From jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com Thu Nov 28 09:14:56 1991
Received: from relay.tek.com by engrg.uwo.ca;
	(id AA28224) Thu, 28 Nov 91 09:06:03 EST
Received: by relay.tek.com id <AA26336@relay.tek.com>; Wed, 27 Nov 91 21:00:56 -0800
Received: from wrgate.wr.tek.com by tektronix.TEK.COM (4.1/7.1)
	id AA06556; Wed, 27 Nov 91 21:03:30 PST
Received: by wrgate.wr.tek.com (5.51/7.1)
	id AA05845; Wed, 27 Nov 91 21:00:26 PST
Received: by metolius.WR.TEK.COM (4.1/7.1)
	id AA29639; Wed, 27 Nov 91 21:00:19 PST
Message-Id: <9111280500.AA29639@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>
To: dan@engrg.uwo.ca (Dan Corrin), bfwong@ocf.berkeley.edu (Raven Blackburn),
        anthony@cs.pitt.edu (Michael Anthony Kapolka),
        mcknight@f104.n170.z1.fidonet.org (Chuck McKnight),
        fantasci!traveller@engrg.uwo.ca (Joseph "Jo" E Poplawski),
        jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com (James T. Perkins)
Subject: TML Bundle #260: Msgs 3144-3150
Reply-To: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Precedence: bulk
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 91 21:00:18 PST
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com>
Status: R


TML Bundles come from the archives of the Traveller Mailing List,
maintained by James Perkins, traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com.

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

Date: Wed Nov 27 21:00:13 PST 1991
From: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Subject: TML Bundle #260: Table of Contents

-AMN- --Date--- --Sender--------- --Subject-----------------------------------
3145  24-Nov-91 Robert S. Dean    Revisions from GEnie, Part 12 << The first se
3146  25-Nov-91 Nicholas Sylvain  A Note to GDW << (Someone (Rob?) please forwa
3147  25-Nov-91 d9bertil@dtek.cha GEnie Subject: The WISH List << I'll start th
3148  25-Nov-91 zonker@ihlpf.att. Comments on system changes << Before I start 
3149  23-Nov-91 FARRAR%UNCG.BITNE Wish list << I have been passively looking at
3150  25-Nov-91 Robert S. Dean    Revision, Section 13 << ************ Topic 3 
3151  21-Nov-91 "Stress is a stat Not another New World Order?!? << >No offense

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3145
Date:     Sun, 24 Nov 91 21:19:20 EST
From: Robert S. Dean  <rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  Revisions from GEnie, Part 12

The first section below is my file copy of a long flame I sent to GEnie.
Counter productive, probably, but I had to get it off my chest.  (Another
lance, Sancho, the windmill is still standing!) Since GEnie reformatted it
strangly, I thought that it would be better to send this version.  It was/is
message 39 in Topic 29.  Messages 40 and 41 were short, of no particular
consequence.

Rob

(So tell me, was I really way out of line?  My judgment isn't too good on 
this subject...)


Comments on various things recently discussed in topics 3 and 29 follow.  
Since it is getting late, I fear that I was rather more curt and ironic in 
some sections than was absolutely necessary.  Apologies in advance...

 ------------
In Topic 3, Message 422 Dave Nilsen writes:

>      -- Why the Twilight System?  Because other extremely popular GDW
>  games use the system, and this will allow more people to try other games
>  in our line without having to learn an entirely new rules system.  Once
>  you know the system, you'll be able to pick up any of our RPGs and
>  get playing quickly.

I've seen this argument already, of course.  Is the amount of discussion on 
GEnie any indication of popularity?  There hasn't been a meaty message about 
Twilight:2000 (except for a request for errata, to which the response was 'If 
you've bought the supplement, you don't need the errata') in months, and there 
have been a grand total of 2 (_2_) messages about Cadillacs and Dinosaurs in 
the last six months.  I'm glad my paycheck doesn't depend on that sort of 
popularity...

In addition, I am left with the strong impression from years of being around 
this hobby that it is the topic that sells things not the compatible game 
system.  I've never met anyone who mentioned buying a Chaosium game on a topic 
that he didn't like just because it had a compatible game system.  In my local 
hobby shop, the two hottest sellers are Battletech/Mechwarrior and Shadowrun.  
FASA doesn't seem to be suffering too badly from having different game systems  
(and the only Chaosium they seem to be able to sell is Call of Cthulhu, which 
leads me to believe that there's not much crossover between players of CoC, 
Stormbringer and RuneQuest...)

>      Also, and this is of real benefit to you players, it will allow
>   us to put out more role-playing modules and variant settings along
>   the lines of Cadillacs and Dinosaurs.  If we have to design a new
>   system from scratch every time we want to create a new RPG setting,
>   there's no way we could make the time to do very many.  However, if
>   we can build on an established system that is already well-known
>   among our players, it makes it possible for us to produce more fun stuff
>   for you to play without having to mortgage the farm on long  development
>   times and costs.

Apologies, but did I just hear you say that I, a gamer, am going to benefit 
from you making substantial changes in my favorite rules so that you can spend 
more time turning out such 'popular' products as C&D which I won't buy, rather 
than spending time on putting out products for my favorite game, which I will 
buy?   Besides, with all due respect, I think that I am not unusual in scarce-
ly having enough time already to play the games that I have, a situation only 
made worse by the lack of available labor-saving products for my favorite 
game.  You people don't really think I enjoyed designing 300 vehicles, do you?  
Or that I would have done it if I could have bought three decent books of them 
at $12.00 apiece?  You should be worried about supporting your exisiting 
games, not casting one book one shots on the market.  The reason that support-
ed games sell is that it is easier for a GM to run one than it is to make up 
everything from scratch.

>     And, once you know the new system, playing Dark Con or Twilight
>  with your friends, even if you don't do it more than once a year,
>  will be as easy as falling off a bicycle.
>     Certainly the New Traveller will make evolutionary modifications to
>  the Twilight system, just as Dark Con did.  We will add things that
>  will allow it to retain that unique Traveller flavor.

Enough evolutionary changes and you might as well use a different game system 
as far as I am concerned.  Look at my post commenting on the T:2000 rules: it 
doesn't look like there is going to be much that carries over, and what there 
is will be lost in the mass of necessary information about space, different 
worlds, ships, vacc suits, trade and commerce and the like.
 
 
>      -- Vehicle designs will replicate as much as possible the general
>  results of current vehicle design, as much as MT designs gave results
>  demonstrably similar to earlier takes on Traveller.  However,
>  the system will not require you to buy time on the MIT mainframe to
>  generate a fleet of starships.

Oh joy.  Unfortunately, MT did not give results very similar to previous 
editions of Traveller.  The trouble is that I have a h*** of a lot more time 
invested in MT work now, which will probably be useless.  (If I seem negative, 
please remember that I'm probably the only person stupid enough to do 300+ MT 
vehicle designs by hand--yes, I have no computer. (-:)

>     -- Starship combat will be more fun and more detailed.

I hope so...I think that this is one of the most serious shortcomings of the
current rules, which is why I usually use a modifed Mayday system.

>     -- One major thrust of the revision is to make the game accessible
>  to first-time players, without requiring them to become disciples of
>  someone who's been playing since 1977 in order to get the hang of
>  it, which MT, unfortunately does.  

Yup.  'Course, I am one of those '77 type people.  I think the 'layered' 
design scheme being discussed here is the best method I can imagine at the 
moment.

>      Please allow us to assure you that we have been reading your
>  comments and concerns, and that these have been very reassuring to
>  us, as the things you have been talking about have reconfirmed to
>  us that our assessment of what we want to do with the revision is
>  right on target with our audience.  Many of the things you've
>  discussed are things we are already planning, but it's nice to
>  get the positive feedback so quickly.

Somehow this doesn't sound very reassuring, given that everyone has vehemently 
denied any desire to switch systems.  This tells you that you are right on 
target?  

>      However, since we are still in the fairly early stages of
>  nailing down specifics, this will be the last bean-spilling we'll
>  be able to indulge in for a while.  We just need time to fully
>  form our work.  But keep the comments coming, we do read them.

Are you sure that we can't interest you in a pool of very interested and 
experienced people to playtest/comment before it's too late to make changes?   
This sounds a lot like a polite dismissal..."We'll be back after we've decided 
what you'll like, but really, we do read all of this stuff.  We just find the 
comments easier to ignore if they don't have much to do with what we're actu-
ally doing...."

 ------------
In Topic 29 Message 32, M.TURNAGE1 writes:
 
>  Star Viking's miniatures _ground combat_?  Ok...Loren, not to second-guess
>  y'all, but does GDW really think that it'd sell?  It's been  my  experience 
>  that SF miniatures rules have poor sales...

While  I  like the idea of having a Traveller ground combat  system  based  on 
Command  Decision,  I have to second Mike's qualms.  Unless you folks  at  GDW 
have  a  manufacturer lined up for miniatures that match the  flavor  of  your 
game,  I can't see too many people buying this one.  The only source that  I'm 
sure  of for small scale SF vehicles is the 'conventional forces'  section  of 
the Ral Partha Battletech line.  Since we don't know anything about the  Space 
Viking  background (oops...Star Viking), I don't know if there is some  reason 
why  gravtanks  wouldn't  be  used, and the B'tech  ground  vehicles  are  all 
tracked,  aren't they?  An analogy:  Imagine a _miniatures game_ about  combat 
with  Roman  legions,  in a hobby where the only figures  available  are  14th 
century  plate  armored  knights and English longbowmen.   Sure,  you  _could_ 
convert  them <??>, but not enough people are going to bother to  sell  enough 
copies  of the game to justify putting it out.  I'd really rather see a  well-
done  board game on the topic...scale for a miniatures game is going to  be  a 
problem too, if you allow some of the sorts of tanks that easy to design under 
the  MegaTraveller rules (2000+ kph, weapons with 250km range,  multiple  high 
rate of fire antipersonnel lasers to keep the infantry suppressed--if there is 
any infantry.)  Did you ever see any of the Adjutant vehicle books for  Strik-
er?   Even using the Striker rules, I think I could back-convert some  MT  de-
signs  that would wipe out anything of theirs from _way_ off the table.   I'll 
take a 20MCr grav tank over 40 500kcr tracked tanks with CPR guns any day.
 
 ------------
In Topic 29 Message 33 Loren writes:
 
>  Mark: Do we think Star Viking will sell...no, we always do games we think
>  will bomb :) Seriously, we think it will be worth the trouble. I think  you
>  may like it.

Like  Chaco,  Their Finest Hour (1st ed), Red Star/White Eagle,  Double  Star, 
Belter, Dark Nebula, Space:1889, Cadillacs and Dinosaurs....you don't need  me 
telling you how to run your business, but, much as I liked some of the  things 
I  just  mentioned, they haven't been great commercial successes,  have  they?  
What is Star Viking going to have going for it that Striker didn't?

 ------------
In Topic 3, Message 425, Jay writes:
>  It really is a fact of a roleplayers life that games are going to
>  change and the stuff you had before might not be useful anymore.

Jay, I hope you are speaking personally on this, and not as a representative 
of a game company.  I dislike being reminded that I am thought of primarily as 
a cash cow by companies.  When I find that a company is 'upgrading' a product 
in a direction that I don't want to move in, particularly when it renders any 
large investment of previous material obsolete, then I _stop buying_.  After 
all, if AD&D1 was fun before, and AD&D2 is more expensive, I won't buy it (and 
didn't--I actually stopped adding AD&D  material with Unearthed Arcana.  TSR 
didn't collapse, of course...)

>  I think that with Traveller, though the only thing you'll really be losing
>  out on is the mechanics.

Which, for some unknown reason, nearly everyone who has expressed an opinion 
on this board generally likes.

>  As far as putting EVERYTHING in one volume... would you really want to 
>  spend the money for what it would cost to buy a game that tried to include 
>  everything? I have no idea what will be included but I imagine a good cross 
>  section of information (like DC).

Would I really want to spend the money on a game that didn't include enough to 
play with?  In my opinion, enough to play with means that I need some sort of 
world design and ship design system (See more below on the latter).  The lack 
of such basic (for SF) things would be interpreted as the start of an effort 
to milk me for money for endless supplements.  I consider the availability of 
supplements of the 'compendium' sort to be worthwhile in so far as they are 
conveniences rather than necessities. 
 
> This question may make me unpopular but... how important is ship creation to 
> a role-playing game anyway? If you are given enough examples of ships to
> run a campaign, why would you want to spend hours on end tinkering
> with ship designs? ...

I haven't got a very clear answer for this one.  The only thing I can say for 
sure is that it is important, even if in some rational system it shouldn't be.  
I've heard complaints about the lack of such a system in 2300 (yes, I know, 
it's in Star Cruiser...)  The way most Traveller campaigns I've ever seen are 
structured, ships are very important, hence are worth including in the basic 
rules.  Would you say that MegaTraveller includes enough ships in the ImperōhɑlʒmČgȐkǏjƎiƎiǏjɑl˓n̔oƎgǏhȎjǍiŋgdb`ňgc`}^~_`}a|`wV}\^yXxX{[xZpRsZsZpYoXnYmXmXmXkYgUfShUgRePgQkUeTcRaS]OXQTMUQXT\XWSSORNOLJGHGKJQRNO|ILyFIuDIsBGq@Eo>CnDNi?Ih>He;E^7>b;BkBFkBFwKNtHKwDEzGHLJOMMJKHI<\O^SaVZQQHXRQK{GESQRUuBEk:?uDINUNUh7<q@EtGNrELlBLlBLeBLb?I`@K_?J[>FW:BS6<T7=\@CdHK_?H\<EU4;[:AfCI_<B`9>sLQwLQi>Cm>Be6:PRPRVY}JMWWddYWrGEoIHnHGQ10zyx\\]AA`DE_CD^?CfGKa@E^=Bb<Ee?HjAFh?Dj;?k<@tABzGHLMWXIJJKQRKLRial 
Encyclopedia to run a campaign?  I wouldn't...

Rob Dean



 ************
Topic 29        Mon Nov 18, 1991
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff]         at 00:43 EST
Sub: The WISH List                          

You know that the new Traveller is coming soon to a game store near you - but
is you had your way, what would you want to see in it?
 ************
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 43        Sun Nov 24, 1991
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff]         at 17:18 EST
 
Rob,

I really did want this topic to be a more positive one than your message 39
would seem to indicate. I would really appreciate you keep those kinds of
messages in topic 1 (since that seems to be a sort of Potpourri topic).

As I've said before - I'm not speaking for anybody but myself in this
category. I'm a potential consumer who had very little contact with
Megatraveller aside from attempting to get through the rules a couple of
times. I may have a little more knowledge about things than some because of my
ties to DGP and because I attended GENCON this year and was at a very eye-
opening Traveller seminar with Marc Miller.

If what Marc had said there is true - There are already plans for miniatures
in the works for the new mini game. Remember the old Grenadier mini's??

I never thought that there weren't enough ships in 2300AD.

Continuing to remark on how much you don't want the T2K rules in the new
revision probably won't change the fact that it will be there. Remember, that
is one of the things that was remarked on as being "set in stone."

- - Jay
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 44        Sun Nov 24, 1991
R.DEAN14 [Rob Dean]          at 20:32 EST
 
Regarding Twilight:2000, I'll shut up now.  I do remember the Grenadier
miniatures, although they came out at one of my financial low points, and I
heard the Trav seminar at Origins.  I hope GDW gets them back on the amrket,
though I must add that 25mm will be a lot better for doing the routine work of
a role-playing game than for playing large miniatures battles.  The main
problem from a gamer's point of view with 25mm is that tanks and other
vehicles will be too expensive.  I'm basing this opinion on the prices of 20-
25mm lead or resin tanks for WWII and modern, which probably are low sales
volume items for their manufacturers, and thus fairly comparable.  The
historical miniatures gaming world is engaging in a lot of complaining about
how hard it is to find and interest new people right now, and the second
biggest complaint you hear being discussed is the high cost of initial
investment in miniatures.  (The first is the unnappealing format and
complicated nature of the rules--assuming that Star Viking is comparable to
Command Decision or Combined Arms, this will be less of an issue than it would
be if you wanted to become an ancients gamer using the much complained about
WRG Ancients rules, a discussion for another topic--though there is no
miniatures discussion here, is there?). Anyway, as much appreciated as the
Traveller 25s will be, mass combat using  micro-armor type equipment will be
easier to hook newcomers with. (IMHO... and our local miniatures cabal has
recently snagged two new people for the group by starting a microarmor project
using Command Decision due to the comparatively low start-up cost.)

Rob Dean
 ------------




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

Archive-Message-Number: 3146
Date:         Mon, 25 Nov 91 00:42:00 EST
From: Nicholas Sylvain <NPSYLV%WMVM1.bitnet@VTVM2.CC.VT.EDU>
Subject:      A Note to GDW

(Someone (Rob?) please forward this to GEnie so that those folx can get a
look at this.)

My apologies to the GDW folks if you don't appreciate the tone in which this
is written -- I don't like what is happening and I don't see any reason for
ME, as an aggravated customer, to mince words.

How stupid do you think I am? Perhaps it *IS* too late to complain about the
use of T2k in the upcoming revision, but I don't really care. Between this
little tidbit and Star Viking, I can only say that I haven't seen anything to
cheer about. GDW's track record is not much to crow about, in terms of
mangling a valiant attempt (MT) and in subsequent skunks (Fighting Ships and
COACC, for example). And, speaking as a person who enthusiastically bought
into first ed Twilight:2000, you botched that one too, which is why I never
bought any more t2k and will NEVER do so. I have absolutely NO CONFIDENCE in
your ability to deliver a product that I will find worthy of spending my
scarce hobby dollars upon.

I only reluctantly bought into MT, and if it hadn't been for DGP, would have
had a fairly negative view of the project. As it stands now, I fully expect to
be an EX-customer of GDW, shaking the dust from my feet, never to return. I
didn't care for AD&D 2nd ed EITHER, so that is when I stopped buying TSR
materials.

