Subj: Traveller-digest V1999 #1376
Date: 11/22/99 12:16:11 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com
Reply-to: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com
Traveller-digest Monday, November 22 1999 Volume 1999 : Number 1376
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.
The following topics are covered in this digest:
Re: Comedy Quote Chain?
Re: Traveller Planetary Assaults
Re: Ine Givar
Re: Comedy Quote Chain?
Re: Traveller Planetary Assaults
Vargr
Re: Weapons of mass destruction (Was: Traveller Nav, Gun...)
Planetary Assault Techniques
Re: Traveller Planetary Assaults
Re: Traveller Music (was RE: Traveller-like fiction)
Water as weapons (long)
Re: Traveller Navigation and Gunnery
Re: Water as weapons (long)...
Re: Traveller Navigation and Gunnery
Vargr
Re: Traveller Navigation and Gunnery
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 20:48:49 -0800 (PST)
From: Kyle Schuant
Subject: Re: Comedy Quote Chain?
I wonder just how big a crater a Marine falling from
orbit would make?
"Bigger than one made by any pimply-faced,
weak-kneed Army Rapid
Intercourser, By God! An' smile when you call me
'Impy'"
- - Armsman/1c Gerg Schulters, Lima Co, 1183rd Marine
Regiment (Hell on the Half Shell), interviewed while
under a table at the 404 Club.
"Only if the Marine landed head-first. The
hollow-point effect, don't you know."
- - Corporal Shannash Irkirkhaamn-Noland, Alpha
Co, 1199th Jump Infantry Regiment ("Aces and Nines"),
upon hearing of
Armsman/1c Schulters' remarks.
"Well, it's good to know that the Navy always
will land us at the right place."
- - - Private Naive Bastard, Charlie Company, 5th
Battalion , AIF, Gallipoli, April 1915
"Right-o, mate. And they keep us so ruddy
well-supplied, too."
--Corporal Knows Better, Company A, 2nd Battalion,
British
1st Paras, Arnhem, 21 September 1944
"Yes, Goering promised he could supply us from a
great
distance, easily."
- -- Oberst IntheScheiss, 223rd Bavarian Hills
Infantry, Stalingrad, 1943
"We'll be home by Christmas."
- Uncounted multitudes of soldiers, marines, sailors,
and airmen, of
many nations, and too many wars.
"A thousand body bags on this ship? But that's less
than one per squaddie! I'm not sharing a body bag with
you, you worthless sod!"
- - Squaddie on the way to the Falklands, 1982
=====
KA Schuant
member: Chef's Guild International, Sporting Shooter's Assoc, Amnesty Int, Carlton Soccer Club
Melbourne
Australia
"Duct tape is like the Force: it has a light side, a dark side, and it binds the universe together"
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 20:54:18 -0800 (PST)
From: Kyle Schuant
Subject: Re: Traveller Planetary Assaults
Are the exact strategies that important? Are your
players all Admirals in the Imperial Navy, or
Commanders of a rebellion or something? Just wondering
if we're not getting a little abstract...
- --- Richard Wilson wrote:
> At 09:13 PM 11/21/99 -0500, you wrote:
> > If you're dropping troops to the surface to
> grab what is, in all
> >likelihood,
> >an already well-defended target, such as a starport
> or other "high value
> >target", why wouldn't you make that, or one of
> those, your main beachhead?
> >If you're talking "hit and get" raids, yeah, but I
> got the impression that
> >you
> >were talking seize and _hold_ the starport.
>
> Way bother grabbing the starport at all? If
> commercial starships can land
> at a type X starport (AKA a big empty field) than a
> combat lander should be
> able to.
>
> So, for a planetary assault you could drop a brigade
> or two in a deserted
> spot. They grab a large enough area for your combat
> engineers or seabees to
> build a new starport. The new starport lets you land
> troops in a secure
> area while the people on the planet are busy
> re-routing their troops to an
> area they were not prepared to defend. If you are
> not willing to bombard
> high value targets, well, the local troops will be
> coming to you so you can
> hit them in a low value area.
>
> And if the locals don't come out to play? Grap the
> rest of the planet and
> starve them out. (What tech level does weather
> control become practical?)
