Traveller-digest      Wednesday, June 25 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1473



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Character Generation Pages in WFW95
Re: Stats and Skills
[T4.1] Grad. School
Re: T4.1 Char Gen Checklist
Re: Latest Vote Count
My vote
Re: Character Generation Pages in WFW95
Re: Characteristic vs. Skill claim
Re: Marc's Comments and a suggestion or two
Re: New Gaming Term!
Re: New mailing list member...may I introduce myself?
Why the MT system is not a good choice
Re: Eris Task System Suggestion
Task System Blues
RE: Eris Task System Suggestion
Re: T4 Task Rationale
Re: Minimum TL for Dirigibles
TL of ramshackle empire

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

Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 03:05:12 GMT
From: jlindsay@direct.ca (James Lindsay)
Subject: Re: Character Generation Pages in WFW95

On Tue, 24 Jun 1997 19:03:48 -0400 (EDT), CardSharks@aol.com wrote:

> MENTAL CHARACTERISTIC EQUIVALENTS
> Value	Int			Edu
>
> 0		Braindead		Illiterate
> 1		
> 2					Basic Reading
> 3		Impaired		Grade School
> 4					Ed Certificate
> 5		Below Average	High School
> 6		Average		Associate
> 7		Average		Bachelors
> 8		Average		Masters
> 9		Above Average	
> A		Superior		Doctorate
> B		Very Superior	
> C		Gifted	
> D		Very Gifted	
> E		Genius	
> F

Hmmm... if 0 translates to "Illiterate" (I assume that the "Braindead"
term was not to be taken _literally_), negative stats will be
necessary to describe individuals under the mental age of, say, 5.
"Illiterate" might be better off at EDU=1, with "Childlike" or
"Instinctual" taking the place of EDU=0.

IOW, what exactly is the definition of each stat at rating 0, and how
does a rating of 0 compare with slightly higher values (it obviously
can't be a linear scale)?  The answer to this question might require
more thought than you might think.

Out of fairness to people possessing stats at the lower end of the
spectrum, I think it is unfair to view 8.3% of the general population
as "Impaired" (based on using 2d6 at age eighteen to determine
character statistics).  Descriptors such as "Impaired", "Lame",
"Anti-social", etc. would be better off administered as character
"disadvantages" (like in the GURPS or Whitewolf system).

James W. Lindsay     Vancouver, British Columbia
  "http://www.prosperoimaging.com/ground_zero"

"Give me the strength to change the things I can,
    the grace to accept the things I cannot,
         and a great big bag of money."

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

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 23:09:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: Stats and Skills

In a message dated 97-06-24 20:17:17 EDT, you write:

<< As far as a game mechanic, how about limiting skill level by stats?  For
 example, you can only attain a particular skill level equal to one-half of
 the relevant attribute.  So if you have Intelligence of 8, you can achieve
 Medic-4.  Perhaps players could be allowed to proceed above this skill
 ceiling if each additional skill level "cost" twice as much.
  >>

There was a restriction once upon a time that total levels couldn't exceed
Edu + Int.

Your comment implies that the restriction should be max skill level cannot be
more than 2x Characteristic. The problem there is that Medic is associated
with two different Characteristics (Edu and Dex). I suppose we could say you
can have any skill levels you want, but you can only USE 2x the related
characteristic.

Marc Miller

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

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 23:33:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: fcain@st6000.sct.edu (Franklin W. Cain)
Subject: [T4.1] Grad. School

Mr. Miller, 

A graduate of a Navy, Military, or Merchant Academy should be permitted to
attend Graduate School (after leaving his service).  

If you've already updated the Academies to show the award of a BS, then my
criticism is invalid.  Otherwise, please consider this.  

Thank you.  

Franklin W. Cain

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

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 97 22:21:56 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: T4.1 Char Gen Checklist

On 06/24/97 at 02:06 PM,  CardSharks@aol.com said:

>In a message dated 97-06-23 06:32:02 EDT, you write:

><< that anyone who can will pursue an advanced education >>

>that any player who sees the advantage for his character...
 