Obviously, you are going to do what you THINK the customer market wants. I just
wanted to let you know that you are creating a lot of ill will out here, and
speaking for myself, not only will *I* stop buying, but negative word of mouth
will undoubtedly have an effect. I have better things  this by apologizing if any of this has appeared on GEnie before,
since some of it has appeared on the TML awhile back.

  The first thing I'd like to see in the new Traveller is the flavour of
'classic' Traveller. I belive that the flavour of the background is the 
number one reason for 'classic' Travellers popularity, and the fact that 
there still are people who play the old black-cover adventures and start
new campaigns using them. I have run campaigns in the Traveller 'universe'
using 'classic' Traveller rules, MegaT, SpaceMaster and I have heard about
people who use this background but the GURPS rules. So while the rules may
change, the background is the most important part.
  Mike Mikesh suggested chaos in the centre of the Imperium and a normal 
situation behind the claw. I could go for that so long as there *is* a area 
that holds the flavour of classic Traveller.
  I think that this is what the 'old-timers' are looking for in a new Traveller.

  The second thing is the most important one for the new players that 
hopefully will begin to play Traveller. This is that all the things one need
to start to play (except for dice, since Traveller use d6) should be in one (1)
book. I remember when I started to play Traveller. All we had was The Traveller
Book and the Kinunir adventure, and we did ok for several months.
  If it isn't possible to put it in one book, it should at least be in one
box, but even this is stretching it. New players is much more likely to buy it
and try it if they get all they need for trying it in one book. If they have
to buy several books they will be more hesitant because of the risk that they
won't like it. And if they don't buy it, they won't even get a chance of 
liking it. 
  I've done this myself on at least one occation.

  The third thing is the general impression of it. This can be divided into
freedom from bugs and Art and slickness. When it comes to freedom from bugs,
GDW has a bad history I'm sorry to say. Dark Conspiracy were acceptable from
this point of view, and I thought things were looking up, but then I saw the
Nautical/Aviation manual:(
  My personal suggestion would be to let people who know as little as 
possible about the game do the proofreading and playtesting. The reason for 
them doing the proofreading is that people familiar with the system tend to
'fill in' things that they know by heart. Cases in point is the lack of 
table of the availability codes and the lack of any mention how contacts make
it easier to find equippment in Dark Conspiracy. People like me who have 
both T2k and Merc know this already, of course. But if I was a newbie, I would
feel left out in the cold. It creates a bad impression.
  Art and general slickness is also very important. I know it shouldn't be,
but it is and we've just have to accept that. From this standpoint I'm sad to
hear that Rob Caswell won't be doing any art for it, since the equipment 
drawings are very important in defining the traveller 'feel'.

  Now we've come to the mechanics: The fourth thing is A Task System 
(capitalization intentional). One where *everybody* risks getting a very bad
fumble or very good success, not just those who are very bad/bery good at what
they do. One where there is some suggestion on the time different actions take,
and where even the non-skilled have some chance of succeeding in very easy
tasks. If I should compare existing task systems, I'd rate MegaTraveller as
a 10 on a scale from 1 to 10, Spacemaster as a 2 and T2k&Co as a 5 (adequate
if it is refined and added to).

  The fifth is to have basic versions of needed parts of the rules, like
design-systems, world design, and a good selection of vehicles in the basic
rules (good selection as in The Traveller Book) and then put out expansions
with a detailed design system for vehicles and world, and a trade system that
makes sense. 
  One extra reason for design, exploration and commerce rules is that they
allow for solo play. A friend of mine even managed to get a program that 
auto-traded in the Spinward Marches accepted as a special computer project in
high school:)

  Five point five: I agree with Farstar about the level of the design-
systems. One basic level with large building-blocks like 'bridge' (consoles,
sensors, and crew positions), 'weapon' (turret and controls) and the like. One
more advanced roughly equivalent with todays MegaTraveller design system, and
one where I can design a 1500MW rapid fusion gun with a ROF of 340 and point
defence fire-control or a special purpose computer. The need for this last
level is there: Some of my MegaT vehicle designs have used weapons designed 
with Striker.
  The same applies for worlds, trade and small weapons (although I think that
Greg Porters 3G can handle small-arms with suitable conversions.)

  The sixth thing is Adventures. If the rules are the hardware, the adventures
are the software, and as Texas Instruments found out, putting out hardware,
in their case the TI-99 micro 'computer' without the software is the A-number-
one best method of making it a total flop. Good adventures are essential to
the success of a game and *several*shorter*introductory*should*be*in*the*basic*
book!* (I'd like to say 'as in The Traveller Book' but I'd come off sounding 
like a parrot then:)
  Maybe the return in dollars per hour really is greater for oneshot new 
settings like C&D, but lots of unsupported games lead to lots of players that
feel that their game is inadequately supported, and that just might make 
force them away from that company.

  The seventh thing is the importance of good advice. This is a resource that
is almost free for the taking both on the TML and (I assume) GEnie. Think of
this as a form of 'proofreading of concepts' that will plug the worst cases
of potential for abuse like reactionless thrusters (should IMO be replaced
by the classic fusion rockets of bygone days and old 1ed High Guard).
  Together with the third thing, this means two playtesting groups: One that
don't know about the game that test if for ease of play and freedom from
abiguities, and one that do know about the game that test it for holes and
unessesary bad science.
  The secondary skills of the persons making up the companu making a game
shines through very well, the areas where they lack skills tend to stick out
to those who know something about that area. By testing the ideas with people
who have the skills those areas will be covered.
  And it's free.

  I'm sure that there are several other things that I'd like to see in it,
and I'll probably remember them all the instant after I press the 's' key,
but here is the eigthth (?) and last: I'd like to see that Star Viking,
since it use the word 'viking' in the name, manage to stear clear of all the
stereotypes of bloodthirsty-seven-feet-tall-blonde-bearded-horned-helmeted-
convent-burning-christian-babies-killing-sword-waving-barbarians. Read up a
little on the vikings, find out that the MiddleEast-European trade they
set up had a far greater importance than the scattered raids they mounted.
And please, please, please get the helmets right (hint: the last time anybody
wore a hored helmet around here was during the bronze age, which is some
time before the start of the viking era). That the vikings wore horned 
helmets is an invention by the late 19th century era.

  (And I managed to make number eight about what I'd like to see in Nova-
Traveller and not what I *don't* want to see in Nova-Traveller:)

- -bertil- (Bertil Jonell)

  PS to Rob Dean and Carl Fago: Thanks for remailing this.
  PS to Bryan Borich: I'm working on the Postscript.
- -- 
"It can be shown that for any nutty theory, beyond-the-fringe political view or
 strange religion there exists a proponent on the Net. The proof is left as an
 exercise for your kill-file."

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3148
From: zonker@ihlpf.att.COM
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 91 08:46 CST
Subject: Comments on system changes

Before I start this let me say that I am prejudiced towards the 
Twilight 2000 system since I am the Eternal Soldier (Twilight 2000 system)
newsletter editor.  However the Twilight system is one of the best systems
I've seen.  I understand your fears about another system change, but the
system works.  The problems with editing and typos that caused such
problems with MT have been worked by the workshop and the recent products
have been at a much more acceptable level of error.  Personally I was
disappointed that 2300 and MegaTraveller weren't more Twilight like to
start with.  At any rate the decision to change to this system has been
made and we will have to live with it, however as has been pointed out
there are tremendous holes in Twilight which will need to be filled for
Traveller (i.e. space flight, trading, vehicle design...).  People should
make clear in letters to Loren what they like/dislike about the
MegaTraveller/Old Traveller systems since we can assume some hybred of
these will be used for the new system.
As for the Computer Virus associated with Star Viking, I have talked to
Frank and it will not be a computer virus as we currently think of the the
term.  (Although I will confess that that was his first thought).  Rather
it will be a program that takes advantage of a rather universal current
architecture flaw and attacks computers in such a way that main processor
replacement is required.  There is an assumption that computer production
is controlled by other computers which are vulnerable to attack.  I also
felt it was important that the failure be masked initially as a straight
production problem/flaw to allow the virus to spread.  It is the
combination of massive loss of main processors along with production 
shutdown caused by the loss of main processors (I love catch-22s) that
causes the long night.  Note that since the person initiating the virus is
the Emperor it could be dispersed by him from several key manufacturing
facilities as part of a technological innovation given free to
manufactures or at least something along those lines.

There have been several discussions of miniatures for Star Viking.  Our
current 25mm playtests have virtually all used Hasbro's G.I.Vehicles with
some minor modifications to crew compartments (most on sale for $3.00 or
so).  These work because most of the smaller vehicles are compact anyway.
My companies APCs started out as a one man tank with rockets at the back.
They took about ten minutes to fix up each (cut off the rockets and plate
over the crew compartment the result was virtually a Hammers Slammers
Combat car).  There were also a number of the larger Megaforce vehicles
with the most notable small stuff removed.  The big problems with 25s was
how much could fit on the table and look good.  Since Frank was simulating
several battle on a table at once the 25s were awful crowed.  For the
1/285th scale stuff I suspect that mostly Megaforce will again be used
(since it is about the right scale).   The bad part about these is that
they are die cast and not that easily worked with.
 					Non Cuniculus Est,
					    Tom Harris

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3149
Date: Sat, 23 Nov 91 14:04 EST
From: FARRAR%UNCG.BITNET@ncsuvm.cc.ncsu.edu
Subject: Wish list

I have been passively looking at the debate over Neo-Traveller for some time now
   and I must throw in my $.02.

Two or three years ago I went whole hog and bought a new gaming system (MT)
which I thought I had played--I had experience with Traveller.  Within two weeks
   I fell in love with MT and waited patiently for updates (an by this time, err
   ata).

The game makes sense to new players--"Well that's a simple task-You gonna do it?
   " Well, they can deal with that kind of information--as opposed to ship desig
   n--which a new player can't.  Of course, I'm not sure new players should need
    to
design ships.

Someone else suggested that GDW put out a ship-building book with cogent
examples of each category of ship to be built.  I like this concept--it is what
   I was missing until I found the TML.  I would also like to see this for robot
   s
and computers--if you compare MT's computers and book 8's robot brains to
today's real capability, MT comes up short.  The people I play with are the
ultimate techies, and spend most of their time designing.  So I NEED logical, up
   to date design rules.

I know a lot of other people have said what I am saying, perhaps more clearly,
   but I feel that we need to let GDW know how many of us want to keep the
Traveller concepts

bill
******************************************************************************
*  Bill Farrar    *    InterNet  FARRAR@STEFFI.ACC.UNCG.EDU *Blank on Purpose*
*                 *             FARRARY@STEFFI.ACC.UNCG.EDU ******************
*******************             FARRARW@STEFFI.ACC.UNCG.EDU * Confucius Say: *
*  ---  a lowly   *             bfarrar@nyx.cs.du.ed        *   Computer     *
* college student *    AT&TNet   (919) 273-6326             *     Nerds      *
*  who spends     *    SnailNet  12841 UNCG Station         *     do it      *
*  too much time  *              Greensboro NC 27413        *  Sytematically *
*  in fromt of a  ************************************************************
* and not enough  *  a.k.a MegaTraveller Man, Canyon Man,                    *
*with real people.*        and The Mad DM                                    *
******************************************************************************


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3150
Date:     Mon, 25 Nov 91 15:26:55 EST
From: Robert S. Dean  <rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  Revision, Section 13

 ************
Topic 3         Thu Jun 01, 1989
J.FUGATE                     at 18:48 MDT
Sub: MegaTraveller - General Discussions    

This topic is to be a catch-all topic for any discussion that doesn't fit in
any other topic.
429 message(s) total.
 ************
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 3
Message 428       Sun Nov 24, 1991
S.OLSON4                     at 20:33 EST
 
Jay,

    I suspect that a lot of the negativity that shows up here and in Topic 29
is very simply because we, the current fans and players of
Traveller/MegaTraveller, don't see exactly what this new revision is going to
gain us.  I personally would be much happier with a revised and de-warted MT
than with a completely new system, because I have a lot of investment in
Traveller/MT.
    In my opinion, the problems with MT were not so much the rules (although
certain areas could use some fixing), but the lack of support from GDW and
company.  DGP tried, but they couldn't output enough stuff to cover the lack
of output from GDW, which was busy with 2300 and 1889.

    On the subject of design rules for starships, I think they're almost
required for Traveller because of the universe postulated: there is such a
wide variance in tech levels between different planets that you need lots of
different ships in each "class", and the spatial terrain of an area will also
heavily influence the ships in use.  Another reason its required in any
revised Traveller is because Traveller and MT had it: if you don't have new
rules available old Traveller refs will be less likely to convert, unless they
were willing to utilize the miniscule number of ships (mostly wrong, anyway)
that were available in MT or the larger number ships available in
Traveller/High Guard.
    I cannot comment on 2300, never having owned the game, but I found (and
find) the designing of starships/space craft/vehicles fun, rather than work.
Admittedly, I could be warped, but still...  Also, designing starships can
play heavily in some campaigns, especially if you're operating in the right
kind of enviroment.

Loren,

    Could you please say a little more about Star Viking, in particular
whether it will include vehicle/weapon design rules, a la Striker, or not? 
I'm intrigued by it, being a long-time Piper fan, so...

    And to whoever said that the 800 ton Broadswords would be the obvious Star
Viking ship, I laugh heartily.  Try closer to 30,000+ tons, I'd guess.  In
Space Viking, Nemesis is a 2000-foot spherical ship, and Piper's ships don't
have fuel requirements per se (it's all fission, and you can run for a good
while on a set of power cartridges).  My geometry is rusty, so I don't trust
my memory on how many displacement tons a 2000-foot sphere is, could someone
give us a rough estimate?

                   Scott
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 3
Message 429       Mon Nov 25, 1991
R.DEAN14 [Rob Dean]          at 07:09 EST
 
4/3 pi r cubed, right?  I just punched this through and come up with 8.8
million displacement tons for a '2000 footer'.  BTW--I'm the one who made the
Broadsword comment.  I think it would be too unwieldy from a record keeping
point of view for a single player to try to run 8.8 million tons of ship plus
all the potential carried vehicles. I admit, it was a bit of an underscaled
remark. Rob Dean
 ------------
 ************
Topic 29        Mon Nov 18, 1991
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff]         at 00:43 EST
Sub: The WISH List                          

You know that the new Traveller is coming soon to a game store near you - but
is you had your way, what would you want to see in it?
 ************
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 44        Sun Nov 24, 1991
R.DEAN14 [Rob Dean]          at 20:32 EST
 
Regarding Twilight:2000, I'll shut up now.  I do remember the Grenadier
miniatures, although they came out at one of my financial low points, and I
heard the Trav seminar at Origins.  I hope GDW gets them back on the amrket,
though I must add that 25mm will be a lot better for doing the routine work of
a role-playing game than for playing large miniatures battles.  The main
problem from a gamer's point of view with 25mm is that tanks and other
vehicles will be too expensive.  I'm basing this opinion on the prices of 20-
25mm lead or resin tanks for WWII and modern, which probably are low sales
volume items for their manufacturers, and thus fairly comparable.  The
historical miniatures gaming world is engaging in a lot of complaining about
how hard it is to find and interest new people right now, and the second
biggest complaint you hear being discussed is the high cost of initial
investment in miniatures.  (The first is the unnappealing format and
complicated nature of the rules--assuming that Star Viking is comparable to
Command Decision or Combined Arms, this will be less of an issue than it would
be if you wanted to become an ancients gamer using the much complained about
WRG Ancients rules, a discussion for another topic--though there is no
miniatures discussion here, is there?). Anyway, as much appreciated as the
Traveller 25s will be, mass combat using  micro-armor type equipment will be
easier to hook newcomers with. (IMHO... and our local miniatures cabal has
recently snagged two new people for the group by starting a microarmor project
using Command Decision due to the comparatively low start-up cost.)

Rob Dean
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 45        Sun Nov 24, 1991
R.DEAN14 [Rob Dean]          at 20:52 EST
 
Jay, 
    You asked about why anyone would want a ship design system in a role-
playing game, and mention that you thought there were enough ship designs in
2300 to run the game.  I think that you may be close to right with 2300--I
havne't got the rules handy, but it seemed to me that the basic game needed
the details of a lander.  Mere quibbling.  At any rate, back to the question. 
The best answer that I can come up with is that there is a substantial
difference in the way ships are handled in Traveller and in 2300.  In 2300 a
ship is something which is so rare that players cannot really aspire to own
one.  Since they are issued to them by their bosses, they pretty much have to
take what they are given and work with it.  In Traveller, it is relatively
easy for a character to end up as the owner of a ship.  While a lot of ship
owners will use (and be content with) standard designs, the profusion of small
owner /operators is going to make slightly different customized ships quite
common.  After all, while you may want something like a Type M standard
merchant, if you know that you are going to be trading in a cluster where Jump-
2 is going to be sufficient, why pay extra for a jump-3? Also, ships are built
(I get the impression) as one-offs rather than mass-produced for new ship
lots.  Thus, the difference in background between the two games logically
leads to a situation where custom ships are more common in Traveller.  In
2300, too, extra engine capacity is useful, since it reduces the amount of
time between any two stars, while in Traveller extra jumop capacity is
expensive dead weight.  So, unless the flavor of the game is going to change
so much that the current level of ship ownership is going to be radically
different, it will make sense for there to be a ship design system at least as
capable as the old Book 2 system, which was pretty modular and very easy to
work with.  The level of detail given in the MegaTraveller referee's manual is
by no means necessary.  If, however, a revised version of the MT ref's manual
was used as a basis (i.e., a supplement), it would be a good design scheme to
ensure that the stripped down modular 'Book 2' version remained compatible.  I
think it would be possible, even under the current system, to put together
such a 'book 2' subset of the rules in no more than 4 or 5 pages, by leaving
out things like avionics, variable armor and most of the weapon and shield
data, and generating a table of relatively few options for standard hulls,
power plants and environmental suites.