>
> Granted, this won't work with a world with a high
> enough pop. A world with
> a population greater than maybe 7 or so, you will
> probably end up having to
> hit at least some of the population centers hard.
> This might start out
> with EMP bursts and escalate (clean airbursts to
> burn soft targets) if the
> locals didn't surrender.
>
> And a final thought. The Imperium is made up of
> 11,000 worlds. Burning one
> world every few decades might be a cost effective
> measure if it makes other
> worlds think twice about leaving.
>
> Richard Wilson
>
>
>
=====
KA Schuant
member: Chef's Guild International, Sporting Shooter's Assoc, Amnesty Int, Carlton Soccer Club
Melbourne
Australia
"Duct tape is like the Force: it has a light side, a dark side, and it binds the universe together"
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 17:57:46 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance"
Subject: Re: Ine Givar
From: "Eris Reddoch"
Date sent: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 16:50:24 -0600
> On 11/22/99 at 11:35 AM, "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" said:
> >I wrote an article for Pyramid that was published about a year ago on
> >the Ine Givar. It's still there in the archives. Check out
> He won't get much of that article unless he's a Pyramid Online
> subscriber.
> IMO, it's worth $15 a year. So, I recommend it to everyone, and if
> you drop my name I think I still get a free month. I
> recommend it even if you *don't* use my name.
I guess its just such good value that I assumed everyone was a subscriber
(and thats not just hype) :*>
> Andrew did an article about the Ine Givar and posted it on the TML
> before he wrote his Pyramid article. It is archived in Digest 168
> of 1998. He can't give out the one in Pyramid, but the one in the
> TML Digest is (or should be) still available for free download
That was the basis for the Pyramid article, but I think the one in
Pyramid is better.
Andrew etc
Homepage http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/
Traveller http://www.downport.com/amv/
"What do you expect from a species who's females are
always in heat" Ko of the Ilui clan on Humans and honour
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 22:59:24 -0600
From: "Eris Reddoch"
Subject: Re: Comedy Quote Chain?
On 11/21/99 at 08:48 PM, Kyle Schuant said:
>I wonder just how big a crater a Marine falling from
>orbit would make?
>"Bigger than one made by any pimply-faced,
>weak-kneed Army Rapid
>Intercourser, By God! An' smile when you call me
>'Impy'"
>- Armsman/1c Gerg Schulters, Lima Co, 1183rd Marine
>Regiment (Hell on the Half Shell), interviewed while
>under a table at the 404 Club.
>"Only if the Marine landed head-first. The
>hollow-point effect, don't you know."
>- Corporal Shannash Irkirkhaamn-Noland, Alpha
> Co, 1199th Jump Infantry Regiment ("Aces and Nines"),
>upon hearing of
>Armsman/1c Schulters' remarks.
>"Well, it's good to know that the Navy always
> will land us at the right place."
>- - Private Naive Bastard, Charlie Company, 5th
>Battalion , AIF, Gallipoli, April 1915
> "Right-o, mate. And they keep us so ruddy
> well-supplied, too."
> --Corporal Knows Better, Company A, 2nd Battalion,
> British
> 1st Paras, Arnhem, 21 September 1944
> "Yes, Goering promised he could supply us from a
> great
> distance, easily."
>-- Oberst IntheScheiss, 223rd Bavarian Hills
> Infantry, Stalingrad, 1943
>
> "We'll be home by Christmas."
> - Uncounted multitudes of soldiers, marines, sailors,
>and airmen, of
> many nations, and too many wars.
>"A thousand body bags on this ship? But that's less
>than one per squaddie! I'm not sharing a body bag with
>you, you worthless sod!"
>- Squaddie on the way to the Falklands, 1982
>=====
>KA Schuant
>member: Chef's Guild International, Sporting Shooter's Assoc, Amnesty
>Int, Carlton Soccer Club Melbourne
>Australia
>"Duct tape is like the Force: it has a light side, a dark side, and
>it binds the universe together"
"And just remember...if it ain't broke, you ain't really trying!"
Eris
AKU GM
- --
- -----------------------------------------------------------
"Eris Reddoch" using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 23:20:53 -0600
From: Black ICE
Subject: Re: Traveller Planetary Assaults
Kyle Schuant wrote:
>
> Are the exact strategies that important? Are your
> players all Admirals in the Imperial Navy, or
> Commanders of a rebellion or something? Just wondering
> if we're not getting a little abstract...