Right, the way things are set up it makes sense for players to put their
characters through an advanced education.  

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 20:40:53 +0000
From: "Suzette C. Dollar" <suzd@pop.goodnet.com>
Subject: Re: Latest Vote Count

> Voting for T4.1 with revisions or variants thereof:
> Marc Miller
> A.S.Lilly
> Phil Kitching
> Tim Reynolds
> Simon Turner
> Andrew Vallance
> Mike Lee
> Leroy WL Guatney
> J.P.
> Joe Walsh
> -10
> ( some of these state that it can't stand as it is, though)

Add mine to Marc's camp, please.

Suz 

Suzette C. Dollar
#Traveller Channel Manager
suzd@goodnet.com

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

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 23:49:57 -0400
From: 34zbtxq@cmuvm.csv.cmich.edu (Susan M. Shock)
Subject: My vote

I vote for Traveller 4.1

Allen Shock

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

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 97 22:59:31 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Character Generation Pages in WFW95

On 06/24/97 at 07:03 PM,  CardSharks@aol.com said:

>I'm looking at severely crunching down what levels of Edu mean... Attached
>text from the Chargen tables.

>MENTAL CHARACTERISTIC EQUIVALENTS
>Value	Int	Edu
>0	Braindead	Illiterate
>1		
>2		Basic Reading
>3	Impaired	Grade School
>4		Ed Certificate
>5	Below Average	High School
>6	Average	Associate
>7	Average	Bachelors
>8	Average	Masters
>9	Above Average	
>A	Superior	Doctorate
>B	Very Superior	
>C	Gifted	
>D	Very Gifted	
>E	Genius	
>F

This should help a lot, Marc. 

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 22:05:04 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: Re: Characteristic vs. Skill claim

At 05:24 pm 06/24/97 -0800, you wrote:
>Tue, 24 Jun 1997 09:08:55 -0800,  Richard Hough <rdhough@orca.bc.ca>
>
>>First of all, characteristics can range from 1 to 15.
>
>The fact is that if 2.8% of the characters start with
>stat of 2 and 100% of them start with a skill of 0.

	Most of them start with NO skill, which isn't the same as skill-0.
- -- Dave Golden                  http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj --
   goldendj@pcisys.net                       finger for PGP key
    *** USE OF THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR SOLICITATION PROHIBITED ***

 "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: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 00:11:49 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: Marc's Comments and a suggestion or two

Douglas E. Berry wrote:

>>* Keep the ability to combine any skill with any attribute, it's useful
>
>Second (or third) that.. using a skill that I'm very familar with, Rifle, I
>can bring about the following tasks:

<snip>

>One skill, six tasks, and that's just scraping the surface.

   And for TNE lovers...

Rifle (actually pistol) and Charisma:  Intimidation anyone?  "Aha! I
know what you're thinking... Did I fire six shots or only five? To tell
you the truth, I forgot it myself in all this excitement. This here's a
.44 Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world, and it can blow your
head clean off. Now, you must ask yourself one question: "Do I feel
lucky?" Well, do you, punk?"

   And now a word from our sponsors, Tarantino Limited:

Model 3 Gauss Sniper Rifle

An experimental weapon developed by Tarantino Limited several years ago,
only twelve of these guns were ever manufactured.  These were stored in
a warehouse for a short time until they mysteriously disappeared.  None
of the guns has ever been recovered.  A unique feature of this weapon is
the special discarding sabot ammunition developed for it.  DS rounds are
generally not produced for gauss weapons because they are rather
difficult to manufacture.  The weapon was also designed to be used with
an optional cybernetic eye implant which dramatically increases the
short range of the weapon.