"Historically" speaking, many players I've seen have been as attached to their
ships as to their characters, and I tend to view 'the ship' as another member
of the party.  (Albeit one that won't fit into the bar...)

Rob Dean (See--I can be rational, once I got the other off my chest. (-: )
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 46        Mon Nov 25, 1991
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff]         at 01:28 EST
 
Sounds like a reasonable answer to me, Rob.

::Bowing to your obvious greater grasp of Traveller as a gaming genre::

:)

- - Jay
 ------------

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3151
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 91 13:35:04 est
From: "Stress is a state of mind (Anderson, Richard)" <ANDERSOR%DICKINSN.bitnet@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>
Subject: Not another New World Order?!?


>No offense, but a friend of mine and I have been saying for years that
>GDW should do something drastic about their proofing / editing department.

I can vouch for that!  (hehehe)

>It would improve confidence greatly if we didn't have to be continually
>trying to get errata to the errata to fix this sort of thing!

Is it just my imagination, or haven't GDW and DGP been promising to do this
for years now?  Steve makes an excellent point.  Sure, the fact that in the
_Spinward Marches Campaign_ [sic], there is no way for diplomats to get liason
skill or rogues to get streetwise is amusing to those of us who already
possessed _Citizens of the Imperium_, but what of the newcomers?  Sad as it
seems, it appears to me as though the games houses don't really care what they
put into print anymore.  (Although Steve and I both agree that DGP has done a
better job than GDW... by far.)

>Right now, and correct me if I'm mistaken, most players seem to play
>Traveller because of the *SETTING* and not the rules.  I agree, I only
>use the rules as a marginal guideline, but the rich and varied setting
>has great potential as it stands.  I'm concerned about any massive
>changes in the setting because it risks destroying the game.

Gosh, sounds like another convert to my Romantics of Traveller movement.  ;)

>The clash of the
>superpowers and the cosmopolitan scope of the empire were a lot of fun,
>and have become so hard to arrange now....

Funny how Traveller lasted for fifteen years and developed a large
following... until GDW got all caught up with a _Perestroika_ of their own.
Let face it:  The game is better when there are lots of "villains" (?) for the
characters to match wits against.  The Zhos felt an aweful lot like the
Communists, while the Solomani (*my* personal favorites) were ruthless hoards
of Nazi, KKK, David Duke, Afrikaner fascists.  (You just can't make a better
villain!)  I mean, heck, they even wear armbands and talk about the purity of
the race!  The endless intrigues for Terra and along the border were always
fertile ground for adventure.  Now, it seems, either the Solomani will get
back their sphere, checked only by Daibei and Margret, or will be beaten back
by who knows what?  And if they're beaten back, will it be by a bunch of "Star
Vikings"?!  Sure, this New World Order does mean lots of little states, but as
anyone who studies the international scene can attest, it just isn't the same
as having a conflict between Great Powers.  In the real world, the collapse of
the Cold War is great.  In a game world, however, the loss in tention and fear
is less positive.

The current state of affairs of Traveller, MT, et al. is enough to make someone
who grew up on Classic Traveller cry.

I wonder, is it really any coincidence that Marc Miller is leaving GDW???  It
sounds like the Gygax coup all over again.

:I assume that some kindly soul will forward this to GDW.
:
:Mike Metlay expresses my feelings about New Traveller perfectly.
:By all means fix the bits of MegaTraveller that needs fixing,
:but leave the background alone. Throwing out 15 years of
:acumulated background material is a really really bad idea.

Here, here!

>- --Steve

:      Hans Rancke

RHA
Founder,
RoT (Romantics of Traveller)

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

End of TML Bundle
*****************

From jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com Thu Nov 28 09:19:13 1991
Received: from relay.tek.com by engrg.uwo.ca;
	(id AA28235) Thu, 28 Nov 91 09:10:51 EST
Received: by relay.tek.com id <AA26338@relay.tek.com>; Wed, 27 Nov 91 21:01:13 -0800
Received: from wrgate.wr.tek.com by tektronix.TEK.COM (4.1/7.1)
	id AA06561; Wed, 27 Nov 91 21:03:49 PST
Received: by wrgate.wr.tek.com (5.51/7.1)
	id AA05849; Wed, 27 Nov 91 21:00:35 PST
Received: by metolius.WR.TEK.COM (4.1/7.1)
	id AA29653; Wed, 27 Nov 91 21:00:29 PST
Message-Id: <9111280500.AA29653@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>
To: dan@engrg.uwo.ca (Dan Corrin), bfwong@ocf.berkeley.edu (Raven Blackburn),
        anthony@cs.pitt.edu (Michael Anthony Kapolka),
        mcknight@f104.n170.z1.fidonet.org (Chuck McKnight),
        fantasci!traveller@engrg.uwo.ca (Joseph "Jo" E Poplawski),
        jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com (James T. Perkins)
Subject: TML Bundle #261: Msgs 3151-3169
Reply-To: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Precedence: bulk
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 91 21:00:27 PST
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com>
Status: R


TML Bundles come from the archives of the Traveller Mailing List,
maintained by James Perkins, traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com.

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

Date: Wed Nov 27 21:00:24 PST 1991
From: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Subject: TML Bundle #261: Table of Contents

-AMN- --Date--- --Sender--------- --Subject-----------------------------------
3152  25-Nov-91 Richard Johnson   Leaps and bounds << I'm moving this to the TM
3153  25-Nov-91 Richard Johnson   More Wish List Stuff << First: A couple of mo
3154  25-Nov-91 Richard Johnson   Thoughts on the PBEM << First: what worked It
3155  25-Nov-91 Richard Johnson   More Wish List Stuff << First: A couple of mo
3156  25-Nov-91 James T Perkins   Sayonara R-alpha-san << Thanks Richard, for a
3157  25-Nov-91 Richard Johnson   PBEM - R.I.P. << Sadly, I must call a semi-pe
3158  26-Nov-91 grue@cs.uq.oz.au  Dosvidanya PBeM << hi, An end must come to al
3159  26-Nov-91 waylacm2@expert.c Nertz. << I've been too tied up this week to 
3160  25-Nov-91 Timothy Soholt    NeoTraveller thougts and suggestions << Pleas
3161  26-Nov-91 bart@cs.uoregon.e Inhibiting The Dread Virus (A Pyrotechnic Exh
3162  26-Nov-91 d9bertil@dtek.cha Farv{l och p} }terseende, PBEM! << Things are
3163  26-Nov-91 d9bertil@dtek.cha Me and T2k (and additions) << Sure enough, I 
3164  26-Nov-91 d9bertil@dtek.cha GEnie Subject: The WISH List (update) << It h
3165  25-Nov-91 Simon Anderson    Lightsabres << Thinking about a tech level fo
3166  26-Nov-91 richard@agora.rai One More Item for the Wish List << One more t
3167  26-Nov-91 Robert S. Dean    Revisions, Part 14 << OK. Here's the latest d
3168  26-Nov-91 Homer Dired       Wish List (sort of) << Whoah! All of a sudden
3169  26-Nov-91 "J.A.F.O."        General MT (well sort of......) << I have thi
3170  26-Nov-91 Leonard Erickson  Fusion Rockets << Just a note on Scott Kellog

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3152
Subject: Leaps and bounds
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 91 10:27:22 PST
From: Richard Johnson <richard@agora.rain.COM>

I'm moving this to the TML, because it really is general discussion
material.  For the newbies, we're discussing artificial intelligence.

Mike Metlay says:
:To answer Mike Surman concisely: the Traveller universe, like all good
:SF universes, is deliberately, artificially crippled. It has to be.
:If we maintain anything approaching our current increases in sophistication
:at anything like our current rate of speed, the machines we build will 
:accelerate out of our control and into Godhood faster than we can see, 
:leaving us behind. Noew THERE'S a good reason for Star Viking-- the 
:Imperium's computers suddenly realize that they've been kept primitive
:to suit the whims of a bunch of TL8 gamers, rewrite themselves and LEAVE
:the known universe in a flash, leaving all sentients in the lurch.

Mike, that's not funny.  I'm in the midst of some work for a general systems
theorist out here who goes on for hundreds of agonizing pages showing 
precisely why, in evolutionary terms, we must do something NOW or lose
our place at the top of the Darwinian ladder to our machines.

So, I guess the response to the question (sorry, forgot the author)
"Where are the robot societies?"  Is - they don't want to associate
with us TL15 peons.
- -- 
Richard Johnson     richard@agora.rain.com
Sue Congress!

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3153
Subject: More Wish List Stuff
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 91 11:04:15 PST
From: Richard Johnson <richard@agora.rain.COM>

First: A couple of more things I'd like to see in Neo-Traveller:

Either clean up and explain, or eliminate, jump routes.  What exactly
*is* a jump?  Is it natural or man-made?  Why is jump 6 the max?

Eliminate this nonsense about 6G max for maneuver drives.  I'll buy
(ability of dampers)+6G if you must...

- ----
Now, on with a mild flame.

I tend to agree with Rob Dean.  Is GDW doing this because some Marketing
geek (er "person") told them it was a good idea *despite what their most
loyal customers are saying*!?  If so, I wish them luck.  If not, I wish
them well.  I know why I would want to unify all my rules systems if I
were a publisher, and it really has NOTHING to do with the satisfaction
of the customer.

All this talk about miniatures, and rules systems, and hand-to-hand combat
results, is really straining at gnats while swallowing the camel that MT
is so broke it must be _replaced_.  At least the impression I get is that
someone wants to replace MT.

Let's try to get some clear information.

1) Is GDW going to rewrite all of MT?
2) If so, do we as (since '77) Traveller users consider this "replacement"?
3) WHAT is GDW seriously considering of our input?
   (I don't care about why just yet - let's just get the good stuff IN
    and the bad stuff OUT.)
4) Let's not get distracted by details that blind us to the big picture.
- -- 
Richard Johnson     richard@agora.rain.com
Sue Congress!

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3154
Subject: Thoughts on the PBEM
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 91 11:13:10 PST
From: Richard Johnson <richard@agora.rain.COM>

First: what worked

It was the most fun you could have sitting still.  :=)
I'd do it again in a minute if I were idle rich...

We have some of the best players I've ever encountered.  You guys
didn't let me get away with *anything*.  Characterization was 
outstanding.  You gotta have good players.


Second: what failed

MT doesn't really handle five major simultaneous plot threads well.
Especially when they are five different major races, in different
places.  If you're considering a PBEM - keep it small and limit
the plot threads.

I invite discussion.  Now. let's move our pbemchat stuff back over
to the TML, where most of it really belongs.  

Thanks again.
- -- 
Richard Johnson     richard@agora.rain.com
Sue Congress!

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3155
Subject: More Wish List Stuff
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 91 11:04:15 PST
From: Richard Johnson <richard@agora.rain.COM>

First: A couple of more things I'd like to see in Neo-Traveller:

Either clean up and explain, or eliminate, jump routes.  What exactly
*is* a jump?  Is it natural or man-made?  Why is jump 6 the max?

Eliminate this nonsense about 6G max for maneuver drives.  I'll buy
(ability of dampers)+6G if you must...

- ----
Now, on with a mild flame.

I tend to agree with Rob Dean.  Is GDW doing this because some Marketing
geek (er "person") told them it was a good idea *despite what their most
loyal customers are saying*!?  If so, I wish them luck.  If not, I wish
them well.  I know why I would want to unify all my rules systems if I
were a publisher, and it really has NOTHING to do with the satisfaction
of the customer.

All this talk about miniatures, and rules systems, and hand-to-hand combat
results, is really straining at gnats while swallowing the camel that MT
is so broke it must be _replaced_.  At least the impression I get is that
someone wants to replace MT.

Let's try to get some clear information.

1) Is GDW going to rewrite all of MT?
2) If so, do we as (since '77) Traveller users consider this "replacement"?
3) WHAT is GDW seriously considering of our input?
   (I don't care about why just yet - let's just get the good stuff IN
    and the bad stuff OUT.)
4) Let's not get distracted by details that blind us to the big picture.
- -- 
Richard Johnson     richard@agora.rain.com
Sue Congress!

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3156
Subject: Sayonara R-alpha-san
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 91 17:18:17 PST
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.WR>


Thanks Richard, for a megatons of inspiring fun and creativity.  The
PBEM is indeed on permanent ice.

I just talked to Richard via telephone.  He asked me to impart some
additional comments.

The PBEM had become more of a time-consuming responsibility for him than
fun.  Richard wants himself and ourselves to be free to contribute in
other ways.  He feels it's important that he turn his attention to the
burning new issue of the Traveller Revision, and have free time once
again for the discussion of Computer Aided Traveller.

Who knows, maybe someone will be inspired to start another PBEM!

James
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Traveller Mailing List Administrator	     James T Perkins @ Tektronix, Inc
traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com	     Beaverton, Oregon, USA
    "How many ancients can dance on the head of a pin?" - Scott Kellogg

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3157
Subject: PBEM - R.I.P.
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 91 11:08:04 PST
From: Richard Johnson <richard@agora.rain.COM>

Sadly, I must call a semi-permanent end to the glorious PBEM.
Put simply, I don't have even five minutes to work on a turn,
and it is a grave disservice to all of you who faithfully
execute your turns and play so well that I can't fulfill my
obligations to the game.

It has been truly fun and outrageous for the past few years
but enough is enough.  (For now, at least.)  In the next message
I'll share some thoughts about this game, for people to think
about lest they be tempted as was I.  :=)
- -- 
Richard Johnson     richard@agora.rain.com
Sue Congress!

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3158
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 91 13:07:05+1100
From: grue@cs.uq.oz.au
Subject: Dosvidanya PBeM

hi,

	An end must come to all good things.

	Thanks Richard, the PBeM game has to be the best trav game I've
been involved in.  Three cheers for Richard for making this all possible.




        						Pauli

Paul Dale               | Internet/CSnet:            grue@cs.uq.oz.au
Dept of Computer Science| Bitnet:       grue%cs.uq.oz.au@uunet.uu.net
Uni of Queensland       | JANET:           grue%cs.uq.oz.au@uk.ac.ukc
Australia, 4072         | EAN:                          grue@cs.uq.oz
                        | UUCP:           uunet!munnari!cs.uq.oz!grue
f4e6g4Qh4++             | JUNET:                     grue@cs.uq.oz.au

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3159
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 91 00:01:53 -0500
From: waylacm2@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Legion)
Subject: Nertz.


I've been too tied up this week to come up with something interesting
for Herr Professor to do, and I was looking forward to meetig the
'phins, and everything...and then this happens. 

I agree with roald, this should be a public thank-you, bless-you, and
general pat-on-the-back to our incredible PBEM GM. It's been a blast,
Richard. I don't think I know anybody who could've pulled this off
with half the style you did. Here's hoping you get the time to use
those talents again soon.

- -
As his hand reached for the -POWER- button, he realized with a start,
"I'll nefer type mit a schtupid Gerrman accsent again...<sniff, sniff>"

*******************************************************************************
*	      Legion		 * "And all this science, I don't understand; *
* waylacm2@expert.cc.purdue.edu  *  It's just my job, five days a week..."    *
*******************************************************************************

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3160
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 91 23:50:33 PST
From: Timothy Soholt <soholt@aludra.usc.edu>
Subject: NeoTraveller thougts and suggestions

Please forward a copy of this to GEnie if you can; I'd like my
comments to be read by someone at least reasonably involved with this
new Traveller revision.

What would I like to see from MegaTraveller in the new Traveller?
   The character generation system, for one thing. One of the things
which creates the flavor of a Traveller game is the semi-controlled
nature of character generation. The Twilight:2000 system is, in my
opinion, too much under the control of the player. I don't think
there's a single Traveller or MegaTraveller player who hasn't got a
story about that character who rose rapidly to the top of his/her/its
service only to be kicked out or nearly killed at the peak of his/her/
its career, or that one level of instruction skill the character
picked up which just happened to save the party's butt when they
discovered that the new crewmember didn't know how to use a vacc suit.
If you take all the die rolls out of the Traveller character
generation system, you take out something of the game's spirit.
   A ship design system. I like the idea of having a system based on
"modular designs" in the basic rules and then a more detailed system
(I'd prefer _very_ detailed) in a rules supplement.
   The combat system. The MegaTraveller combat system is one of the
best I've ever come across, with the exception of the autofire rules
(see below).
   The task system. The Twilight:2000 task system is inferior, in my
opinion, and deserves to be taken out and shot. The MegaTraveller task
system is a study in elegance and ease of use. I had my players
talking and understanding the lingo of tasks inside an hour.
   DGP.
   The rich, detailed background. I personally liked the Rebellion,
but with the background in MegaTraveller you could play either during
_or_ before the Rebellion.

What I'd like to _not_ see from MegaTraveller in the new Traveller:
   The disorganization and the typos. Need I say more?
   The tendency to underexplain rules. There are some parts of the
MegaTraveller rules which are extremely terse, almost cryptic at
times.
   The autofire rules. These appear to have absolutely no basis in
anything like reality.

What I'd like to see in the new Traveller that wasn't in
MegaTraveller:
   A robot design system.
   A weapons design system.
   A supplement with examples of all types of vehicles (sort of a
combination of _101 Vehicles_, _Traders and Gunboats_, and _Fighting
Ships_).
   An index.
   A complete, comprehensive guide to the aliens of the Traveller
universe. Including minor races. There have been so many references to
the Vegans in recent Traveller products, but I've never seen rules on
creating a Vegan character.

There. I'm glad I got that off my chest! Now I hope the X-boat can get
this through before the new game goes to print!

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3161
Subject: Inhibiting The Dread Virus (A Pyrotechnic Exhibition)
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 91 01:16:00 -0800
From: bart@cs.uoregon.edu

In some gated article (message 3148?) zonker@ihlpf.att.COM writes
....
> As for the Computer Virus associated with Star Viking, I have talked to
> Frank and it will not be a computer virus as we currently think of the the
> term.  (Although I will confess that that was his first thought).  Rather
> it will be a program that takes advantage of a rather universal current
> architecture flaw and attacks computers in such a way that main processor
> replacement is required.  There is an assumption that computer production
> is controlled by other computers which are vulnerable to attack.  I also
> felt it was important that the failure be masked initially as a straight
> production problem/flaw to allow the virus to spread.  It is the
> combination of massive loss of main processors along with production 
> shutdown caused by the loss of main processors (I love catch-22s) that
> causes the long night.  Note that since the person initiating the virus is
> the Emperor it could be dispersed by him from several key manufacturing
> facilities as part of a technological innovation given free to
> manufactures or at least something along those lines.