Actually, PCs in a planetary assault situation would tend to find the
tactical situation (what is our immediate mission objective, how do we
get there, what support do we have, and who will relieve us) far more
important than the echelons-above-gawd (EAG) strategic view (why are we,
at _this_ time, seizing _this_ world, and how will we assemble the
needed forces to seize it). Thus, while an EAG game (such as _Fifth
Frontier War_), with a ground force scale of units up to field army
size, can abstract space, ground-space interface, and ground combat, the
typical PCs will _need_ to have all the details we're discussing in this
thread.
(Yes, I know that I skipped the operational level of war. In my
defense, I would expect most warfare-related campaigns to place the PCs
either in the units actually engaging in combat [see _Striker_ for
details], or in positions on the General Staff, deciding how to
prosecute the war as a whole [as in FFW]. Even operational-level
campaigns [with the PCs as commanders of combat operations involving a
single world] would require knowledge of the tactical doctrine being
employed by units under those commanders' direction.)
<>
- --
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 00:17:20 -0500
From: Mark Urbin
Subject: Vargr
Kyle Schuant charismaticly bangs out:
>>>Interesting thoughts. I've played them more like a
>wolf pack, with a
>strong leader having to show off his strength to the
>others.>>
>Like the Klingons, you mean? (I always wondered if MM
>ripped them off ST...)
Vargr predate the Movie & Post-CT Klingons.
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
eclipse@ultranet.com -- These opinions are mine, no one else wants `em.
"Sucessful Termanation of OPFOR Capabilities, re: Life Sustaining
Operations; Originating from a Departure Line Orientated to the Vertical
of the Main Battle Area." -- http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 21:29:33 -0800
From: "Luther Martin"
Subject: Re: Weapons of mass destruction (Was: Traveller Nav, Gun...)
Note that I said that they will not be used regularly. This both
agrees with our world and the canon Traveller universe. You should think of
my original post as my thinking which leads me to believe the canon universe
in this area.
I believe that the comments about greater capacity for violence making war
infeasible are also less than relevant to my original comments. The point is
that even with the capability for extremely high levels of violence, most
(notice the use of this word, in case anyone decides to give a list of
counterexamples) groups agree to a set of conventions which limit the impact
of the fighting.
Rambling on:
Note that even under the current law of land warfare, you are entitled to
reprisals if your enemy violates the conventions. Considering the number of
violations by the Iraqis in the Gulf War, think about the possible *real*
reason for some events in the war.
Even further afield:
Much like the SCA, who do not reenact history as is was, but rather
something like
"history as it should have been," Traveller is not the future, but "the
future as it should be," at least from the POV of the authors. In reality,
it will not even be close, but that
shouldn't stop it from being an interesting game.
- ----- Original Message -----
From: Jens Rydholm
To:
Sent: Sunday, November 21, 1999 4:37 AM
Subject: Weapons of mass destruction (Was: Traveller Nav, Gun...)
> Luther Martin wrote:
> > This is the ultimate reason why it is very unlikely
> > that such things like
> > near-c rocks will be regularly used as weapons.
>
> I want to disagree with you here. During war, more or less every weapon
> that is effective to use will be used. Kyle pointed out the atrocities
> commited by the *allies* during WWII as an example. Especially the
> bombings of Dresden were interesting, as it was not a military target.
> On the contrary, many German civilians had gone there to avoid being
> bombed. The bombing was done at that spot in order to ruin the German
> morale quickly...
>
> > Civilizations which progress far
> > enough to reach advanced technology will also have
> > come to the same
> > conclusion.
>
> Hehe... if we (stupid humans) learned from history, that is, we would
> have come to the same conclusion. I do not have the exact wording for
> this quote, but one of the Wright brothers said (about the flying
> machine) that this machine will make further wars impossible, since the
> potential for destruction is so great.
>
> Sadly enough, it had been said before. A pope (don't know which, have to
> find my quotations collection) once said (not an exact quote either)
> about a new weapon that it was too accurate, silent, quick, and deadly
> to allow for any more wars. That weapon was the crossbow...