TL: 12
Manufacturer: Tarantino Limited
Ammo: 15 x 75mm
Muzzle Energy: 64,145.5 joules
Weapon Length: 165.79cm
Weapon Weight: 30.17 kg loaded, 29.77 kg empty (includes weight of empty
box magazine)
Weapon Price: Cr 4912.59 (includes cost of empty box magazine)
Magazine Weight: 12.25 kg loaded, 11.85 kg empty
Magazine Price: Cr 31.65 (Dart loaded), Cr 39.60 (DS loaded); Cr 23.70
(empty)
Ammunition Weight: 26.51 g per round
Ammunition Price: Cr 0.53 (Dart), Cr 1.06 (DS)
Features: Shock absorbing stock, electronic sight, gyroscopic
compensator, laser sight
                                                       -Recoil-
Round            ROF   Dam Val   Pen Rtg  Bulk   Mag   SS  Burst   Short
Range
15x75mm   Dart    5      17       2-2-3    11    15    1*    2*    320
(300)**
15x75mm   DS      5      17       1-1-2                1*    2*    320
(300)**

*  Recoil is reduced by one if used with bipod
** Short range without electronic sight

Note: Maximum range with laser sight is 240 meters
Note: Short range with bipod and cybernetic eye implant is 600 (520)
meters.

Designer's Notes: This is kinda what I pictured the rail guns in the
movie "Eraser" being like.  More than likely, the firer would set up
this weapon in a discrete location and then ambush the target from long
range.

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 00:21:35 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: New Gaming Term!

Mike Lee writes: 

>cajoule- v. The action of discouraging munchkinism by application of
>electrical, mechanical, or thermal energy.
>(ex. When Mike showed the player group his ex-Scout, ex-Navy, ex-Marine
>character, with a UPP of FFFFF1 and an infinite repeating PGMP, the GM had
>to cajoule him with a cattle prod to make him create a decent character.)
>Measured in joules.
>
>Many thanks to Harold Hale, whose typo gave me the inspiration. (and a lot
>of laughs!)

   When typing e-mail notes, I use Netscape Navigator, which does not
have a spell check capability.  Every so often, one slips through under
my Spelling radar (that little warning in my head that a word looks
wrong).

   If I served up an unintentional pun that in any way served to lighten
the mood of this place, then it was more than worth it.

Regards,

Harold

P.S.  Please do not tell my players about the cattle prod.  I haven't
used it in months (I had trouble obtaining proper replacement
batteries), and I think they have blocked its existence from their
collective memory.

- --h

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

Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 00:24:21 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: New mailing list member...may I introduce myself?

JumpSix@aol.com writes:

>Ya know I am REAL happy to see Traveller alive and well. I was just looking
>at material I used to use when I started playing in high school (1979 or so)
>I thought Id hit search on the internet and found yall! 

   Fresh meat!  Somebody get the charcoal, I'll get the Weber and the
lighter fluid.  :-)

   Welcome aboard!

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 05:04:00 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Why the MT system is not a good choice

If you read and digest this post, you will see why the MT system is 
not all it is cracked up to be by many members of this list.

Many of us (me included) look back fondly on this system for the many 
hours of enjoyment it gave us back in the MT days.  But if you look 
at the system with a discerning eye, you will see that the system is 
no better than T4 or T4.1.

Here's why.
===============================================================



Problem #1:  The Stat Problem

Your character just finished med school.  He's got a Medical-3 
rating.  His Edu is 9, and you are attempting to treat another person 
in your party.

Now, there's this NPC medic aboard also.  He's got Medical-3 as well, 
but he's only got Edu-5.

Both of you attempt the same task (a Difficult  throw to heal 
your party member).  Of the two medics available--with all factors 
being equal, who do you think will do the better job?

Your character with the Edu-9, right?  With all other factors equal, 
your higher Edu should win out over the NPC's Edu of 5.

So what would it be?

In MT, both characters have the SAME chance to succeed.  Because of 
MT's stat division, both will have a target number of 8+.  Both have 
a 41.67% chance of success.

Now, compare this with KBv2.0.  Under my system, your character's 
target number is 18 while the NPC's is 14.  Your character will have 
a 90.27% chance of success while the NPC (due to his lower Edu) will 
only have a 55.63% chance.

