage."

Player: "I hit him for 18."

GM: "You pop a cap in his ass and he's done for, move along. (just so you
know, this is the result I gave because it's what I wanted)"

I treat the rebel as a goon.  If their really irrelevent, then I don't
worry about armor or what their actual hits are, etc...  Sure, they
drop like Stormtroopers, but they serve no other value than to show
how dangerous this place is.  Only when the characters are major
villians or I need to provide a red herring do I ever worry about the
level of detail that you're complaining about.

Just my take on roleplaying style versus roleplaying rules.

       --Jerry

8) Jerry Alexandratos                %  "Nothing inhabits my    (8
8) darkstar@strauss.udel.edu         %   thoughts, and oblivion (8
8) darkstar@canary.pearson.udel.edu  %   drives my desires."    (8

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 12:55:27 -0900
From: anwfh@acad2.alaska.edu (William F. Hostman)
To: traveller@mpgn.com
Subject: WHat Course Observations
Message-ID: <v01530501ad2ef8f53638@[137.229.100.61]>

Sombody asked what the general responses were to where to take traveller;
here are my observations from the TML/XTML lists:

about 20-25 % are Keep TNE
about 20 % are Revise and reprint MegaT
about 20% are revise and expand Classic
about 10% are reprint ct or mt as is (with erratta corrections only)
about 10% seem to ask for something new (GURPS Trav being the leader there)
some 5-10% want an amalgamated hybrid between mega and TNE.

Nobody seems to want to give up their "favorite setting"

Phil wants TL's overhauled.

Everyone wants traveller to survive somehow.

Overall, it seems that most of us don't use the RC, (I estimat about 30-40%
of TNE persons use it)

most agree that FF&S is too in depth, and has several broken features.

about 80% of those posting seem to want an FF&S lite for whatever the final
system ends up being.

about 5% of all responses seem to indicate that they will not buy a new edition.

The above are OBSERVATIONS ONLY, not a detailed statistical analysis.

Personally, I am in the Revise and rework MT, with some additions, and
pro-FF&S lite.

-Wil

William F. Hostman

EMail:          ANWFH@Orion.Alaska.EDU
HomePage:       http://orion.alaska.edu/~aswfh/index.html



------------------------------

Date: 26 Jan 1996 18:33:12 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Cc: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Tech vs Econ Superiority
Message-ID: <482213886.2093673@nynet.nybe.north-york.on.ca>

>>>Now we have victory by way of technological
>>>superiority - not economic superiority.
>>
>>Which is pretty much what happened in the Gulf War.
>
>Spot on.  Technological impact on the outcome of conflicts cannot simply be
>dismissed.  The biggest economies DON'T always win.


Actually, the Gulf War is a good example of economic superiority.  What do
you think paid for all the research and expensive weapons but a strong
economy?

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 17:11:27 -0700 (MST)
From: Lance Blyth <lrblyth@lamar.ColoState.EDU>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Cc: Multiple recipients of list <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: 2300?
Message-ID: <Pine.A32.3.91.960126170933.123458A-100000@lamar.ColoState.EDU>

Sorry to take up space with this post, but I'm in a losing fight with my
mail program!

Could someone please email me (off-list) the 2300 Discussion List
address?  My stupidity thanks you!

Lance
lrblyth@lamar.colostate.edu


------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Jan 1996 14:12:13 +1300
From: Simon.Harding@vuw.ac.nz
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 566
Message-ID: <199601270112.OAA06863@rata.vuw.ac.nz>


>The cyberpunk BS.  Not that there shouldn't be cybernetics,
>genetic engineering, or computer networks.  But there should not be that
>smug cynicism of cyberpunk.  The "Rotten to the Core " Adventure was
>terrible and a cliche.  Street gangs with samurai swords?  Exotic
>nightclub singers?  Evil corporate plot?  Give me a break.
>

I agree. I have played and run my share of Cyberpunk and  Shadowrun games
and have found that not only are the environments in these games
"Cyberpunk" but the games themselves are "Cyberpunk" - attitude and style.
OK it was great fun but move on already, the cliches are mounting and the
irony is wearing thin. Its about time the chrome and gloss was taken out of
the "dark future".