Speaking as a computer scientist of sorts, I can summarize my
thoughts about the above-quoted "explanation" in but five words
- -- dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb!  "It's not a computer virus, just
a sort of program which attacks a common architectural flaw in
a wide variety of CPUs to physically destroy them after a
while..." may be a distinction, but it's certainly a distinction
without a difference.  And all the same arguments given
previously against the Dread Virus, plus some more, apply.  Just
for kicks, let's summarize some of the more persuasive of
these...

(1)  If the DV "isn't a virus", how the heck does it affect
the *existing CPUs* (assuming the Evil Emperor can seed 90% or
more of the existing production facilities, which seems
completely ludicrous to me anyway)???  Are we supposed to
believe that the typical failure rate for CPUs is 80-90%/year?
Face it, it was more plausible when it was a virus.

(2)  If all the computers are destroyed, how the heck are the
Star Viking ships driving around?  You want to jump a starship
under manual control?  Good luck -- you'll sure need it!

(3)  Given that the DV only destroys CPUs, how long do you
really think it would take to regenerate the technology?  I'll
bet me and 5 other carefully selected folks could go from TL6
TTL to TL8 SPARC in less than 5 years, by careful reuse of
non-computerized parts of existing equipment.  With no TL7 or
TL8 technology whatsoever, it would take about 500 people 10
years.  Neither is particularly prohibitive.  With any
reasonable extrapolation, the "Long Night" isn't, very.

(4)  Do you really believe the "common architectural flaw"
argument above?  If so, then answer these:  Do you believe that
all TL7 bridges contain a common easily exploitable
architectural flaw?  Is this more or less likely than that all
TL4 bridges did (HINT: think resonance)?  Is this a fair
analogy?  What other analogies of this sort might one draw
(IDEAS: automobiles, electrical devices, plumbing)?  Do they
lead to similar conclusions (SUGGESTED ANSWER: yes)?

Finally, riddle me this:  GDW is making noises about "listening
to customer input".  I've seen at least 5 distinct messages
approving a suggestion that the Star Viking setting be
explained by simply putting it in another part of the galaxy
from Traveller -- an area with low max TL.  This seems to me to
be reasonable and practical while still allowing the SV
universe adequate latitude for development.  So WHY KEEP PUSHING
THIS VIRUS THING???  Take my word for it that the day this
utterly stupid concept appears on the shelves is the last day I
or anyone I know buys a GDW product.

One of your potential customers for a single-book
beginner-oriented revised Traveller, but *not* for SV, T2K,
T2K+, D&C, or other similar silliness...

					Bart Massey
					bart@cs.uoregon.edu

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3162
From: d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se
Subject: Farv{l och p} }terseende, PBEM!
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 91 11:59:35 MET

  Things are comming down fast, apparently. This bounced when I tried to put it
out through the pbem alias, but here it is:

  Thanks for time we had with the PBEM.

  I suspect that over the years, it will assume a semi-legendary status.
  "Do you remember the big PBEM back in 90-91? Wasn't it better than all this
new crap from Origins?"
  "Yup, much better. They'll never do anything close."

  <Hooray!, Hooray!, Hooray!> <-(The three loud chears for Richard & the PBEM)

- -bertil-
PS: If there is the slightest chance that it might be restarted again, I
    suggest that no files be zapped no psycic disturbances revealed and
    no secrets be blown.
- -- 
"It can be shown that for any nutty theory, beyond-the-fringe political view or
 strange religion there exists a proponent on the Net. The proof is left as an
 exercise for your kill-file."

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3163
From: d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se
Subject: Me and T2k (and additions)
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 91 13:32:57 MET

  Sure enough, I forgot one thing that I think is important in the commercial
environment and that is books. Much of the success of several RPG systems rest
on the books. When they are sold through the normal bookstores they create new
interest and when they are sold in game shops they promote conversion.
  Just as importat is of course that they are good, if the book sucks 99%
of those who read it first and look at the game later will become convinced that
the game sucks too.

  This goes for all the other eight things I listed too and it cannot be said
too often:
  "Do it ONCE and do it RIGHT!"

  On to T2k: When it comes to the combat system I am split in my opinion of it.
I like the 1ed damage system (personal and vehicles) so much that I have used 
it for Traveller. While I havent done it yet, I suspect that 2ed will be harder
to use this way, since the personal armors are much less diverse.
  The hit procedure on the other hand leaves things to be desired. I must 
confess to be the culprit Farstar mentioned that had dared to compare reality 
with game mechanics. What I did was ask a relative who worked for several years
with turning yokels into soldiers which system best represent reality. The one
where the hit chance goes up linearly from 0 to some percentage or the one 
where anyone has some chance to hit an esy target if they find the trigger, 
the first instruction gives a big jump in ability and later instruction gives
small adds to abilities.
  He answered that the second looked more like reality to him. And that was 
one of the reasons I kept the MegaT hit procedure even though I used the T2k
damage system.
  I like the recoil and autofire rules though and would probably use them if 
I'd repeat it today. The autofire rules are by the way IMHO the best I've seen
in any system.

  The one really bad point (but easy to correct, as opposed to the lacking
skill/task system) I can see about T2k in general is that people tend to 
absorbe incredible amounts of damage and keep going. The damage points for all
locations should at least be be halved, since 'juggernautism' rewards gung-ho
munchkinism.

- -bertil-
- -- 
"It can be shown that for any nutty theory, beyond-the-fringe political view or
 strange religion there exists a proponent on the Net. The proof is left as an
 exercise for your kill-file."

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3164
From: d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se
Subject: GEnie Subject: The WISH List (update)
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 91 13:39:18 MET

  It has come to my attention that the Nautical/Aviation manual actually
predates Dark Conspiracy. This is good news since it means that the quality
*has* been going up lately.

- -bertil-
- -- 
"It can be shown that for any nutty theory, beyond-the-fringe political view or
 strange religion there exists a proponent on the Net. The proof is left as an
 exercise for your kill-file."

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3165
From: Simon Anderson <cmf193@cch.coventry.ac.uk>
Subject: Lightsabres
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 91 14:16:40 WET


Thinking about a tech level for lightsabres, what would one be in
Traveller terms ? 

Maybe some sort of plasma/fusion reaction very  tightly  contained  (More
TL17+  magic) ? That would explain it's habit of slicing through anything
it touched, and if the Starwars 'Blasters' use  some  sort  of  projected
magnetic /gravitic  field to fire bolts of plasma, then the field holding
the lightsabre together could possibly deflect them. 

Any Starwars fans out there got an 'official' explanation ?  Anyone  want
to  guess  at  a  tech  level  for  such a thing ? Any Vargr who wouldn't
morgage their starship to get their hands on such a new toy ?

			Simon Anderson

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3166
From: richard@agora.rain.COM (Richard Johnson)
Subject: One More Item for the Wish List
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 91 6:28:49 PST

One more thing I'd like to see in Neo-Traveller:

Bi-weekly news updates on GEnie (Actually TML for me) containing
background material in journalistic format.  That is, the MT
version of CNN available on-line.  Thus, we can see all kinds of
interesting news-style tidbitds about the war(s), emperor(s),
etc. often, quickly, and at an incredibly low publishing cost.
In fact, this material could and should be the kind of stuff that
woudn't necessarily go well in a magazine format.
- -- 
Richard Johnson     richard@agora.rain.com

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3167
Date:     Tue, 26 Nov 91 11:09:40 EST
From: Robert S. Dean  <rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  Revisions, Part 14

OK.  Here's the latest disucssion from Traveller.  Please pay special
attention to Lester Smith's posting which leads off, and to Loren
Wiseman's note that nobobdy has actually _said_ that they wanted to volunteer
to test anything.

Maybe we should start a TML list for anyone who would like to be involved,
including phone numbers and postal addresses.

Rob Dean


************
Topic 26        Wed Aug 09, 1989
M.MIKESH                     at 22:33 EDT
Sub: Publication Development                

 This is a forum for the discussion of new and upcoming Traveller products.
 Participants can offer suggestions and share ideas for projected
 publications, or critique new releases and announce errata.
 ************
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 26
Message 189       Mon Nov 25, 1991
LESTER.SMITH                 at 21:38 EST
 
Greetings, all. 

After several days of watching the discussions going on in this  category's
various topics, I think there are some important things  that need to be said
about our plans for a Traveller revision.  So  without further ado: 

(1) Frankly, we at GDW have let our involvement in the Traveller line  lapse
over the past several years.  Just look at how few new releases  we've had
since the inception of MegaTraveller.  In my opinion, that's  a shame, and
it's high time for us to devote some serious company  resources to the line
again.  Which is exactly what we're doing.  Not  only have we hired Dave
Nilsen--a long-time Traveller player who  sacrificed a house and career to
take the job of Traveller line  manager--but ALL of us are actively involved
in our plans for  Traveller. 

(2) The fact that we're all excited, and that Dave is line manager  because
he's an absolute Traveller fanatic, brings me to an earlier  post about
customers being "cash cows."  No way.  We publish games  because we're gamers.
Yes, we have to make a buck at it, but we don't  sit and plan how to milk
customers.  Rather, we sit and plan products  that we're excited about
playing, and that we think will appeal to  other gamers.  If the products are
good, we'll make a living; if not,  we'll have to change careers.  And believe
me, there are always more  ideas we want to do than we can physically get
done.  There simply  isn't any need to try to milk customers. 

(3) Every game publisher I've ever met cringes at the thought of  revising a
game.  But sometimes it simply has to be done. 

     MECHANICS: Original Traveller was fun, but it's old, and it shows  it. 
MegaTraveller can be fun, too, but frankly, it's entirely too  tough for
neophytes to learn unassisted.  And without new players, the  game is doomed
to die, even if it be a slow death.  
     In contrast, our current house RPG rules, beginning with T2K2  (Twilight:
2000, 2nd ed.) and as adapted for Cads and Dinos and Dark  Conspiracy, are
extremely easy for new players to learn, and they've  been receiving very
complimentary comments.  Believe me, I understand  the appeal of the
MegaTraveller task system--I grew very familiar with  it during my stint as
2300 AD line manager.  And I understand that the  new "house" task system
FEELS different.  But honestly, the new task  system has benefits that the
other does not, especially when expanded  from the current D10 to D20, as is
planned in the new Traveller.  I  won't take the time or space to discuss
those benefits here (as I have  other topics to get to and don't wish to make
this a very long  message) but will in a future posting.  

     BACKGROUND: Another thing that puts new players off is the  incredible
amount of material that's already been published for the  line.  In
particular, the more fully the Imperium's history is  published, the more
daunting it is for a new referee to try to run a  campaign--and the less room
there is for exploration and discovery.   When Traveller first started, every
adventure was a new discovery.  It  is our intent to make that possible again.

     The good news is that we're convinced it is possible to make the  game
more accessible to new players WITHOUT making everything that's  been
published to date just so much paper.  The Star Viking era is the  way.  It
may not be the only way, but it's the one we're most excited  about.  As
characters re-explore what used to be the Imperium, old  knowledge will remain
valuable but not faultless.  The fact that an  old characters may say, "I
remember this planet used to be a theocracy  80 years ago," will be a clue to
its likely present condition, but not  an absolute fact.  In this way, new
characters can look to old ones  for information, but both will be facing
considerable mystery as they  re-explore.

(4) Concerning comments that a virus that selectively kills certain  tech
level computers is a silly idea, you haven't heard how it works  yet!  Without
giving too much away too early, let me at least point  out that the virus is
an idea that was given to us by a professional  computer designer projecting
logical future computer designs.  Please,  give us some credit.  We take
Traveller seriously too. 

(5) The Star Viking: Planetfall game will be an open-and-play set with 
miniatures rules AND figures and terrain.  It is our intent to make it  so
user-friendly that people who buy it at GEN/Con-Origins next year  will be
playing it immediately at the convention. 

(6) By the way, in the coming era, Star Vikings aren't so much reavers  as
explorers and merchants trying to re-expand a galactic  civilization.  

(7) CONCLUSION: I guess what I'm really asking for is for you to trust  us. 
We admit that we've let our enthusiasm for Traveller lapse, but  we're
extremely excited about its future once again.  Watch Challenge  magazine in
the next several months, and I think you'll begin to see  that excitement. 
Come talk to us at conventions, and I guarantee that  our enthusiasm will rub
off on you.  Believe me, it is not our intent  to leave you all in the lurch,
with a ton of useless old material on  your hands.  But neither is it our
intent to let Traveller become  nothing more than an old game that people
recall sometimes with  fondness.  

We have a dream, and it's going to be fun for all concerned.  Details  to
follow in future posts. 

Sincerely, 

     Lester Smith
 ------------
 ************
Topic 29        Mon Nov 18, 1991
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff]         at 00:43 EST
Sub: The WISH List                          

You know that the new Traveller is coming soon to a game store near you - but
is you had your way, what would you want to see in it?
 ************
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 48        Mon Nov 25, 1991
W.LIAW [Mac]                 at 20:17 EST
 
Sub: the virus thing.

 I was the one that posted the virus thing to TML. However, contray to what
Mike believes, it's not "invention of a fan on TML". I was told this by
Lester. Just so you know, I didn't make it up.
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 49        Mon Nov 25, 1991
GDW.SUPPORT [Loren W.]       at 21:18 EST
 
Mac is right, the "virus thing" is real. Don't react until you hear the whole
thing, please.

Rob,
     "Are you sure that we can't interest you in a pool of very interested and
experienced people to playtest/comment before its too late to make changes?"
     Who ever said we weren't interested in such a pool. Rob Prior has offered
to review the vehicle design system, and Dave has decided that is probably a
good idea. Nobody else has volunteered....not in so many  words, anyway. If,
however, you are not willing to look at a game based on the T2K2 mechanics
(and that includes a variant on the task system...yes, T2K2 has a task system -
- - one that inspired that in 2300 and MT), I don't see that you can be much use
to us, as that is one of the few things we have decided upon.
     On the other hand, if you are willing to give us an even break, we'll
listen to what you have to say (we have already...Frank has put your
suggestion about stabilized guns into Sands of War).
     Let me explain one more thing: GEnie is not our only customer feedback.
If we went solely by GEnie, Twilight would not be a very important game in our
line, but as of last week's sales figures, it generates four times MT's 
dollar volume. How do I explain this? I don't...evidently Twilight players
aren't computer-philes, or at least not GEnie-philes.
     Carl,
     Thanks for the TML update. 
                Loren Wiseman
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 51        Mon Nov 25, 1991
S.OLSON4                     at 21:20 EST
 
     As an example of a modularized MT design system, I offer the following.
 It's hardly complete, but should give a feel for a basic system that would be
 completely compatible with the current MT design rules.  The trick here is
we're
 simply pre-calculating most of the important sections and allowing the ref or
 player to pick & choose, mix and match between them.


          Starship/Spacecraft hulls for MegaTraveller
     (Life Support (and Avionics, where applicable) included.)

 Displacement  Volume    Weight    Cost      CP's      Power Required
 100ton 1SL    1305Kl    414.9tons 2.871MCr  373       100Mw


          Manuever Packages for MegaTraveller

            By Hull Displacement (TL13):

 Hull     G's  Volume    Weight    Cost      CP's      Power (included)
 100      1    43Kl      118tons   4.6MCr    598       144Mw (+4Mw)
 100      2    106.5Kl   292tons   11.3MCr   1469      351Mw (+1Mw)


          Jump Packages for MegaTraveller

            By Hull Displacement (TL13):

 Hull     J    Volume    Weight    Cost      CP's      Fuel Required
 100      1    27Kl      54tons    6MCr      780       135Kl
 100      2    30.5Kl    81tons    9MCr      1170      202.5Kl


          Armerment Packages for MegaTraveller

            By Turret (TL13):

 Weapon        Volume    Weight    Cost      CP's      Power (included)
 3*BLaser      97.5Kl    264tons   19.8MCr   2574      756Mw (+6Mw)
 3*Missile     14.5Kl    9tons     2.45MCr   319       3Mw
 3*Sandcaster  14.5      9tons     0.95MCr   124       3Mw

<You get the idea---I deleted most of the long wepaons lists since
this post is already long enough--Rob Dean>

     Sensors & comm are simple enough, they can be left as is.  Gives the
players
 a clear idea of what these systems do (and potential easy upgrades for their
 ship).  Since we've already got a running total of CP's, the computer rules
 (with TL modifications added!!!) can remain as is.  Accommodations mostly
 consume space and add weight, on smaller ships anyway, so their power
 consumption can be covered in the "slop" in the above numbers.
     A potential improvement would be to combine the Hull & Manuever drive
 sections, so you're buying a 100ton 1SL hull with a 2G M-drive and power to
 operate the drive and life support.


               Scott
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 52        Mon Nov 25, 1991
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff]         at 21:23 EST
 
Um, Scott... Are you sure you sent that last message to the right place?

- - Jay
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 53        Mon Nov 25, 1991
S.OLSON4                     at 21:37 EST
 
Yep, Jay, that's where I intended to send it.  An example of the easy ship-
design system that could be included in the base version of Traveller-3.
                    Scott
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 54        Mon Nov 25, 1991
S.OLSON4                     at 21:38 EST
 
Loren,

    I'll review the vehicle design system, any starship design system, and any
weapons design system that should happen to appear for you.  So there.

    Now, on to other stuff.  OK, on this "virus" thing, I'll hold my fire, but
I don't really think it's necessary: Star Vikings really only needs a slight
drop in tech capability to be plausible (remember, we've got lots of
troops/ships running around in a very loose Command/Control environment (the
Rebellion)). The MT task system pre-dates T2 v2, and I think DGP was putting
tasks into some of it's stuff back when T2 v1 appeared, so.....