See the difference here?  The spread between Edu's is significant, 
and not accounted for in MT.

This is where the T4 idea excells.  Your character benefit from every 
stat and skill point they have--not just every 5th one.  Their skills 
and stats define their chance of success--not modify a random roll 
like in MT.

T4 got it right.  It only needed a little tweaking.  KBv2.0 is the 
answer.
==========================================================

Problem #2:  Spectacular Success Problem.

Spectacular Success was called Exceptional Success in the MT rules.  
Here, I will call it SS like in T4 for convience.  

There is a problem with it when using the system in conjunction with 
T4.  Under the MT system, SS is rolled when a number is rolled that 
is 2+ points higher than the target number.

Let's take our medic from the above example, and let's put him doing 
an Average task.

Using the MT rules, his target number becomes 3+.  This means, if he 
rolls a 3, he will achieve marginal success.  If he rolls a 4, he 
will achieve regular success.  And, if he rolls a 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 
11, or 12, he as achieved spectacular success.

Doesn't anybody but me see the problem with this when applied to T4?

The guy's got a 8.33% chance of rolling regular success, and a 
whopping 83.33% chance of rolling SS.

That's bass-ackwards.

I don't have to tell you that you won't find this problem in KBv2.0.
=============================================================

Problem #3:  Regular Success

OK, here's a third problem with MT.  Let's compare our medic we've 
been using to a Medical-1 character.  Both characters have Edu 9.  
Both characters are attempting an Average task.

Our doctor has a target number of 3+.  The Medical-1 NPC has a target 
number of 5+, and this is how it should be.

For our doctor to roll regular success, he needs to roll a 4 exactly. 
 For the NPC to roll regular success, he needs to roll a 6 exactly.  

You might see where I'm getting at here.

Our doctor, who is much more skilled than the NPC, has a 8.33% chance 
of pulling off regular success.

On the other hand, our NPC character, who needs a higher number to 
pull off regular success, has a 13.8% chance of rolling regular 
success.

Now, we have the problem of the lesser skilled having a better chance 
of doing something than a higher leveled character.

This is due to the bell-curve like nature of rolling 2 six 
siders--the middle numbers are easier to hit than the numbers on the 
end.

Again, you will not find confusing problems like this in KBv2.0.
================================================================

Clearly, from what I've stated here, MT is not the answer.  I believe 
with all my heart that KBv2.0 is.  The only criticism I see about it 
is that it requires too many dice and that it is more complex than 
T4.

First off, we are not talking about that many more dice--1 or 2 at 
the most over T4.

Second, the system is not complicated at all.  I'd posit that it is 
simpler than MT, and I can express it in one equation:

Target Number = Attribute + Experience

where  Experience = Skill x 3

That's not math that is done in combat.  You do it once, write it 
on your character sheet, and then you use that figure to add to your 
attribute--whatever it's current combat value.

What is so complex about that?

Simple addition to find a target number...no half dice...good chances 
of success...easy implementation with T4.

It's everything that you are asking for.  It does the job, and it 
does it well.

I'm telling you.  I did my homework with KBv2.0.  It is the best 
system out there for T4.

I'm not saying that because I'm pushing my system.  I'm saying that 
because I spent months devising the best T4 system, and I haven't 
seen anything yet that can beat it.

Give it a shot in just one of your games.  It will make a believer 
out of you too.

Kenneth.

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

Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 05:12:20 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Eris Task System Suggestion

> 	Hrm? I always felt that skills in TNE had more-or-less the same value as
> in CT/MT ... And I've been keeping the flame for near two decades ...

No.  TNE skill levels are worth about half of a CT/MT skill level.  
That is, a CT/MT level 2 would convert to a TNE level 4--generally.

You can infer this from the rules and game mechanics, but you can 
also look in the back of Survival Margin where it talks about 
converting CT/MT characters to TNE.

Kenneth.

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

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 21:59:45 -7
From: "Stuart L. Dollar" <sdollar@goodnet.com>
Subject: Task System Blues

Just some random thoughts on the task system/skill value/attribute 
debate.