Simon Harding
Administrative Assistant
Graduate Students Office
Victoria University of Wellington NZ

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Jan 1996 14:31:01 +0900
From: Armand Suarez <suarez@on.rim.or.jp>
To: "'Traveller Mailing List'" <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: A New Campaign Era
Message-ID: <01BAECC6.96439080@ppp032.on.rim.or.jp>

Thanks everybody, for the interesting suggestions about what to do with =
game time in jump space.
It is very true that changing jump drive retroactively would cause major =
headaches for Traveller history and so on.  But there is a way to avoid =
that, if Mr Miller deems it a good idea, of course.
Our Founding Father lists several different time periods in which =
Traveller campaigns could be run.  I like this idea very much, because =
outside of rules disputes, it's a good idea for satisfying everybody's =
tastes, and it helps take care of the issue of some people's dislike of =
the Collapse and so on (I have a love-hate relationship with it myself - =
I find Virus very interesting, and I'm a little glad the Imperuim's gone =
because it was too stable and big, and most adventures published were =
for a bunch of merchants or trade spies, which I personally am not so =
interested in, but I am saddened to see the avaliable tech level drop, =
and the setting started to remind me of Twilight 2000 or Gamma World, =
and damn this is long).
Anyway, I promise not to assault you with long parenthesized paragraphs =
anymore.   As I was saying, if we follow Mr. Miller's idea, we could =
have an alternate campaign setting set a few hundred years or whatever =
after the Collapse.   We would have new states, new technology (can we =
go to TL 17 or 18 now please?), perhaps new alien races and threats, and =
maybe a new type of FTL drive, improved jump drive, or whatever other =
aspect of Traveller technology we think needs supplementing.  TL 17 or =
18 is currently not so well defined (except for some design data in MT), =
so we would be able to make it what we wanted while avoiding the =
Ringworld dilemma about overly powerful technology in an RPG.  Even if =
we created a new FTL drive, conventional 1-week jump drive would still =
be available technology, and would be the only technology at TL 15 or =
below.  People fond of this technology wouldn't lose out.
If the project seems too big, then as Rob Miracle suggested in the last =
TML digest, we could all contribute a little bit in our area of =
expertise and interest to help flesh it out, with Mr. Miller having =
final say on what becomes official.  There seems to be a lot of people =
who enjoy writing background stuff or making technological devices at =
least as much or more than they like to play or referee.  (Armand states =
the obvious.) =20
This new setting could be something CT, MT, and TNE =
background-enthusiasts could compromise on, so that all three groups =
would be interested in it.  Again, as someone pointed out, playing in =
1110 or 1115 is nice, but you know the Rebellion and Virus will happen =
(and soon too because of week-long jumps), unless you ignore the =
canonized Traveller background.  Most of us are loathe to do that, =
right?
I guess I'm in the Tweak TNE camp.  I don't want to lose all the =
information and knowledge contained in the current TNE rules, but I see =
a great need for better organization and streamlining for quick =
resolution of combat and so on during play.  I think the biggest time =
waster is not so much the rolls to hit, penetrate, and damage, but =
rather the time it takes to find out what exactly these rolls need to be =
and what the exact effects are.  This information is spread out and hard =
to find.  It's also hard to decipher most of the weapon charts during =
real-time play too, and to know which statistic to use when.  For =
example, the complications with laser penetration, or shotgun fire are =
not clearly laid out so that the rules can be executed quickly. =20
I don't want an oversimplification of the Traveller rules, as I think CT =
is.  Winging it is good, and referees should always do it when they want =
to, but you shouldn't be forced to do it because you can't figure =
something out that the rules cover vaguely or confusingly.  You wasted =
money on a book of useless information then.  You could just play =
without rules.  But what would that do to the people selling the rule =
books?  Poor GDW.
All for now.  I'm interested in what you think about all this.
Armand
P.S.:  It seems that each line of my messages has an =3D sign at the end =
when I see my messages on the list.  I don't press return until the end =
of each paragraph, and I have word wrap on.  I'm using MS Exchange in =
Windows 95.  Any idea why I produce the =3D signs?  And can you read =
rich text format e-mail (fonts, color, etc.)?

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 23:54:23 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@csn.net>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: TNE vs. CT/MT
Message-ID: <1.5.4b11.32.19960127055423.006ae1b8@lynx.csn.net>

At 02:36 pm 1/26/96 -0500, Rob Miracle wrote:
>>        As for keeping construction simple ... don't forget the gear-heads.
>>Check out the suggestions everybody's made for a NonGearHead (NGH)
>>plug-n-chug design system along the lines of Book 2/High Guard which is a
>>compatible subset of Fire, Fusion and Steel II. I've consolidated _my_
>>perception into two pages:
>
>GH's or NGH's doesnt matter, but if the publisher publishes standard
>materials, such as supplements and adventures that uses GearHead statictics,
>then the NGH's are hosed.  Having the ability to set and play for hours

        That's the whole point I'm trying to make -- THE STATISTICS WILL BE
THE SAME! For the non-gearhead, you take a chart of standard systems and
plug them in, just like the original Traveller Book 2. But those standard
systems were designed using the GH rules, and GearHeads can _add_ to those
standard systems by designing their own. So _nobody_ is hosed!

        Let me repeat that ... standard materials published by _anybody_
WILL BE THE SAME FOR GEARHEADS AND NONGEARHEADS! The user (you) neither
cares nor needs to know the details. Whether the starship or whatever was
built using off-the-shelf systems or lovingly handcrafted by somebody who
enjoys it, its use in gaming will be the same. Don't shut out the gearheads!