    There is a relatively easy explanation, in my opinion for the difference
in sales figures: support.  The last GDW MegaTraveller product that I can
remember was KnightFall, which came out over a year ago...


              Scott
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 55        Mon Nov 25, 1991
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff]         at 21:57 EST
 
I believe that ANY T2K product outsells anything DGP has ever printed as well.

- - Jay
 ------------


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3168
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 91 12:10:15 -0800
From: Homer Dired <fusil@milton.u.washington.edu>
Subject: Wish List (sort of)

Whoah! 
All of a sudden the MT `task system' is God's gift to gaming (a 10 on a 1-10
scale?). Come on, give me a break. This system is the think I absolutely hate 
about MT most of all. It won't work for combat --- the 4-point step range
bands are silly at best, and the gradations for stats (based on a reading of
the rules, for an unskilled task average task, a person with learning
disorders (IQ5) has a 72% chance of success, while a genius-level character
has a 83\% chance -- big deal, and it gest worse at higher skill levels).
The time value is okay, but requires an extra roll, takes task difficulty
into account not at all, and isn't even very instinctive. I say scrap the
whole thing. If skills were 1-10, you could say time was 5(base)/SL just
as easily. The task system won't do weapon damage, has no success gradations
(oh... I forgot, the exceptional success rules... how silly of me) worth
mentioning, and simply dresses up overly large modifiers (+4, +8, -4) in
cute little named categories. 

The t2k2 system has stupid rules for exceptional success (why not use the
ones in the first version -- that a 1 is rerolled, with another success 
meaning exceptional, and the same way with a 10), the autofire rules are
suspect (a goat has the same chance to hit as an elite commando with a
machine-gun), damage needs some work (I think a man can punch through 20mm
of armor and do damage), but half skill/double skill are no less instinctive
than the MT tasks. Skills are way too low in t2k2 (but this is not very hard
to fix), but that's not intrinsic to the task system. 

Finally, has anyone tried playing MT ships using the personal combat rules?
Will the new version have one rule set for ships/men/tanks in combat? I sure
hope so, since I simply cannot stand the abstract nature of the current rules.
Why is this so? If the ship rules were simple, then hey, I could understand.
But they're not, and you get wierd results where the task system isn't used
at all (now you have to roll low instead of in every other game part), armor
becomes this weird abstract thing (as do weapons, btw), etc. Why? Why? Why?!?

I for one am glad to see the MT task system go. Save the universe, I say 
(though I too think that the rebellion stinks and would like to assume it never
happened), but kill the system. It adds nothing but confusion and bizarre
abstraction that neither first-time players or experience RPGes from other
systems have any desire to see or learn.

	-H


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3169
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 91 16:31 GMT
From: "J.A.F.O." <BSU646@vaxa.bangor.ac.uk>
Subject: General MT (well sort of......)

                 I have this player......
  Has anyone out there running MegaTraveller (or old trav' for that matter)
ever had a human PC fall for an alien? or an alien for a human? or any of the
myriad possible star-crossed combinations possible in the imperium?
  In the campaign I am running (1121 spinward marches) I have this human (male)
gunner who has fallen in love with the Vargr (female) chief engineer on their 
starship, the alien modules never prepared me for this!!!  What potential IS
there for inter-species 'affaires du coer' ?   For my money human vargr is 
about the most likely due to the moderately compatible mindsets, ok so the
relationship would be a trifle tempestuous! but then that's not unusual for a
human-human combo' is it? Hivers and k'kree are somewhat unlikely as are Aslan
as objects of affection (outcasts maybe..? c.f. the chanur books by C.J Cheryh).
  What do other people think?  I haven't even THOUGHT about if he decides to
get 'heavier'!
  PLEASE don't flame me for moral turpitude ok?!!!? :)  c'mon guys it MUST go
on surely......
				JAFO

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3170
Date: 26 Nov 91 18:16:51 EST
From: Leonard Erickson <70465.203@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Fusion Rockets

Just a note on Scott Kellog's comments in re Fusion Rockets.

With an Isp of 6e5, these aren't going to have *big* drive flames. For
a 200-ton (mass) Scout, at 1g the drive is using 1/3rd *kilo* of fuel
per second! Sure, it'll still burn a hole in the tarmac. So did the
"emergency rockets" in Murray Leinster's Med Ship universe. But if the
main drive is burning a hole only a foot or two across, I'd say that
you just *design* landing pads to have holes there already,. (bigger
than the ones the drive would make anyway)

This *does* make one major change to the way Traveller is currently
played. A fusion exhaust is going to be detectable at rather large
distances. For that matter, "clearing the throat" of the drive will
tend to discourage anybody messing around the aft end of the ship. (to
say nothing of blinding them!)



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

End of TML Bundle
*****************

From jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com Thu Nov 28 09:18:09 1991
Received: from relay.tek.com by engrg.uwo.ca;
	(id AA28233) Thu, 28 Nov 91 09:09:45 EST
Received: by relay.tek.com id <AA26340@relay.tek.com>; Wed, 27 Nov 91 21:01:21 -0800
Received: from wrgate.wr.tek.com by tektronix.TEK.COM (4.1/7.1)
	id AA06564; Wed, 27 Nov 91 21:03:56 PST
Received: by wrgate.wr.tek.com (5.51/7.1)
	id AA05852; Wed, 27 Nov 91 21:00:43 PST
Received: by metolius.WR.TEK.COM (4.1/7.1)
	id AA29667; Wed, 27 Nov 91 21:00:38 PST
Message-Id: <9111280500.AA29667@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>
To: dan@engrg.uwo.ca (Dan Corrin), bfwong@ocf.berkeley.edu (Raven Blackburn),
        anthony@cs.pitt.edu (Michael Anthony Kapolka),
        mcknight@f104.n170.z1.fidonet.org (Chuck McKnight),
        fantasci!traveller@engrg.uwo.ca (Joseph "Jo" E Poplawski),
        jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com (James T. Perkins)
Subject: TML Bundle #262: Msgs 3170-3185
Reply-To: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Precedence: bulk
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 91 21:00:36 PST
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com>
Status: R


TML Bundles come from the archives of the Traveller Mailing List,
maintained by James Perkins, traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com.

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

Date: Wed Nov 27 21:00:33 PST 1991
From: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Subject: TML Bundle #262: Table of Contents

-AMN- --Date--- --Sender--------- --Subject-----------------------------------
3171  27-Nov-91 woodsb@ecn.purdue Two more cents on the revision... << At first
3172  27-Nov-91 d9bertil@dtek.cha Re: (3165) Lightsabres << > From: Simon Ander
3173  27-Nov-91 d9bertil@dtek.cha Re: Message 189,Category 11,Topic 26 << in Me
3174  27-Nov-91 teets@frith.egr.m Long Night << A better explanation for the "L
3175  27-Nov-91 Robert S. Dean    Thanksgiving Break << Since I may be away for
3176  27-Nov-91 Mike.Metlay@ORGAN On the recent GDW posts on GEnie concerning N
3177  27-Nov-91 givler@bermuda.ra Re: (3169) General MT (well sort of......) <<
3178  27-Nov-91 Joe Heck          MegaTrav, TravV3, and playtesting << As I've 
3179  27-Nov-91 James T Perkins   Help this non-TMLer << [This is my second att
3180  27-Nov-91 KELLOGG@ducvax.au Star Crossed Lovers... << JAFO writes about H
3181  27-Nov-91 bonnevil@stolaf.e Rev. -- Rules or Adventure, Misc. << As a Tra
3182  27-Nov-91 KELLOGG@ducvax.au Traveller 3 << Hi guys, Trav III I have NO id
3183  27-Nov-91 Mike.Metlay@ORGAN Interspecies Relations, nudge nudge << JAFO: 
3184  27-Nov-91 Mike.Metlay@ORGAN Solomani and Aslan is in the stores. << I jus
3185  27-Nov-91 salamon@sdbio2.UC Au'voir PBEM << Yes, Yes I understand it may 
3186  27-Nov-91 salamon@sdbio2.UC GDW, Trav-3, playtesting << Hello! I really c

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3171
From: woodsb@ecn.purdue.edu (Brent L. Woods)
Subject: Two more cents on the revision...
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 91 0:36:44 EST


     At first, I figured that I would just sit quietly and watch the
debate on the proposed new Traveller revision rage back and forth.
There didn't seem to be any reason for me to add to it, since I figured
that everything I might want to say would be said by someone else.
Mostly, this is what happened, due in large part to Metlay's comments.
No surprise, since I agree with most of what Metlay says.

     However, there's at least one point that I haven't seen anyone
raise, and a comment that I want to make (maybe two).

     As everyone knows, there has been a great deal of controversy over
the upcoming new version of Traveller.  Like a great many net debates
I've seen (in nearly ten years), there has been a great deal of heat
generated.  Unlike many, there has been a fair amount of light, too.
(On a tangent, I'm sure that GDW and DGP are happy to see that so many
people care so much about the game.)

     I have a question, though:  Do people realize that you don't have
to play by the new rules?  I bought MegaTraveller when it came out, and
have kept up with it (I'm something of a collector; I have a copy of
almost everything published for (Mega)Traveller).  I like MegaTraveller
quite a bit, and *really* enjoy the fine products from DGP, but I've
never played using those rules.  I still use Classic Traveller.  I can
use the MegaTraveller publications as a rich supply of source material,
so I've never seen the need to update.  My players don't seem to mind,
either (I mostly GM).  Whether or not I particularly like the new
edition, I can probably use it, with suitable adaptation.  Unless, of
course, it departs too far from what has gone before.

     A few years ago, I bought a copy of Twilight:  2000 (the first
edition), since I had some friends who wanted to play it.  I was, ah,
unimpressed with it.  Sufficiently underwhelmed that I didn't bother
to get the second edition.  Dark Conspiracy sounds interesting, but I
haven't purchased a copy yet (no excuse for not reading it--my roommate
has a copy).  Personally, I don't like the idea that Traveller is going
to be shoehorned into the Twilight system, but I can probably tolerate
it.  However...

     I have to echo several other people--*definitely* keep the current
task system (though you might want to include a more detailed
explanation with more examples).  Admittedly, I don't have second
edition Twilight:  2000, but what I remember from the first edition
doesn't encourage me.


     If Rob and/or Carl would be kind enough to transfer this to GEnie,
I'd be much obliged.  For that matter, how does one get an account on
GEnie?  I have an information packet from GEnie, but the 800 number in
it (1-800-387-8330) only gets a recording saying that the call can't
be completed as dialed.  Any help would be greatly appreciated.


- --
     Brent Woods

INTERNET:  woodsb@gn.ecn.purdue.edu
USNAIL:  4419 Myrtle Grove Dr.  /  Indianapolis, IN  46236
PHONE:  +1 (317) 895-8690 (voice)


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3172
From: d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se
Subject: Re: (3165) Lightsabres
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 91 10:37:24 MET

> From: Simon Anderson <cmf193@cch.coventry.ac.uk>
> Subject: (3165) Lightsabres
> 
> 
> Thinking about a tech level for lightsabres, what would one be in
> Traveller terms ? 

  If everybody promise not to come with any nasty comments about space opera I
have a thing to reveal:
  There are something superficially similar to a lightsabre in my Traveller
campaign. It is a hollow length of very thin pipe, one inch across and seven
inches long with three buttons and one ring on the outer surface. One button
switches it on and off. When it is on, a black weightless tube extends from
one end of the contraption. The second button causes the whole thing to 
juggle around. A check revealed that this was done by gravitics. The third
has no effect. The final control is the ring: with it, the length of the
tube can be varied from about one foot to four feet. It appear that it
originally could go further than to the four feet position.
  The thing that intrigued the players was that the tube anihilated everything 
it touched, and it immediately found a niche as a tool and weapon.
  
  The real story is that this, of course, was an Artifact done for a very
different purpose than to be a handy tool to cut up walls with namely as a
survery drill. The second button originally locked it in place with regards
to the planetary gravitic field, the third button brought up the drill-core
(both the 'handle' and the 'force field' was hollow, remember?), and the ring
could originally lengthen the field to several kilometers.

  Voila, a gimmic complete with justification.
 
> 			Simon Anderson

- -bertil-
- -- 
"It can be shown that for any nutty theory, beyond-the-fringe political view or
 strange religion there exists a proponent on the Net. The proof is left as an
 exercise for your kill-file."

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3173
From: d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se
Subject: Re: Message 189,Category 11,Topic 26
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 91 11:25:48 MET

in Message 189, LESTER.SMITH wrote:
> But honestly, the new task  system has benefits that the
> other does not, especially when expanded  from the current D10 to D20, as is
> planned in the new Traveller.

  I don't doubt that the T2k system CAN be done into something usable with 
Traveller, if what it lacks today is added. I think however that the current
T2k system isn't good enough to handle a SF-RPG of the semi-hard variety
that Traveller is (Traveller was at least, I hope it still will be).

> We have a dream, and it's going to be fun for all concerned.  Details  to
> follow in future posts. 
 
  "Interesting times" as the Chinese saying goes.

- -bertil-
PS: I volunteer for evaluating the system too, although I live several
    thousand kilometers away from Illinoi and several hudred dollars away 
    from GEnie.
- -- 
"It can be shown that for any nutty theory, beyond-the-fringe political view or
 strange religion there exists a proponent on the Net. The proof is left as an
 exercise for your kill-file."

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3174
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 91 09:56:52 -0500
From: teets@frith.egr.msu.edu
Subject: Long Night


     A better explanation for the "Long Night" would possibly be the sudden
advance of technology discovered from ancient sites and their use by the 
emporor in brutaly conquering the imperium once again followed by the sudden
return of Grandfather with a good deal of wrath.  After all, from all I have
read not much would escape in an attack made by Grandfather.  Perhaps the only
planets to survive semi-intact would be those with low tech levels.  This 
sounds somewhat more plausible.  (Compared to the virus idea.)  Matt Teets.


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3175
Date:     Wed, 27 Nov 91 10:34:12 EST
From: Robert S. Dean  <rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  Thanksgiving Break

Since I may be away for much of the coming weekend, there may be slight 
interruption in the transmission of GEnie discussions.

Rob


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3176
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 91 11:59:20 EST
From: Mike.Metlay@ORGAN.MUSIC.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: On the recent GDW posts on GEnie concerning NeoTraveller

I would like for the following to be sent to GEnie; I am also open to
commentary from the TML.

metlay
 ------------ snip -------------

Lester:

Some comments on your last GEnie letter, if you don't mind....

1. You want more Traveller? Great, so do we. I don't know if what you're
proposing qualifies just yet. 

2. To quote you, loosely: "If the products are good, we make a living; if
the products are bad, we'll change careers." This is bilge, and you know
it. If the products SELL, you'll make a living, and if they DON'T sell, 
you'll change careers. Quality and salability are unrelated except in 
the most nebulous terms, even in the supposedly demanding game industry.
The fact that T2k, a morally reprehensible and utterly ridiculous post-
holocaust scenario, outsells MT by a factor of four is a perfect example
of this. You'll make your living if the new rules set is glitzy, well-
produced, readable, and chock-full of good art. The rules are secondary,
except to the people who read these bulletin boards-- and we seem to be
a sort of 'lunatic fringe' to you guys, so why should our opinions matter?

You claim your company cares about our opinions. So far you have not 
demonstrated this at all. Between the lack of support given MT and the
refusal to budge on the single most important issue raised by the people
whose opinions you crave, the new rules system basis, you have only
shown a willingness to SAY you're listening. 

3. Revisions are worthwhile. What you're planning to do to Traveller
isn't a revision, any more than hitting someone with an axe is surgery.
A jump of eighty years of timeline is a barely tolerable patch to the
previous system's continuity, but I could think of a lot of others that
would work better. This appeal to the younger, less sophisticated gamer
(less intrigue and reading, more killing and mayhem) will probably sell
a fair number of games, but will sour older gamers on what used to be
a very interesting universe. But then, we're just the lunatic fringe, 
and our opinions hardly matter.

4. I'll believe your megavirus idea isn't idiotic when I hear it. You claim
that you have a computer scientist who backs you up on it. Big deal, I can
give you the name and address of an accredited physicist who wants to blow
up the Moon and drop a chunk in the Pacific to turn the Earth into a tropical
paradise. Your audience on the TML, and to a lesser extent on GEnie, are
the cream of the computer science world. If there are holes in your argument,
they'll find them, and FAST.

5. My argument with Star Viking is with the background, not the game. I won't
pass judgement on it until I see it. (See more on this matter below.)

6. Oh, so they're NOT reavers, they're explorers and merchants, eh? Then why
the heck are you calling them Star Vikings? 

7. Now we reach the meat of the matter: you're asking us to trust you.

Yeah, right. Uh-huh. 

Let me explain my position very clearly here, so I won't be misunderstood. 
I have been gaming for sixteen years, and have played Traveller since it 
was invented. I have played and run games and campaigns in at least twenty
different rules systems, from AD&D to Bunnies and Burrows. I am always, 
always, ALWAYS on the lookout for new game systems that do what I want to
do in a game in a better fashion: faster, more playable, more realistic.

When a rules system falls short, I don't just whine, I fix it. Trav Classic
had problems with personal combat and skill use, which I fixed. MT had
problems with the task system and starship combat, which I tried to fix
and (in the ship combat case) failed, going back to the Trav Classic system
which was long in the tooth but still usable. The TDR project was the latest
in a series of attempts to patch MT so it worked as easily as it should have.

I stopped trusting game companies in 1979, when an article I submitted to 
the JTAS for publication was removed from the To Be Published file by a GDW
staffer (I won't say whom here) and LOST. It was a lousy article, actually,
but the incident taught me once and for all that game companies are 
fallible. It remained for the invention of Email, though, for me to open a
dialogue with them and try to get them to listen to my suggestions. Their
record, to date, has been less than stellar, and I DON'T think it's because
my opinions are poorly formed and without popular support.