>
> ObTrav: Seeing things in this light, I find it rather improbable that
> nukes aren't used by most cultures in Traveller. IMTU, the Imperium (and
> thus their client states) have laws forbidding them, but many other
> cultures use them. The below notes are further information about nuclear
> weapons IMTU.
>
> The Vargr haven't got the knowledge, and the Zhodani won't give it to
> them (the Zho's have got the Bomb, but they are afraid of an escalating
> war). The Darrians have no problems whatsoever with using nukes if they
> need to, and they have bombed several of the Sword Worlds. The Sword
> Worlder's have done the same to the Darrians... This is exactly the type
> of conflict (with the Imperium) that the Zhodani are afraid of.
>
> The K'Kree gladly nuke "bad" worlds, but won't destroy inhabitable (to
> them) worlds that way. Aslan follow the Imperial way of thinking, but
> some clans just *might* have an ace or two up their sleeve.
>
> I haven't considered Droyne or Hiver's, since I don't have any material
> on these races yet (I'm waiting for GT: Alien Races 3).
>
> /Jens 'Spacejens' Rydholm
>
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 23:38:52 -0600
From: Black ICE
Subject: Planetary Assault Techniques
Sethkimmel@aol.com wrote:
>
> In a message dated 11/21/99 2:12:33 PM Pacific Standard Time, j-man@iname.com
> writes:
>
> << Which brings up a question for me; assuming the forces have control of the
> 'high ground', whats the best way of dropping your troops in order to capture
> the planet? Together in armored shuttles (I think this is a bad idea
> myself) or like in Starship Troopers, where they drop individually
> 'halo-style'? >>
>
> I like the FASA Renegade Legion method of dropping grav vehicles from
> orbit....
Actually, all three methods are important components of a planetary
assault. Large (battalion or larger) jump troop formations will be used
either to seize the initial "spacehead(s)", or to secure key terrain
features to prevent or delay the enemy's early counterattacks on the
spacehead(s). Smaller formations (battalion and smaller) would conduct
diversionary raids, to disrupt the enemy's ability to respond quickly to
the assault. For assaults on low-population worlds with few high-payoff
targets, jump troops, possibly reinforced by small grav vehicle
contingents, may be sufficient to secure the world under attack.
Attacks on these target worlds would most likely consist of Imperial
Marine regiments, with little or no Army participation in actual
combat. OTOH, if Army units of corps size or larger are to be involved
in active ground combat (as compared to counterinsurgency, pacification,
or occupation duties), then the preferred units would be Army Rapid
Interface formations.
The jump troop lodgments would then be reinforced (if necessary) by grav
vehicles descending from orbit. These forces would provide the
firepower needed to enable the invaders to expand the spacehead(s)
enough to provide fairly secure rear areas.
However, the vast majority of troops, equipment, and supplies would
reach dirt via shuttle (and/or landing-capable starships), landing in
the now-secured rear areas seized and expanded by jump troops and
direct-assault grav vehicles. After all, the biggest problem with
direct-drop forces is that resupply is too difficult to maintain for
long periods of time without use of shuttles and/or landing-capable
ships. The shuttle-borne flow of supplies, reinforcements, and
replacements to the spacehead(s) will enable the invader to secure both
important objectives on-planet and travel routes betwen those
objectives. These forces will almost always consist of Imperial Army
forces that have been mobilized from regular or colonial subsector
elements.
- --
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 00:55:51 -0500
From: "Lyle Youngblood"
Subject: Re: Traveller Planetary Assaults
>From: Richard Wilson
>Way bother grabbing the starport at all? If commercial starships can land
>at a type X starport (AKA a big empty field) than a combat lander should be
>able to.
Radar and/or other sensor/scanner installations (probably best on the
planet), small craft and local naval bases, repair facilities, warehouses
(full of stores potenially useful to either side), I assume that the
planetary
political and/or industrial heartland will likely be fairly close to the
main
starport for ease of access. Most of this assumes a down starport, but
an orbital one will be taken fairly easily early in the campaing. Even if
you don't want to hold the downport, you probably want to disrupt it heavily
to minimize enemy use of it. And you don't want to scrag it completely
unless your in a "total war" environment, because it's too damn expensive
to rebuild. To me, this means either a hit-and-run raid or outright seizure
is desirable.