>Sorry, give me a 200 ton hull, the engines that go J2 2G and let me get busy
>drawing....

        That's exactly what people have been suggesting! And if somebody
comes along and wants a 225T hull, he can design it and it will be
completely consistent with everything else.

>I don't want to say "You are in Efate.  Its a world.  You cross the path of
>someone who doesn't like you.  A fight breaks out, you pull out your TL15
>Advanced Combat Rifle with APFSDSDU rounds and fire a burst of three rounds.
>Lets see, the first hits his kevlar vest and 890 foot/pounds of force are
>lost, leaving 280 foot/pounds.  This causes a grade three nural damage to an
>area 13 cm around the impact area.  This causes a small trickle of blood to
>emminate from his mouth as he collapses to the ground.

        More than slight exaggeration. All the considerations of
foot-pounds, Joules, etc. are done by whoever designed the weapon, even in
TNE. All you need and get is "4 dice of damage, with a penetration of x."
Not very difficult to say "his armor absorbs 2 dice, so you do 2 dice of
damage." In fact, what you do get is exactly:

>Its better (IMO) to say "You have travelled to Efate.  Its a world under
>policial seige by the Jhymkara Rebals.  They spot you leaving the starport,
>and mistake your starburst symbol for a faction of the Church of the One
>True Way, and begin a fight.  You pull out your ACR with APFSDSDU rounds and
>fire.  You dropped a rebal and now can escape.

        I don't see how you _can't_ do this using TNE. I have.

        Since there are many people who _want_ more detail than you seem to,
I would point out one thing

                It's easier to consistently _REMOVE_ details than
                it is to add them.

        So if you go with the low detail, the more detail people ARE hosed.
But if you go with the moderate detail, the low detail people can quite
easily extract what they need and ignore the rest. Don't you already do that?
 ___________________________________________________________________
  Dave Golden                              PGP Public Key available
  goldendj@whip.com
  http://www2.csn.net/~goldendj/index.html -- Last updated 24 Jan 96

 "He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his
  enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes
  a precedent that will reach to himself" -- Thomas Paine


------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Jan 96 11:19:00 +0100
From: angus.mclellan@almac.co.uk (ANGUS MCLELLAN)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Additional RSB Errata
Message-ID: <8B9A2A7.1400018164.uuout@almac.co.uk>


Please find below some suggested RSB errata further to or correcting
those in TML Digest 545. Most points stem from Alvin Plummer noticing
the wandering Zhodani naval base at Zircon (on David Golden's WWW pages,
in http://www2.csn.net/~goldend/traveller/Errata/RSBErrata.html).

page 35, Notes for Regency UWP Data.
Base Code 'J' (Non-Imperial Naval Base) should be added to those listed
and the appropriate map symbol should be added (it was an open Five-
Pointed Star in the good old days).

page 37, Jewell Sector Map/UPP Listing.
Zircon should have a type J base and not type Z, and the map should be
changed to the appropriate symbol (per the map included with MTJ1 and
listings in MTJ3).

page 44, Daryen Subsector, Map/UPP Listing
(Replaces my previously suggested errata).
The simplest method of reconciling the bases shown on the map and on the
UPP listing for the Darrian Confederation with past data (MTJ 1 and 3)
is as follows.
    1. Replace all type N bases with type J.
    2. Retain all type M bases unchanged.
The UPP listing incorrrectly shows Nonym as having a type M base in
1117, this should be corrected as type J (per MTJ1 and 3). Whether Nonym
should have a type J base isn 1202 is moot. One possible reasons for the
downgrading of the base at Nonym is the great weakening of Sword Worlds
strength and a move to a more all-round defense strategy by the Darrian
Confederation Navy.

Of course, the type J base may have been intended to be consigned to the
dustbin of history. If so, all of the foregoing bases should be type M
without exception. However, the varying symbols employed rather suggest
a mistake rather than any sort of plan.

page 50, Glisten Subsector, Map.
Crout (2232) is shown as having a naval base. This is probably an error
as the UPP listing does not show it, nor did it previously have a naval
base in any official source.

page 62, Usani Subsector, Map.
Liran (1923) should be shown as a High Population world (upper case) AND
the starport is incorrectly shown as B instead of A.

page 64, Gulf Subsector, Map.
Tuwayk (0339) should be shown as a High Population world (upper case)
AND the starport is incorrectly shown as B instead of A. Lucifer (0436)
should have a B type starport (not D as I suggested or X as per the
map).

page 66, Pax Rulin Subsector, Map.
Ktaofilr (2102) should be shown with an A starport, not B.

I shall try and muster the energy to construct a consolidated errata and
post it to the list.

Angus

------------------------------

End of TRAVELLER Digest 569
***************************