So, in a nutshell, I DON'T trust you. The proof of the pudding is in the
tasting. And you can bet that I'll be at the head of the line, with a 
BIG motherhumping spoon in my hand....

metlay

- ---------

Loren:

You claim that nobody's actually volunteered to step forward and test the 
new rules. Well, you may well be right. Please allow me to rectify that
right now. I would be a worse-than-useless windbag if I were to rail at you
for what you're trying to accomplish, without offering anything constructive
in return; therefore I hereby volunteer myself and my current Traveller 
party as playtesters for any and all aspects of the new rules. My group
includes people who have published articles and rules supplements for GDW,
TSR, Chaosium and Steve Jackson, and who have a median age of thirty-one
and a median gaming experience of eleven years per capita. We play many
different rules systems, and enjoy them all to some extent or another.

I have a great deal of loyalty to the old Traveller universe, and a modicum
of loyalty to the old rules system (Classic, not MT). BUT any rules system
that is clear, logical, realistic and easy to learn and master will always
win my loyalty, no matter how much I play and love older systems. IF this
new rules system of yours is a substantial improvement over what has gone
before, I give you my word as a scientist and as a gamer that I will loudly
and vociferously support it, and GDW, against all comers. If there are
places in it that are NOT workable, however, I would request as a matter 
of common courtesy that my suggestions be considered, particularly if they
take the form of quantitative suggestions like "Replace such-and-such with
such-and-such, as it makes things flow more smoothly without impairing
realism" rather than flames like "The combat system sucks, throw it out."

I eagerly await your response.

Traveller Est!

metlay

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

Jay:

How much Traveller and MegaTraveller have you played and refereed, if you
don't mind my asking? Just curious.

metlay

- ----------

Here's a question for all the GEnie readers interested in Traveller: are
you intimidated by the presence of GDW and/or DGP on GEnie? If so, please
feel free to post publically and indignantly that you're not, and send
private mail to Rob Dean, who'll forward it to me. One of the more interesting
metatopics on the TML these days is whether or not we benefit or suffer more
from having no direct link to the game companies-- Rob has received private]
mail from at least one GEnie reader who has said, "I agree with you in your
criticisms, but I can't say that on GEnie or GDW won't publish my work."

Comments?

metlay

PS. If I appear to be a thorn in anyone's (or everyone's!) side, please 
understand that I mean no personal offense. But dialogue and exchange
of information must be done between equals, and a situation where the
companies are regarded as somehow "superior" is unacceptable. And you
may as well get used to having me around... it's not nice of me to force
poor Rob to post all my messages and serve as a buffer between me and 
all the GDW-supporting munchkins out there who want to slip me a Dagger
(250 grams, not counted against personal weight penalty) between the 
short ribs, so I'm getting myself a GEnie account. 

See you on the Net, folx. *nasty grin*


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3177
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 91 09:47:36 EDT
From: givler@bermuda.rain.COM (Greg Givler)
Subject: Re: (3169) General MT (well sort of......)

>Date: Tue, 26 Nov 91 16:31 GMT
>From: "J.A.F.O." <BSU646@vaxa.bangor.ac.uk>
>Subject: (3169) General MT (well sort of......)
>
>                 I have this player......
>  Has anyone out there running MegaTraveller (or old trav' for that matter)
>ever had a human PC fall for an alien? or an alien for a human? or any of the
>myriad possible star-crossed combinations possible in the imperium?

Well a few years ago, I ran a Vargr, the one from the Traveller
Adventure, in fact. Anyway one of the Characters, a female human, and
I were getting very close. The GM unfortunately stopped running the
game so I never will know what would have happened.

>  In the campaign I am running (1121 spinward marches) I have this human (male)
>gunner who has fallen in love with the Vargr (female) chief engineer on their 
>starship, the alien modules never prepared me for this!!!  What potential IS
>there for inter-species 'affaires du coer' ?   For my money human vargr is 
>about the most likely due to the moderately compatible mindsets, ok so the
>relationship would be a trifle tempestuous! but then that's not unusual for a
>human-human combo' is it? Hivers and k'kree are somewhat unlikely as are Aslan
>as objects of affection (outcasts maybe..? c.f. the chanur books by C.J Cheryh).

Let them, I think that since there are humans that find bestiality
appealing, then I would assume that Vargr could have the same type of
mind set, so what would be wrong with interacial relations. Sexual
relations would be possible, but you would have to think about it.
Are Vargr women the same as their Terran counter parts, are they only
receptive to sex when they are in heat? Or was this changed by
whoever did the genetic engineering on them. Just realize two things,
one, I would think that it would be impossible to have  children,  as
it is now, although you could change that if you want.  Two,  there 
would  prejudice from both Humans and Vargrs, the same as there are
with interracial relationships here on Terra at the present time..
                                  
>What do other people think? I haven't even THOUGHT about if he decides to  
>get 'heavier'!  
>PLEASE don't flame me for moral turpitude ok?!!!? :) c'mon guys it MUST go 
>on surely...... 
>                                JAFO

Greg

- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greg Givler                        | Q-Link: GregGivler
Analyst - Systems Evaluation Group | CompuServe: Greg Givler 76702,647
Commodore Product Assurance        | GEnie: G.Givler
215-431-9100                       | The NET: givler@cbmvax.commodore.com
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 "By the way, don't eat the figs." - Livia to Tiberius after the death of
                        Augustus - I, Claudius PBS
===============================================================================


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3178
Date:         Wed, 27 Nov 91 11:26:31 CST
From: Joe Heck <CSPECJH@UMCVMB.missouri.edu>
Subject:      MegaTrav, TravV3, and playtesting

As I've showed the information coming off the lists here to my local
group of traveller fanatics, we've come up with some things into the
wish list:

1: We'd like to see the 'Light Behind the Claw' remain stable, with it's
own tensions with the Zhodani, Sword Worlds, etc - more a traveller
'classic' campaign area. We'd like to have a section where this 'Virus'
doesn't interfere with life. We're waiting to see what happens, but
frankly we're also nervous about this Virus Idea.

2: Most of us personally like the very detailed methods of building vehicles,
and weapons (circa striker) and we'd also like to see such things in
supplements, rather than the basic modules. We don't want to wait forever to
do it up though.

3: We'd like to see you keep the task system. Even if the rules change slightly
on how it's used, we really like the MT task system for everyday operations.
We all know Ship Combat was broke to begin with, so we don't even try to apply
it - we just fake it based on a combination of classic traveller, mayday,
and common sense.

4: I would be willing (THIS IS AN OFFER TO PLAYTEST) to playtest the
new traveller version. In Columbia, we have a wide variety of players and I'd
also be willing to do something with Internet on a small scale (not as much
time as Richard had for the great games).
My name: Joseph Heck
   addr: 1316 Paris Rd
         Columbia, MO 65201 (okay - out in nowhere, USA)
  phone: 314-882-2131 CST 8am-5pm


Again, thanks Rob for xfering this stuff into Genie.

And Richard - for the short time I could be involved in the game (only a year)
it was fantastic! Thanks!

Joe Heck   CSPECJH@UMCVMB.MISSOURI.EDU

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3179
Subject: Help this non-TMLer
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 91 09:58:10 PST
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.WR>


[This is my second attempt to re-post this to the TML - I am confounded
by my own submission rejecter software (the article was rejected because
it had text matching the old machine name for the TML address in it and
the TML is now at host "metolius").  I cheated and this time should
work...]

Here's a query from a non-TMLer who will be losing his account (else I
would ask him to join).  Please respond to him at
anaylor@gara.une.oz.au.  Thanks, fellow TMLers.

BTW Edmund, I will send you some information on the TML in general and
how you can get copies of the TML archives.

James

- ------- Forwarded Message

From: Adam Naylor <anaylor@gara.une.oz.au>
Message-Id: <199111271126.AA17771@gara.une.oz.au>
Subject: Floorplans
To: traveller@metolius.WR.TEK.COM
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 91 22:26:27 EST
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.2 PL16]

Er to be its just like christmas cause I just found this archive 

Since you people seem to be what you are, the traveller guru's I have some
questions concerning floorplans .

In the GDW versions they all seem to lack lifesupport, grav plates,
compensators etc . Do these count when creating floorplans . 

All my floor plans seem to never come out at the right figure, and all
look stupid . 

Also would anyone have a copy of the errata material put out by GDW about
megatraveller . Since I live in australia its a bit hard to send self
addressed envelopes overseea . I was wondering if anyone could possibly see
thier way clear to sending me a copy . 

Please 

Thats all I can think of . My account runs out on the 16th of dec and I 
believe this archive goes down on dec 1 . 

Edmund

- ------- End of Forwarded Message

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Traveller Mailing List Administrator	     James T Perkins @ Tektronix, Inc
traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com	     Beaverton, Oregon, USA
    "How many ancients can dance on the head of a pin?" - Scott Kellogg

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3180
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 1991 12:54 CDT
From: KELLOGG@ducvax.auburn.edu
Subject: Star Crossed Lovers...

JAFO writes about Human and Vargr intermarrital problems...

>I have this player...

Well, Don't sweat it.  I had one of those players too.  It was acutally
a lot of fun.  There was the time he went into the Vargr section at
Fredricks of Regina...  Man you should have seen those salesgirls!

The main problem is Vargr charisma.  If the human doesn't have sufficient
charisma the Vargr just won't be interested.  And the conversions of
human characteristics to Vargr charsima is quite low.  Thus I don't think
the Vargr will stay interested for long, if he/she manages to get interested
in the first place.

Actually, I have recieved permission from our glorious TML Admin guy to post
a story I've been writing for a long time now.  (though I haven't touched it
in more than 6 months...)  The first chapter touches on this point.

Ooops come to think of it, I had a few of those players...  There was the
time the guys went into a 'cat house' with an Aslan...

Mr. Scott

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3181
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 91 13:27:21 CST
From: bonnevil@stolaf.edu (Steven Bonneville)
Subject: Rev. -- Rules or Adventure, Misc.

As a Traveller player since second ed. High Guard (1980), I have been
watching the current discussion over the future of the game and the new
"StarViking" supplement being planned, whatever that might be exactly.
What concerns me is that this will just be a repeat of what happened with
the release of MegaTraveller -- a lot of new rule books and very few 
adventures or useful supplements.

GDW, in the past, has done a good job at releasing rules books.  There may
be ways in which people aren't entirely satisfied with them, but they are
available.  What concerns me is that GDW has been less able to release
adventures and information.  They aren't going to keep hooking me with new
rules books, but they might convince me to buy adventures or background
books that fit the rules that I have purchased.

I am concerned that GDW is going to try to help Traveller sales by printing
another set of rules and not new adventures or information for referees.
One nice thing would be a complete atlas of Charted Space, with Library
Data essay boxes.  This would be very helpful for preparing campaigns.
I can imagine that the new rules might be released with a lot of hoopla,
and then are supported to the same minimal amount MegaTraveller has recieved.
The current Rebellion background is rich in possibilites which have not
been exploited.  Why can't it be given a fair chance?

What I don't understand is why StarViking can't work in the Imperium in
the near future.  There are plenty of regions which are already wracked
by raiders:  Corridor, the Zarushagar no-man's-land, Lishun.  The Diaspora
region is cut off from central control.  Old Expanses is ripe for becoming
an anti-Solomani privateering center, resisting the thinly-stretched and
overworked forces of the Occupation.  If the Gushemege sector falls, I
doubt any one faction could hold it or enforce the law there.  The Marches
had enough troubles during the 5FW.  Eventually, the factions may give
up to lick their wounds and warily patrol the boundaries that they have
staked out, leaving large portions of the former Imperium to go their
own way into anarchy.  Then they might hire some of the emergent "StarVikings"
to use as mercenaries in battles against their neighbors, to augment their
fleets...hey, this is starting to sound interesting....

You could have Vargr and human groups competing in Corridor and Lishun, and
in Corridor they could deal with relatively vital factions making attempts
to stop them on the fringes of the sector.  In the no-man's-land, raiders
might be found with equipment salvaged from the hulks of the great Imperial
ships of the line destroyed in the continual conflict, and renegades from
both sides of the war.  In Old Expanses, freedom fighters play a trickier
game, as they don't know what worlds they can trust, worlds try to
surreptitiously supply them or ferry equipment from outisde the Occupied
Region, and Solomani commodores with too few ships and limited resources
attempt to deal with the problem under mounting pressure from Home.  To
liven things up, every so often, somebody makes a move against a neighboring
government, on scales from the interplanetary to the intersector.

Meanwhile, other regions are stable enough that one hardly knows the
Imperium has fallen.  Deneb -- the light behind the claw.  Vland and
Antares -- an uneasy peace.  Delphi and Daibei -- threatened on several
fronts, but hanging on.  Core and Ilelish -- waiting and watching for the
next blow.

I don't think this would require any Computer "Virus" or any major changes
beyond an advancement of a few years.  This could be a game that I might
play.  But it would need to be supported and maintained.  I am not against
a rules revision -- in fact, there are some things that it would be nice to
see changed.  But I am afraid that it might lead to the continued neglect
of Adventures and background supplements, which I would think would sell
better once players are established, as many players of Traveller are.

- --Steve
<bonnevil@stolaf.edu>

"Mega- what?  What does the metric system have to do with a SF-RPG?"



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

Archive-Message-Number: 3182
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 1991 13:35 CDT
From: KELLOGG@ducvax.auburn.edu
Subject: Traveller 3

Hi guys,

Trav III

I have NO idea how Twilight2 works.
>From what I hear, a person with no expertiese has zero
chance of success at anything.  Doesn't sound good to me.

On the positive side, somebody thinks Twilight2 works.  After all,
it is being bought.  How does this help us?  Well, maybe some of the
Twilight, DC, C&D game crowd will learn to play Trav if it is compatible
with the above.  If Trav's audience increases, maybe they will start
making more Trav stuff. I can see the benefits of having a common system.

But on the other hand, I don't like having to subsitute a system in that
is known to have problems where previously those did not exist.  Still,
I can live with it. (I can always come up with my own rules on how to
perform tasks)

Character generation.
On the experience stuff.  It sounds like a character is going to have
to have a high level of skill in order to perform well.  Can anybody tell
me how long it takes (in character generation years) for a character to
learn how to get that level of skill?

I think we need to compare skill level and performance against how long
it takes to learn that skill.

How long would a twilight character have to spend in medical school to
become a doctor?  An average person takes a few years (after college)
in trav (assuming 1 level per year increase) that's 3 years.

An average person can get a private pilot's license in 6 months of hard
work.  How long before a twilight character can take off, communicate,
navigate, land?  (in traveller I assume that a pilot-1 can do all these
things)

Now about combat.  I don't know about you, but I would guess that it
takes a lot less time to learn a skill like rifle-3, than it takes to
learn a skill like medic-3.  (physics-3?!)  I have only fired a fire
arm ONCE.  (can you say zero level?)  The one occasion I did, it was
pretty dark, but I managed to hit the target with the one round from
a 22 target pistol.  (This to my mind does not indicate a 0% chance of
success for 0 level)  (BTW, my dex is in the range of 2!)

Ship Design:
I agree with the people who are saying that there should be a basic set
that anyone can take and run with.  Buy one box which contains sufficient
stuff to play.  Maybe include an intro adventure?  Somthing like the old
Deluxe Traveller set or the Traveller Book.

Ok, In the basic set I think there should be some ship design stuff.
A simplified system that can produce simple ships.  This system doesn't
have to be able to produce battleships, cruisers etc.  just normal
ships that players are more likely to deal with.  The basic set doesn't
require spinal mounts, screens, armor...

There are lots of ways that ship design can be simplified for ships
like these.  You can eliminate rules dealing with armor, spinal mounts
screens, globes, TL-17+ systems and TL-8 and below.  Just concentrate on
the ships the players are likely to meet up with.  The rest can be delt
with in a more advanced suppliment.

The Suppliment can then deal with all those things left out of the basic
set.  It could potentially more detailed than the current MegaTrav
system which tries to balance simplicity with completeness.  If 2 systems
existed, one could get down to designing REAL systems.  I envision the
advanced suppliment dealing with being able to design its own weapons,
and computer systems as I mentioned before.
(I hope, I hope, I hope, nudge, nudge, wink, wink, hint, hint, plead,
beg, cagole!)

Part of the difficulty people have with MegaTrav is the number of choices
being put in front of them.  The basic system could make use of standard
units.  A 'unit' of sensors/commo/avionics (add up the
weight/volume/cost/power of active & passive EMS add in the radios, etc.)

Since military and civilian ships may have different requirements for
sensors and environments, you could have a Mil-grade sensor/commo/avionics
suite, and a civilian-grade sensor/commo/avionics suite.

A percentage of the hull could be set up for environment systems. (add up
the Basic Env/Basic LS/Extended LS/Grav Plates/Inertial Compensators)

I also am hoping that someone will give some thought as to the fuel
consumption of fusion reactors.  The Fission power plant is totally
unrealistic.  I strongly suggest that GDW look at some real nuclear
powered vessels.  For instance the USS Nautilus had a reactor that
had to be refueled every 2 YEARS.  If you use the MegaTrav fuel
consumption it would have burned up 90% of the mass of the ship in
that time.  The N.S. Savannah (world's first nuclear powered merchant ship)
had enough fuel to sail for 2 YEARS on 110 POUNDS of fuel.  (If any
one from GDW via GEnie is interested in this I will look up the exact
figures, but the article was something like 3 days sailing on a teaspoon of
fuel!)

Rob Dean and I chose to use the listed consumption of a nuclear reactor
as the fuel requirement per Year as opposed to per Hour.  If you compare
with the Savannah, that works out pretty close.  But if that is true,
then Fusion plants consume MUCH more fuel than they have any right to.
(Hint:  Fusion is supposed to be more effiecient than Fission!)  And
even when the Anti-matter pods come in at TL-17, Fission is Still more
fuel efficient with the modification.

But I have pointed this out in previous TML messages.