Also, although a really big combat lander probably CAN land in an open
field, I expect re-inforced surfaces will be prefered. Chief Engineer to
Captain: "Sir, due to uneven sinkage rates, we appear to have taken on
a 12% cant to starboard and nearly 15% towards the bow. I reccommend
EXTREME caution on take off."
Lyle
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 18:50:58 +1300
From: "Frank Pitt"
Subject: Re: Traveller Music (was RE: Traveller-like fiction)
> > I really think that, once a list is created, we should add it to
> > the FAQ, along with the suggested Travelleresque reading. But
> > that's my opinion. YMMV.
>
> What we really need is a TML Knowledge Base, the few times I've
> tried to use the archives in the past I've found it difficult.
> Anyone want to set one up?
Love to, but I don't have a permanent connection to the internet.
I'd suggest BITS or downport would be the appropriate locatons
Frankie
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 17:10:25 +1000
From: dadams@parracity.nsw.gov.au
Subject: Water as weapons (long)
I wrote:
>>>
IMHO, the best riot control weapon is something with no medical side
effects, able to be targeted effectively, and has minimal secondary
effects. Watar canons seem to fit the bill. Water casues no alergic
reactions, the delivery will at most cause abrasions and blunt trauma
(on hitting the ground or obsticals) and can be aimed to avoid
children and elderly (who have a higher chance of sustainig more
serious injury with the secondary effects.
<<<
Leonard wrote
>>>
You've never seen what a regular fire hose can do, have you? And you've
*definitely* never seen what a water cannon can.
At the speeds and pressures involved, the *water* can break bones. You
don't have to be thrown against anything.
<<<
I reply:
Selective quoting can be a bitch. If you read the previous paragraph I stated
that non leathal weapons aren't. I meant that no matter what is used, fatalities
*will* occur. No Ifs, no buts.
Leonard again:
>>>
There are pictures available of the time the authorities used "mere"
firehoses on civil rights demonstrators in the South. And you can see
the water stream "pick up" and "throw" people 10 and 20 feet. Anything
pushing hard enough to do *that* and less than a foot across can and
will produce blunt trauma all by itself.
<<<
I reply:
A knoted string will kill in the wrong hands. Any feasable riot control weapon
requires a brain to use. If you are going to use high preasure water at knife
fighting ranges, then you MUST expect casulties. It was one of the strong points
mentioned in the Non Lethal Weapons show on Discovery.
Water IF USED CORRECTLY is:
1. Non irratant. It will not cause fits and alogegnic reations. It is non
poisonous. It cannot cause toxic shock. If it does puncture the skin it can not
cause any secondary effects (apart from the trauma itself).
2. Aimable. Yes you can aim at heads. But aiming at the torso or legs is more
effective and harder to avoid.
3. Cheap. In non deasert enviroments, water is cheap, and in a pinch can be made
by burning hydrogen. Any starship can be used as a riot vehicle in a pinch (and
may be a feature on some ships!).
Leonard again
>>>
As for water cannon, there are cases on record (from repressive
regimes) where they were used and *cut people in half*. Those things
can punch holes in concrete blocks or some frame buildings. Using them
on people is *not* remotely "without medical side effects".
<<<
Again, we are talking about the system, not the people using it. If you want to
use it to kill, there are better ways of doing it. If you using excessive force
to crush a riot, why use water? Plasma guns and Fusion guns haver better ranges,
better blowthrough (I got 3 gollywogs with 1 shot!) and better fear causing
atributes (people wont generally assult a plasma gun enplacement no matter
what). I can suppress a riot with knotted sting, and kill people with it (and
has been historically used , it's called a whip).
Do I have the will to use lethal force and live with the consequences?
No.
If called to suppress a riot with water, would I do it? Yes.
Why?
Because I know if I keep control of the situation, I can minimalise the
causualties. I want to cause fear and loathing in the rioters, not martyrs for
the cause. If I loose control of my troops, no mater what they are armed with
(chopsticks, canes, whips, SMG's, black puddings) they can and will kill. (Ask
the East Timorese).