First off, let me stand up and be counted amongst those who are 
in favor of Marc's tweaked task system for T4.1.  

Here are some of the reasons why:

1) MT seriously undervalued attributes, and I'm coming to the 
conclusion that most of the house rules I've seen discussed on this 
tend to do so as well.  I started out when the new system came out as 
a confirmed MT devotee.  I'm becoming less of one daily.  While I 
think that a high level of skill can make up for a relative lack of 
ability, this is generally not the case.  

Count me amongst those who think it makes as least as much sense, and 
is a lot easier to use than the square root of an attribute, or some 
such.  It's simple, it's elegant, and frankly, of any task system 
I've seen its probably the easiest out there for a new player to 
get a handle on.  <G>

2) I hate to say it folks, but contrary to the protestations of a 
number of people on this list, CT=MT, but CT & MT don't translate 
all that well to T4.  

Here are the things that are dramatically different about T4 from ALL 
of its predecessors:
1) Different ship and craft design systems
2) Different combat system
3) Different space combat system
4) Different skill assignment system in character generation
5) Different task system

In light of all the differences before, it is wrong to suggest that 
Skill-1 in CT or MT is equal to Skill-1 in TNE, T4, KB, or whatever 
acronym you care to play with. <G>

Here's why:
T4 Character generation tends to give about twice as many skills per 
term as the old CT/MT basic character generation system.  Compared to 
the Mercenary/High Guard/Merchant Prince/Scouts Advanced Character 
generation T4 still gives a player about half again the number of 
skills compared to the older system.  This, btw, doesn't even begin 
to take into account the background skills, which are numerous in T4, 
rare in CT/MT.

1 other thing.  The ability to hand pick skills will tend to create a 
situation where a high skill level doubled or tripled creates a 
situation as badly out of whack as most of the T4 task system creates 
in the minds of the skill heavy crowd.  

A doubled or tripled skill level of 9, which is very achievable in 
T4, is 18 or 27.  

The current T4 task system, coupled with a system that gives out a 
larger number of skills, creates a situation where Attributes and 
Skills are BOTH important.  This is IMO, the way it should be, as CT 
& MT both had a tendency to render attributes nearly meaningless 
beyond character generation.  

3) In defense of consistency.

First of all, having been a member of this list for a long time, I 
know how shook up people on the list get when things are changed 
arbitrarily.  The number of people who were irked when MT came out 
and changed the background is legendary.  Similarly, the flame wars 
over the believability of Virus were some of the most vicious I've 
been witness to.  The number of people who were upset when they 
discovered that all their designs, and characters and so on weren't 
cross-compatible between CT/MT & TNE is still interesting.

This mailing list, depending on who you ask, has anywhere from 
300-500 members.  Something like 15-20,000 copies of T4 have sold.  
Like it or not, even if all of TML tells IG with one voice that they 
want a specific change to the task system (which has not happened). 
It is still only a tiny minority of the number of people who have 
bought and may continue to buy T4 books.  Ultimately, IG will live or 
die on how well they satisfy those 15-20,000 customers (of which TML 
is, admittedly, a devoted faction).

Now, getting back to my original argument, put yourself in IG's 
place.  They've sold somewhere between 5-10,000 copies each of 10 
different supplements to those folks who bought the original 
rulebook.  All of those supplements use the new task system.  All of 
those supplements are built integrally around the new task system.

Now a bug-stomped version of the rulebook comes out.  It says, oh, 
btw, that $250-300 you just spent over the last 10 months is now 
nearly worthless, because we've replaced the task system, and combat 
system, but we know you'll LOVE the new one, and its so much 
better than the old one, and eventually we'll come out with new 
versions of the old supplements for you to buy to replace the ones we 
just made obsolete.