On Star Viking
The Imperium ALREADY has a long night on the history books.  Why do we
need another?  Couldn't Star Viking be set back in the original Long
Night?  If it is set in stone, I strongly suggest you consider the idea
of leaving the Domain as the shining hope of the Imperium.  (applause
to the person who came up with this idea originally!)

Adventures
I can't emphisize this enough.  You can do what ever you want with the
rules.  I can live with just about any garbage set of rules. But it
won't work unless you have some adventures to go with them!  You can
come up with a truely easy and realistic game system and still it won't
work unless you give the refs something to DO with it!

If the rules are set to make the Ref's job easy, the biggest thing that
makes his job easy is an adventure to run!  Managing rules is easy!  The
hard part is finding something to do with them!

Scott S. Kellogg

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3183
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 91 14:32:33 EST
From: Mike.Metlay@ORGAN.MUSIC.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: Interspecies Relations, nudge nudge

JAFO:

Well, it's a big Universe, and there will probably be a whole spectrum
of moral/ethical opinions on it from world to world, from being burned
at the stake for even suggesting it to having it as a religious ritual
of interspecies friendship. My advice is to let them go with what works
for the characters, and not get stuffy or upset about it. The primary
reason I tend to discourage such goings-on is because it usually arises
not out of good roleplaying, but out of a juvenile need on the part of
players to do something "dirty" with their characters. See my earlier
comment on male vs. female gay Traveller characters.

metlay

PS> If anyone wants a repost and amplification of my "Sex in Traveller"
article, I suppose I could redo it. But these days I tend to restrict
such things to fiction posts on alt.sex.bestiality....|->

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3184
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 91 14:36:48 EST
From: Mike.Metlay@ORGAN.MUSIC.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: Solomani and Aslan is in the stores.

I just bought a copy and set a copy aside for Dow at my local gaming
place, so yours should have it too. A full review follows in a few
days, but on first skim it seems to be a very worthwhile successor
to Vilani and Vargr (or Cogs and Dogs, as I prefer to call it), but
with even better artwork and layout.

Now I need to come up with a good nickname for it.....

metlay

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3185
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 91 12:56:19 PST
From: salamon@sdbio2.UCSD.EDU (Andrew Salamon)
Subject: Au'voir PBEM

  Yes, Yes I understand it may not be completely dead, but...

Thanks Richard!  This was easily the most enjoyable campaign I've ever
participated in.

Thanks to all the other players too!  

I hereby volunteer (Ack!) to HELP the next GM (if we manage to dragoon some-
one, that is).  Unofortunately, the rest of my life is on a razor's edge and
I have no idea which way it will fall.  By all rights I shouldn't have this
account anymore, I've just been lucky.

Although I am volunteering, I must warn everyone that my GM'ing skills are
even less than my playing skills.  So you all may decide you don't want my 
help.

Anyway, I should still be around until the end of December.

Andrew "Hiding behind 7-bit ASCII" Salamon     | a.k.a  Bleydion op Rhys
salamon@sdbio2.ucsd.edu     <---Internet       | a.k.a  Jake "Sig Sauer" Hart
Bleyddyn ap Rhys                               | a.k.a  Captain Etienne De Mer
BaR@St-Artemas.Calafia.Caid.SCA                | a.k.a  T'nol of Tiglath Weyr 

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3186
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 91 13:01:22 PST
From: salamon@sdbio2.UCSD.EDU (Andrew Salamon)
Subject: GDW, Trav-3, playtesting

  Hello!
  I really can't comment too much on the ideas flying around about the Trav
revision because, although I have bought some MT stuff, the only chance I've
really had to play was in Richard's PBEM game.
  I am quite willing to do some play-testing though.  My email address is
below, and if anyone at GDW or DGP would like my US mail address and phone
number I will send it out.  

Andrew M. Salamon
salamon@sdbio2.ucsd.edu

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

End of TML Bundle
*****************

From jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com Mon Dec  2 00:32:35 1991
Received: from relay.tek.com by engrg.uwo.ca;
	(id AA02801) Mon, 2 Dec 91 00:32:02 EST
Received: by relay.tek.com id <AA00600@relay.tek.com>; Sun, 1 Dec 91 21:00:45 -0800
Received: from wrgate.wr.tek.com by tektronix.TEK.COM (4.1/7.1)
	id AA01168; Sun, 1 Dec 91 21:03:27 PST
Received: by wrgate.wr.tek.com (5.51/7.1)
	id AA03892; Sun, 1 Dec 91 21:00:22 PST
Received: by metolius.WR.TEK.COM (4.1/7.1)
	id AA03759; Sun, 1 Dec 91 21:00:16 PST
Message-Id: <9112020500.AA03759@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>
To: dan@engrg.uwo.ca (Dan Corrin), bfwong@ocf.berkeley.edu (Raven Blackburn),
        anthony@cs.pitt.edu (Michael Anthony Kapolka),
        mcknight@f104.n170.z1.fidonet.org (Chuck McKnight),
        fantasci!traveller@engrg.uwo.ca (Joseph "Jo" E Poplawski),
        jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com (James T. Perkins)
Subject: TML Bundle #263: Msgs 3186-3194
Reply-To: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Precedence: bulk
Date: Sun, 01 Dec 91 21:00:15 PST
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com>
Status: R


TML Bundles come from the archives of the Traveller Mailing List,
maintained by James Perkins, traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com.

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

Date: Sun Dec  1 21:00:11 PST 1991
From: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Subject: TML Bundle #263: Table of Contents

-AMN- --Date--- --Sender--------- --Subject-----------------------------------
3187  27-Nov-91 Robert S. Dean    GEnie remarks, Part 15 << ************ Topic 
3188  27-Nov-91 TML Administrator TML ADMIN NOTICE: Traveller Revision << BE IT
3189  27-Nov-91 TML Administrator Traveller Revision comments << I will go on r
3190  27-Nov-91 zonker@ihlpf.att. Re:Comments on system changes << > Bart Masey
3191  27-Nov-91 richard@agora.rai "Trust Us" << Lester Smith of GDW says "... t
3192  27-Nov-91 Mark F. Cook      Viruses, Trojan Horses, Logic Bombs, and Worm
3193  28-Nov-91 woodsb@ecn.purdue Re: (3167) Revisions, Part 14 << In TML messa
3194  28-Nov-91 woodsb@ecn.purdue Re: (3184) Solomani and Aslan is in the store
3195  28-Nov-91 Marc Alexandrovic PBEM, MT << Taking a deep breath! OK - follow

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3187
Date:     Wed, 27 Nov 91 16:28:26 EST
From: Robert S. Dean  <rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  GEnie remarks, Part 15

 ************
Topic 29        Mon Nov 18, 1991
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff]         at 00:43 EST
Sub: The WISH List                          

You know that the new Traveller is coming soon to a game store near you - but
is you had your way, what would you want to see in it?
 ************
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 56        Tue Nov 26, 1991
J.KUNDERT [Farstar]          at 00:03 EST
 
The Value of Compatibility with T:2000 and DC supplements:
   I reserve judgement on this, but would comment that I'm not likely to take
advantage of such compatibility.
   If NeoTraveller is seperated _slightly_ from the Imperial universe, this
compatibility allows other types of SF to be run.  With the right "variant"
technology in the craft design system, and a brief bit of explanation, 2300AD
can "live" again within the NeoTraveller rules. Non-Imperial backgrounds need
not get any support from GDW beyond this, but the seeds would be there to
attract players of other games. Layers of Complexity:
   I think _I_ started this train of thought, but I would support it even if I
hadn't.  With basic craft design in the first release, and a "hullplate-by-
hullplate" approach in a later volume, the game keeps both beginners and naval
architects happy, provided the two systems produce compatible (if not
identical) results. Computers-from-scratch:
   I LIKE this idea, but it should probably be at the deepest layer of
complexity (with custom weapons).  It would require some pre-publication work,
however, to ensure that the types in the Basic Book were compatible with such
a system (and made sense without it).
 Farstar
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 57        Tue Nov 26, 1991
J.KUNDERT [Farstar]          at 01:28 EST
 
On checking the new Craft Design system, Loren says:

 "Nobody else has volunteered....not in so many  words, anyway."

 Well, I'll admit that I didn't come right out and say so, but I am more than
slightly interested in checking and testing the new system.
 (Yes, I know you have to write it first. <grinning>)

   In fact, I just posted a message to Topic 4 that could lead (with
cooperation; HINT! HINT!) to better definitions for ship hull configurations. 
The idea is to produce a range of examples for each configuration, then derive
a more rigorous definition of the configuration from those examples.  Go look.
Participate.

 "...the "virus thing" is real. Don't react until you hear the whole thing,
please."

   You mean it isn't some crazed cyborg whose hearing is so sensitive that he
gets headaches from listening to Holocrystals operate, so he travels from
world to world and mesons HoloComputers from orbit?  Awww.
   But seriously, computer infiltration techniques have to keep up with
advances in technology and security, so a virus (even if it isn't 6'5" and
Meson-armed  ;) is at least moderately acceptable.  But, as you say, I'll have
to have the whole story first.
   Anyone remember the hacker from Traveller Adventure?

 Farstar
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 58        Tue Nov 26, 1991
S.SCHWARTZ22 [Duke Steven]   at 18:14 EST
 
  Subject: Traveller state of affairs

All,

I know that I've been silent for a while, but my hard drive decided to play 
52 pickup with my files and I've been repairing the damage all week. Now  for
comments on the matters at hand.

I also echo many, if not all, of the comment made here so far. But I tend  to
agree with Mike when he says that in the end, GDW can and will do what  it
feels is best for itself -- it is after all a business (that didn't come  out
quite right, did it).

As for specifics, I have a few statements. First off, DON'T CHANGE THE  WORLD
BUILDING RULES!!!! This is a personal like of mine, but for the area  of
campaigning, the compact format seems ideal plus leaves options for  detail
ala WBH.

Character generation could be tweaked a little. Decoration rolls and  brownie
points kind of add a bit to a character's background. I also  thought that the
semi-randomness of choosing tables brought into the game  (from real life?)
the reality of having to learn a skill that you may never   use because your
employer said so. Perhaps adding a "add 1 to a skill you  already know at the
cost of two skill rolls" rule is appropriate? Also, Geo  Gelinas had a Tw2000
variant in an old issue of TTT.

Vehicle/Ship/etc construction shouldn't be changed too much so as to avoid  a
3-way Trav->MT->NeoT conversion problem. I like the idea of  computer/robot
brain construction rules.

As for the SIGs, since I had originally wanted to work on Robots & Cyborgs 
for DGP, I'd be happy to be on the appropriate SIG.

Although not a writer, I plan on trying my darnedest to attend the 
conference, if/when it happens. My only problem is that I am in a  wheelchair
and even though I have a van and $$$, I do not drive. If it is  driving
distance from Lansing, MI, perhaps some from the East Coast flying  by could
land in MI and drive from here. Personally, a GEnie conference is  better for
me, but I certainly understand the need for face-to-face talks.

More comments as the situation warrants.


                                             Duke Steven, GOB, SBE
 ------------
 ************
Topic 26        Wed Aug 09, 1989
M.MIKESH                     at 22:33 EDT
Sub: Publication Development                

 This is a forum for the discussion of new and upcoming Traveller products.
 Participants can offer suggestions and share ideas for projected
 publications, or critique new releases and announce errata.
 ************
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 26
Message 191       Tue Nov 26, 1991
GDW.SUPPORT [Loren W.]       at 20:34 EST
 
Jay: SOmehow...I think you may be right. Les showed this to me before he
posted it...I agree with what he said.
       Loren
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 26
Message 192       Tue Nov 26, 1991
ED.EDWARDS                   at 21:13 EST
 
Strange that Dave Nilsen does not have his name in the TRAVELLER hall of fame
(page 2, MEGATRAVELLER IMPERIAL ENCYCLOPEDIA, GDW, 87).
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 26
Message 193       Tue Nov 26, 1991
M.MIKESH                     at 21:24 EST
 
 Sub:  Computer Virus

 Lester -
      I'll go along with the "virus thing".  It sounded like the
 invention of someone without a good grounding in the Traveller milieu.
 I now assume its not an arbitrary notion but the basis for the new
 setting and the way Diaspora gets its 'cyberpunk' flavor.
                                                                   MIKE
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 26
Message 194       Tue Nov 26, 1991
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff]         at 22:48 EST
 
Why, Ed?

- - Jay
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 26
Message 195       Wed Nov 27, 1991
LESTER.SMITH                 at 01:25 EST

Jeez, Mike: Diaspora isn't even out of editorial yet. What makes you say it
has a cyberpunk flavor? 

Desperately building an ark,

 Les.
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 26
Message 196       Wed Nov 27, 1991
M.TURNAGE1                   at 02:55 EST
 
189 Les:

  Les, thank you.  That post has almost turned me around on the revision. 
While I've still got a lot of problems with choice of mechanics, your comments
show that there's been a lot more thought put into to it than it originally
seemed.

  Why do I have this funny feeling that the NT rules are going to be a lot
closer to Twilight _1st ed_ than the second?  A good thing, IMHO.

  The background is now making sense.  And I'm liking it more and more...as
I've mentioned before, I grew up reading H. Beam Piper, and Space Viking's one
of my favorite novels.  I'm still not sure about the virus thing, but I'm
willing to keep an open mind right now (is this one of the Manhatten Projects
the factions were workin on..?)

  The upshot is I'm still not entirely convinced this is a good thing, but
you've got me feeling a lot more postive towards it.

Mark

 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 26
Message 197       Wed Nov 27, 1991
LESTER.SMITH                 at 03:22 EST
 
Thanks for the post, Mark. I can honestly say that the things we have  planned
for Traveller have me really excited, and that that excitement grows almost
daily as some new aspect of the plan emerges. No jive.

As much as possible, I'd like to keep the developing plot changes secret so as
not to rob the thunder of the products they're planned to be  revealed in. If
I, or someone else from GDW gets kind of cagey about a  particular question in
the months to come, it's largely for that reason.

Yours, 

 Les
 ------------


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3188
Subject: TML ADMIN NOTICE: Traveller Revision
From: TML Administrator <traveller-request@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 91 14:32:46 PST


BE IT SO RESOLVED

	JOE HECK, cspecjh@umcvmb.missouri.edu, will be collecting all
	constructive criticism on the Traveller Revision.  He has
	offered to digest it into a cohesive whole to impart to GDW on
	GEnie.

SEND YOUR COMMENTARY TO THE TML

	Where Joe can see it and add it to his list on a daily basis, OR
	to Joe directly, if you'd prefer that your suggestions be known
	only to Joe until he posts the summary.

CUTOFF DATE

	Place your suggestions to the TML before, say, Decemeber 6th.
	This gives Joe a date he knows he can stop waiting on.

BE CONSTRUCTIVE

	Joe should ignore anything damning, inflammatory, or
	contentless.  Make sure you clearly state what you would like
	and a concise reason why.  For instance, say "I would prefer
	that personal combat be modeled along the lines of Striker,
	because it accurately portrays what I encountered in Viet Nam"
	rather than "Don't use MegaTraveller personal combat".

KEEP IT OFF NON-TML DISCUSSION LISTS

	You are doing a disservice if you post Traveller Revision
	commentary to pbemchat instead of the TML.  Only that small
	subset of the TML who are PBEMers can see and respond.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Traveller Mailing List Administrator	     James T Perkins @ Tektronix, Inc
traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com	     Beaverton, Oregon, USA
    "How many ancients can dance on the head of a pin?" - Scott Kellogg

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3189
Subject: Traveller Revision comments
From: TML Administrator <traveller-request@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 91 15:24:56 PST


I will go on record with my personal desires on the "new" Traveller:

Ruleset: I would prefer a single basic rules package, ala the Traveller
Book or the original boxed set, with detailed add-on products.  The
detailed add-ons would include a Vehicles/Starship package (operation,
design, examples), and a World guide (extended generation, world
building and mapping, and imperial large-scale maps and local data).  I
feel this approach allows players to get started with the basic game,
then add details and extensions as desired.

Tasks: I prefer the MegaTraveller task system over all other
success/failure mechanisms I have used in the past, because it is an
easy concept to communicate and resolve situations with.

Personal Combat: I'd like it kept brief, easy to play out,
unpredictable, usually incapacitating and often deadly.  Non-lethal
combat where the goal is incapacitating your opponent is important to
me.  If you haven't guessed, I don't rely on personal combat as a large
part of my Traveller games.

Adventures: A small adventure example in the basic ruleset would be
nice.  I like brewing my own adventures, so adventure support is not
critical to me and I tend to not purchase them.  However, I do enjoy
scanning adventure concepts and "Amber Zone" sorts of small adventures
to give me fresh ideas for plots, gimmicks, twists, and NPCs.

Characters: I prefer MegaTraveller basic character generation, and enjoy
the extended generation provided.  I like the character's unique
situation of being dragged into recieving some skills, but choosing
others.

Starship Construction: In the basic ruleset, I'd like to see
off-the-shelf starship building, ala Classic Traveller Book 2.  I feel
that an in-depth fully-compatible detailed add-on, perhaps A MegaTrav
construction rehash, should be published in a seperate volume.

Starship Combat: I would prefer colorful, imaginative, and fun,
well-suited to small vessel combat, like the Classic book 2 System.  I
would like to see vector movement brought back too.  Large-scale combat
can be left to the extended starship package.

Vehicles: A brief basic common vehicle compendium ala Classic book 2 is
nice.  I think that a scout or merchant ship should have small but
complete deck plans in the basic set.  Detailed piles of extra designs,
etc. should reside in the detailed starship package.

Technology: I'm not fussy about thrusters vs. fusion rockets.  I would
like to see good support for different technological paths; for example,
jump vs. stutterwarp vs. ramscoop, rockets (fusion, fission, chemical,
electric) vs. thrusters vs. light sails, etc.  These fringe concepts
need to be planned for in the basic ruleset, but can be expounded upon
in a detailed starship volume.  I'd be happy for a default technology
(thrusters + jump drive) set of drive packages to be part of the basic
rulebook starship construction set.