I would fear a uncontrolled force armed with silly putty , or a force willing to
use leathal force more than I would a profesional force with a water cannon.
And history shows that sooner or later, a government that resorts to leathal
force against its own will fall.
Darryl
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 22:09:35 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Traveller Navigation and Gunnery
In mail you write:
>> So my figures say he goes off like 11 times his mass
>> in TNT. Assume 250
>> kilos for trooper and suit, and you get the
>> equivalent of an old time
>> "block buster" bomb (actually about 2.6 tons of TNT)
>
> So drop a whole division and its like a Hiroshima
> bomb?
Only if you can get them to drop in *really* tight formation. :-)
> "Any volunteers for special duty?"
> - Famous question in the military
"Sir! No, sir!
- - Any halfway intelligent trooper...
- --
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
shadow@krypton.rain.com <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com <--last resort
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 17:13:51 +1000
From: "The Roc"
Subject: Re: Water as weapons (long)...
- ----- Original Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Monday, November 22, 1999 5:10 PM
Subject: Water as weapons (long)
> If I loose control of my troops, no mater what they are armed with
> (chopsticks, canes, whips, SMG's, black puddings)
>
Black puddings? Doesn't one have to be a proponent of Eccie Thump (sp?) to
use these with effect?
Just wondering?
- -- The Roc
"See Bill Oddie with women's clothes on, in, 'Enter with Drag On!'"
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 02:24:05 -0500
From: "Walter G. Smith"
Subject: Re: Traveller Navigation and Gunnery
Leonard Erikson wrote:
>>>>>>>>
> "Any volunteers for special duty?"
> - Famous question in the military
"Sir! No, sir!
- - Any halfway intelligent trooper...
>>>>>>>>
"That's one 'volunteer'. Any others?"
- - standard NCO's response to above comment from "halfway intelligent
trooper".
Walt Smith
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 02:33:47 EST
From: GypsyComet@aol.com
Subject: Vargr
>>>Interesting thoughts. I've played them more like a
>wolf pack, with a
>strong leader having to show off his strength to the
>others.>>
>
>Like the Klingons, you mean? (I always wondered if MM
>ripped them off ST...)
>
Considering that the TNG Klingons are basically what every
Englishman thought Scots Highlanders were like (and, depending
on era, weren't always wrong), ST was hardly being original...
Anyone whose spent time watching dog or wolf packs knows
where the Vargr came from...
GC
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 03:08:51 -0500
From: "Walter G. Smith"
Subject: Re: Traveller Navigation and Gunnery
Leonard Erickson wrote
>>>>>>>
> I'm sorry if I misconstrued your argument. I thought you were refering
> to the Centauri treatment of the Narn. Whish as I recall was prety close
> to bombing the planet back to the stoneage. And yet the Narn didn't
> really give up, they just went underground.
Second, that's fiction. What reaction intelligent being would have to
getting smashed down *that* hard isn't something we can easily predict.
>>>>>>>>
Not just intelligent beings - *alien* intelligent beings. While Narns may
be played in the show by humans in fancy makeup, it could be very
dangerous to assume that "real" Narns will respond to all situations in
similar ways to how humans react.
Narns seem to me a bit more fatalistic than humans, for example.
Such fatalism may allow them to collectively do some pretty heroic
looking things, as they'd have an easier time convincing themselves
that death is a reasonable price to pay for the attainment of a goal.
Walt Smith
------------------------------
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #1376
***********************************
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:
unsubscribe traveller-digest
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe
"local-traveller":
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Return-Path:
Received: from rly-yc05.mx.aol.com (rly-yc05.mail.aol.com [172.18.149.37]) by air-yc04.mail.aol.com (vx) with ESMTP; Mon, 22 Nov 1999 03:16:11 -0500
Received: from lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yc05.mx.aol.com (v65.4) with ESMTP; Mon, 22 Nov 1999 03:15:55 -0500
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id DAA55418;
Mon, 22 Nov 1999 03:11:43 -0500 (EST)
(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 22 Nov 1999 03:11:13 -0500
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id DAA55386
for traveller-digest-outgoing; Mon, 22 Nov 1999 03:11:13 -0500 (EST)
(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 03:11:13 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199911220811.DAA55386@lists.imagiconline.com>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #1376
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com