This stuff goes on in the RPG industry often enough without doing it 
intentionally.  It is very dangerous for a new, relatively small 
company like IG, to promptly scrap the system that they released just 
a year ago, in favor of a new system, regardless of its merits.  The 
possibilities  just because of the possibility of alienating its 
customer base.  IG has released a stream of good to great products 
over the course of the last few months, and is building a good 
reputation that could easily be destroyed or damaged by such a 
blunder.

4) Saying you want a new task system is not a unified voice.

OK, I'll admit it.  I haven't read every word of every post regarding 
Ken's call to arms, but I've noticed a lot of interesting responses.  
Yes, a lot of people on TML have said that they don't like the T4.1 
proposed task system.  A minority have said they like Ken's system 
intact.  Far more have told us about the variations of the MT task 
system, or Ken's system, or their own house rules, or whatever that 
they use.  

It is my considered opinion that probably any task system somebody 
could come up with is going to have a sizable number of people who 
want to "fix" it, because it is "broken."  This is not picking on 
anybody in general, but I've seen about 20 different variations on 
the theme of task system come off the TML in the past week, all with 
variations on their variation of the T4 task system.  Saying you are 
against something is not the same as saying you are for something 
else.  

That's my feeling on things.  You can agree or disagree with it as 
you like.
Stuart L. Dollar                sdollar@goodnet.com
- ---------------------------------------------------
Co-Designer of Products for Marc Miller's Traveller
Including the upcoming release:  Psionics Institutes 
- ----------------------------------------------------
"Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God."
- -Thomas Jefferson

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

Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 18:03:42 +1200
From: Brody  Dunn <brody@intersol.co.nz>
Subject: RE: Eris Task System Suggestion

On Wednesday, June 25, 1997 11:52 AM, David J. Golden
[SMTP:goldendj@pcisys.net] wrote:
> 	Hrm? I always felt that skills in TNE had more-or-less the same
value as
> in CT/MT ... And I've been keeping the flame for near two decades ...

Yeah!  When we had a skill level of 6 we though we were fantastic in any
incarnation of Traveller.

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

Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 23:30:09 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: T4 Task Rationale

Tue, 24 Jun 1997 19:46:46 -0600, "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
[Regarding someone of below average Dex being doctor material.]

>	I disagree. Dexterity is probably a very UNimportant skill for most
>doctors.

I don't disagree.  One might think that intellegence would be a better
base for medical skills.  However, I wanted to make a point about
talent vs skill, not bring up the separate issue of what the best
attribute to base the skill on was.  (In fact, I agree with suggestions
that it might be best to allow skills to be applied to different
stats based on what it's being used for...]

[Stuff about the poster's father supporting his point deleted...]

____________________________
Summers@Alum.MIT.edu

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

Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 08:36:09 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Minimum TL for Dirigibles

>How about having low-tech dirigibles 'sailing' the different airstreams
>found at different altitudes? Either float big kites up above your main
>hull or drop a 'keel' into a lower stratum. Probably use a mix of both
>for a true 3-dimensional 'fighting sail' feel (Wooden Ships, Iron Men,
>Explosive Envelopes....). This could avoid the need for IC or steam
>power (although the arrival of steam powered paddle ships could be an
>interesting innovation if the planet is on the cusp of TL4). Having
>hand-crafted, ultralight components is a nice idea IMO and would fit in
>with a highly skilled and idiosyncratic craft based society that is
>nevertheless suprisingly effective (at least to chauvenistic high tech
>outsiders) at what it does.

Isn't it a bit hard to launch a kite when drifting with windspeed. Lowering
into a lower windlayer might work though. The Swedish arctic explorer Andre
dragged an anchor on the ground in order to use a sail on his balloon (he
was trying to reach the northpole by balloon).


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

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

Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 08:43:53 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: TL of ramshackle empire

Someone asked about the canonical max TL achieved by RoM and I knew I had
seen it somewhere, it's in the Megatraveller Referee Companion and it is
rated at TL 12. The book also has some facts about the Droyne and a
timeline for them that clearly contradicts the text (the timeline notes the
Ancient period from -400 000 to -300 000 a 100 000 year period!).


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1473
***********************************