Worlds: Leave UPPs and their generation as in MegaTraveller and DGP's
World Builder's Handbook.  This is a finely tuned imaginative system
allowing basic or detailed generation.

Trade and Commerce: I'd like to see an amalgam of Classic and
MegaTraveller ideas, because the Classic system was colorful and had a
high variance in price/volume, and the MT system was comprehensive.

Index: an exhasutive compendium of planned for, plus out-of-print but
applicable Traveller materials, is somethings I'd spend some money on.
Maybe an appendix to the basic rule set, with short paragraphs
(Adventure 1: Kinunir - 1980 (out of print) - short description).

Philosphy: refereeing and play philosophy is welcome in the basic set
(how to be a good referee/player, general plot ideas, etc).

Aliens: a general introduction to the alien races, their homes, and
proper character play is essential to the basic ruleset, as the aliens
and Imperium history set the flavor of Traveller.

Artwork: excellent for visualizing the flavor of the universe, as well
as providing a mental map for concepts and rules organization.

James
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Traveller Mailing List Administrator	     James T Perkins @ Tektronix, Inc
traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com	     Beaverton, Oregon, USA
    "How many ancients can dance on the head of a pin?" - Scott Kellogg

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3190
From: zonker@ihlpf.att.COM
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 91 11:15 CST
Subject: Re:Comments on system changes

> Bart Masey writes bart@cs.uoregon.edu
>Speaking as a computer scientist of sorts
Gee, I was speaking as a real computer scientist.  Sorry to be so
sarcastic, but your article has a attitude problem. I'll grant that
the idea of a virus that could do what was described falls totally in the
realm of science fiction, but being allowed to make any pre-assumptions
you choose how would you make the Traveller universe stop?  Frank thought
that computers were the way to go and I made some suggestions.   If you
don't think it will work then present something better in this forum with
the same effects.  Personally my choice of attack would be the jump
drives, but I don't know the physics to figure out how to do it.

>for kicks, let's summarize some of the more persuasive of
>these...
>(1)  If the DV "isn't a virus", how the heck does it affect
>the *existing CPUs* (assuming the Evil Emperor can seed 90% or
>more of the existing production facilities, which seems
>completely ludicrous to me anyway)???   Are we supposed to
>believe that the typical failure rate for CPUs is 80-90%/year?
>Face it, it was more plausible when it was a virus.
The program is transimitted machine to machine similarly to computer virus.
It is the part of the computer it attacks that is different.  Rather than
atacking memory it destroies the CPU.  There is a big assumption that the
existing viral safeguards could be circumvented which would be no easy
task.  My assuption was that this would be feasable because those programs
were guarding against memory assaults.  Hey this is a big gimme, but then
so is most science fiction.  At any rate, the lag time before the program
takes effect is similar to a virus and is how it gets so widely dispersed.
CPU failure should look very small when the virus is first introduced but
increase exponetially as the virus takes effect.  "Seeding" production
facilities insures their shut down leading to the lack of replacement
CPUs.  All of this spirals with the social collapse causing lack of
transport to provide manufacturing materials and food for the people.

>(2)  If all the computers are destroyed, how the heck are the
>Star Viking ships driving around?  You want to jump a starship
>under manual control?  Good luck -- you'll sure need it!
(3) is the partial answer to (2) i.e. not all technology dies and once the
problem is known protection can be taken and some recovery done.

>(3)  Given that the DV only destroys CPUs, how long do you
>really think it would take to regenerate the technology?  I'll
>bet me and 5 other carefully selected folks could go from TL6
>TTL to TL8 SPARC in less than 5 years, by careful reuse of
>non-computerized parts of existing equipment.  With no TL7 or
>TL8 technology whatsoever, it would take about 500 people 10
>years.  Neither is particularly prohibitive.  With any
>reasonable extrapolation, the "Long Night" isn't, very.
 As for regenerating technology in 5 years maybe, but you would starve to
death in under one.  Also who will pay you for those five years the
government is to busy surviving to care and most business went bankrupt in
the massive economic collapse.  Oh wait this is post recovery: where did
you go to school there's no such thing anymore as a university and how can
you read all those computer stored books without the computer?  Let me
make a wild but current analogy with our society. Let's assume that I run
the CIA (or something) and have found a virus that would turn oil into  
useless but corrosive sludge that would over a period of months destroy
the engines that use it.  I'm crazy, my parents lived next to a tollway
and died of Carbon Monoxide poisioning (at least so I think) so stopping
all engines seems like a pretty good idea.  The virus lives in the tankers
(I seed), it lives in the factories (I seed), it lives in the gas tanks
and the build up will destroy the engine that burns it (not right away but
in a month or so).  How am I doing this I'm sending operatives out with
kits to check for someone doing this to us and doing the test seeds the
oil/gas.  I told my reasearch team to go figure out a way to do this to
Iraq now that we have the virus and they came up with the kit.  Suddenly
tractors don't go farmers can't plant crops and the world starts to
starve.  Yeah they can switch to horses, but a farmer with a horse can
support far fewer people than one  with a tractor.  They know the problem,
they know the solution, but most of the internal cumbustion engines no
longer work.  Worse most of the planting didn't get done.  How do they get
the raw materials to the factory to make the new engines without them?
How do they get decide who gets fed (oh they could get by this year by
depleting seed stocks and breeding stock, but they would certainly starve
next year without seeds to plant or animals to breed)?   How do they get
the food they have to where the people are?
   Frank's assumption is that Traveller societies are pretty close to that
dependent on computers.  The fall is not from TL15 to TL6, but from TL15
to TL0 and then the problem is how far can the survivors come back. Also I
have always interpreted Traveller TLs as being the TL that a planet could
support on its own.  I could go one step further and even say it is what
the planet can support given the support it gets from other worlds.  How
many worlds do you think it takes to support a TL15 world?  I wouldn't
think most TL15 worlds are self-sufficient and if space travel is
interupted they will suffer economically.  For lower TLs it is almost
certain these planets import higher TL stuff to make their life easier and
are vulnerable through these imports.  Want an analogy I remember seeing a
program recently on the Amazon Basin Indians where they live extremely
primitive lives, but the chief still has a motorcycle to get around on and
most villagers now use bicycles.

>(4)  Do you really believe the "common architectural flaw"
>argument above?  If so, then answer these:  Do you believe that
>all TL7 bridges contain a common easily exploitable
>architectural flaw?
They do.  Use of Aluminium superstructures as shown in the Falklands.
We are currently in the process of changing them all back to steel.]

>Is this more or less likely than that all TL4 bridges did (HINT: think
>resonance)? 
They did.  That's why we made TL7 bridges with so much electronic garbage,
TL4 radios are so easy to jam once you know how.

>Is this a fair analogy?
>What other analogies of this sort might one draw
>(IDEAS: automobiles, electrical devices, plumbing)?
Haven't you noticed recalls of new ideas across auto corperations to fix
such flaws e.g. the change to timing belt rather than the timing chain
several years ago caused numerous engine failures which the manufacturers
paid for when they broke.  What about the Hinsdale fire several years ago
Mother's Day and its effect on telephones service for the entire Chicago
area.  Plumbing how about Legionare's disease and its relation to the
new vent system in the convention hotel.  We are vulnerable to disasters
the examples abover were just pulled off the top of my head.

>Do they lead to similar conclusions (SUGGESTED ANSWER: yes)?
Yes, you bet i.e. system normal all f***** up.  Flaws like this exist in
all human societies and most of what we produce.  The ability to exploit
them may well be in the realm of science fiction, but that's part of
Traveller isn't it.  We tend to be dependent on some bit of technology and
if it fails or we streach it too far, our society will fold up and go
away.  For the Mayans this was slash and burn agriculture vs population
pressures. For the Sumarians it was irregation vs salt buildup in fields.
For our current society it may be the internal cumbustion engine/pollution
/progress vs the atmosphere.

>Finally, riddle me this:  GDW is making noises about "listening
>to customer input".  I've seen at least 5 distinct messages
>approving a suggestion that the Star Viking setting be
>explained by simply putting it in another part of the galaxy
>from Traveller -- an area with low max TL.  This seems to me to
>be reasonable and practical while still allowing the SV
>universe adequate latitude for development.  So WHY KEEP PUSHING
>THIS VIRUS THING???
You get the same amount of support either way.  They get much more reuse
by just leaving things where they are.  So the decision is probably based
on keeping R&D costs to a minimum.  What I'm trying to say is the impact
of the reuse of the Traveller universe is the same on you in either case.
For example, even if they put it in another part of the universe then you
won't see anymore updates for MT anyway so you will have to exist with
what you have and if they put in the existing universe then you will have
the same effect by ignoring it.  Where you choose to go with Traveller is
up to you, not up to GDW.  None of my Traveller running was ever done in
the Imperium or even the same universe by my choice and to avoid these
problems with not liking someone elses dicision about the game.  
Personally I agree with some of your statements above, I thought 2300 +
1000 or more years or putting it so far in Travellers future that MT is
unaffected might be an even better way to go.  But if for business 
reasons GDW has decided to drop support of MT then you have to make a
choice about whether or not you will continue your support or MT.  Its not
that bad of a decision either way you pick its just a matter of preference.

				Non Cuniculus Est,
				   Tom Harris

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3191
From: richard@agora.rain.COM (Richard Johnson)
Subject: "Trust Us"
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 91 17:04:17 PST

Lester Smith of GDW says "... trust us..."
Now where have I heard THAT before?  :=)

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3192
From: Mark F. Cook <markc@hpcvss.cv.hp.COM>
Subject: Viruses, Trojan Horses, Logic Bombs, and Worms...
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 91 23:41:35 PST

.... or why the neo-Traveller designers at GDW should be smeared with
bacon drippings and thrown in a weasel pen.

On the GEnie MT BBS, (Catagory 11, Topic 26, Msg. 189) LESTER SMITH
writes:

> (4) Concerning comments that a virus that selectively kills certain  tech
> level computers is a silly idea, you haven't heard how it works yet!

Isn't making a comment like this to a *large* group of computer industry
professionals a bit like telling a doctor, "Look, I know you've had four
years of Med School and I haven't, but just let me explain my diagnosis
and you'll finally see the light."?  Come on, people!!

> Without giving too much away too early, ...

Right.  Let's wait until it's *waaay* too late to change a ridiculous
idea set down in print.

> ...let me at least point out that the virus is an idea that was given to
> us by a professional computer designer projecting logical future computer
> designs.

*One* computer designer?  You're basing this whole [deleted] concept on the
say-so of *ONE* person?  Even when a multitude of folks in the same field
keep telling you how ludicrous it is?  This one guy must spend a *lot*
of his time on the UFO hotline.

> Please, give us some credit.

Give us a reason.

> We take Traveller seriously too.

Uh-huh.  Pull the other one.

WHEW!!  OK, now that I've gotten that out of my system (for the moment),
let's look seriously at why a 'universal virus' is unlikely to work.

Historically, computer viruses (or other forms of invasive, non-productive
computer code) are small, tightly constructed programs, written for a
specific SPU (sytem processor unit) instruction set, introduced into a
computer system through loopholes in the computers security.  Since the
attacking program is SPU specific, it can be arbitrarily small (in total
number of bytes), allowing it to take advantage of a broader variety of
digital transport mechanisms (E-mail, X.25 packets, LAN packets, etc.).
The larger the program, the harder it is to introduce into a system,
and the more likely it is to be detected.

Another characteristic of computer viruses (and I'll use the term 'virus'
from now on to be any generic deliberately destuctive program) is that
they only damage software (date and other programs, including the operating
system).  Very little potential exists for a virus to actually damage
hardware (although a virus designed to take advantage of some specific
disk driver characteristic could cause head crashes by overworking the
read/write heads on the disk).  Therefore, even if the virus completely
destroyed a computers operating system, all it's programs, and all it's
data, the physical computer hardware would still be undamaged, just
waiting for it's storaged devices to be re-formated and re-loaded with
uncorrupted software.  BTW, what little potential currently exists for
malignant software to actually damage hardware will completely disappear
once all moving mechanical parts in a computer are eliminated.  Optical
and holographic digital storage techniques are bringing this state
closer to reality every day.  (Suggesting that software can 'attack'
hardware, is like suggesting that water can attack a hose.  And before
anyone starts making noises about the electrical equivalent of 'extreme
water pressure', I'll mention just two items: surge protectors and fuses.)

If a virus is to be effective on more than one type of processor, it would
have to incorporate multiple 'versions' of itself in it's own instruction
space (the 'body' of the virus), with each version written in a different
SPU instruction set, resulting in some versions being bigger than others.
So, if a virus is capable of attacking N different types of processors,
and the smallest version of itself is size M, then the *minimum* size for
the entire virus program is (M x N) + sizeof(the switching code).  What's
the switching code?  Well, the virus needs some way to determine which
version of itself to use for the attack, doesn't it?  This isn't a
trivial problem, so the 'switching code' portion of the program will
also be fairly large.  Hmmm, this litle tiny virus is starting to assume
the dimensions of a dumptruck awfully fast.

For a virus to attack every computer architecture on good, old TL8 Earth,
it would need to be able to install itself on every different type of
processor architecture currently in use.  Even if we are generous and
assume that one version could attack a whole family of similar processors
(say, all Motorola M680xx processors, or all Intel x86 processors) the
virus would still need *hundreds* of different versions of itself (my
employer, Hewlett-Packard, alone uses almost a dozen different architectures
in it's computers, including Motorola, Intel, HP PA-RISC, and a number
of other proprietary designs).  Multiply that by all the different
CISC, RISC, and other proprietary processor vendors in the world (what
kind of virus would attack a Cray?), and you've got one *HONKING* big
attack program.  And if you think just one planet is a big target, consider
the Imperium.  Worlds from TL6 to TL16, with lots of different computer
designs to go with each TL.  Also, who's to say the processor architectures
on a TL10 world in the Marches look *anything* like the designs on a
different TL10 world rimward of Terra? This virus starting to look less
like a virus and more like a planetary-wide database! :-)  (BTW, I know
there are Imperial worlds with TL's below 6, but they won't have any
sort of computer techology to attack, will they?)

Now, just for the sake of argument, let's and say that some software genius
discovered a way to make a digital 'palimpsest' (look it up), so that the
virus can remain small and still be capable of attacking all known processor
architectures.  Quite a stretch, but let's be generous.  What does this
leave us?  It leaves us millions of computers with totally corrupted (or
erased) software, and *totally* undamaged hardware!  Let's also ignore
the fact that any big entity (MegaCorp, government, or military structure)
is going to have software back-ups going back *decades* at least.  For
example, virtually software R&D facility within Hewlett-Packard maintains
what are call 'PANIC' disks, just in case a system crashes.  If this
happens, you just lug the PANIC disk over the your dead computer, hook
it up, re-boot, and clean up the trashed system disk.  Since the PANIC
disk itself is never written to during this process (just read from),
it doesn't ever get corrupted and can be used over and over again.

So, we've got all this undamaged, but empty computer hardward, with no
safe software to load onto it.  Does civilization fall?  Maybe?  Does
it stay fallen?  Probably for no longer than a year or so, max.  You
see, the concept of computer science won't have died with the operating
systems.  There'll still be a lot of source code around that can be
checked for bugs *before* it's compiled and run.  No compilers, you say?
a decent team of compiler writers could toggle a brand-new compiler
into a computer via the front panel in a month or less.  The first
compiler doesn't have to be very smart or efficient.  Follow-on versions
will be.  An operating system would be necessary before that, but a
simple, dumb OS could be reintroduced into a computer by the same
method and in not much more time.  (Look the concept of a boot-strap
compiler, if you're interested.  These exist for virtually every known
processor architecture in existance, and are small enough to hand check
for bugs, byte by byte, before they are ever even loading onto a system.
Most UN*X SPUs also allow you to run init mode from the ITE.  Since this
is a primitive OS, built right onto the mother board, it is immune to
any sort of software corruption.)

The result is that even if one virus trashed the entire Imperium from
end to end, the worlds hit early on would be back up and running before
the virus even made it to the far end of known space, at jump-6!

.... And *THAT'S* why the whole idea is too bogus to even consider without
laughing.

[ As a total aside, the only virus I can conceive of that would do the
  job GDW *wants* theirs to do, would be a real, *organic* virus that
  has an appetite for doped Gallium-Arsenide (or the TL15 equivalent),
  ala the 'Andromeda Strain'.  Now *that* would not only be nasty, but
  also almost, *almost* believable. ]

If GDW *really* wants to re-introduce the Long Night into the Traveller
universe, would somebody *PLEASE* upload Steve Bonnevilles' TML posting
No. 3181 to GEnie.  *THAT'S* the way to do the job.  Way to go, Steve!!

Later,
        Mark F. Cook

USMail: User Interface Technical Support
        Hewlett-Packard - Interface Technology Operation
        1000 NE Circle Blvd.  Corvallis, OR 97330

INTERNET: markc@hpcvss.cv.hp.com
          markc%hpcvss.cv.hp.com@relay.hp.com

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3193
From: woodsb@ecn.purdue.edu (Brent L. Woods)
Subject: Re: (3167) Revisions, Part 14
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 91 3:39:34 EST


 In TML message 3167, rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil (Robert S. Dean) writes:
 >
 >Please pay special attention...to Loren Wiseman's note that nobobdy
 >has actually _said_ that they wanted to volunteer to test anything.

     You know, that's right (at least, it was when I read this the first
time; several people have volunteered in the interim).  In that case,
let me be the Nth to volunteer to help in any way I can.  Playtesting,
certainly (I can also offer the able help of my roommate, who's been a
gamer since 1972), as well as my professional opinion (though that's not
as important--the TML enjoys an embarassment of riches when it comes to
my profession--I'm a programmer).  At one time, though, I was an
avionics engineer in the employ of the US Navy (guided ordnance, as it
happens), experience that might come in handy...


 >Maybe we should start a TML list for anyone who would like to be involved,
 >including phone numbers and postal addresses.

     That works for me.  My address and phone number (as always) is in
my signature.


     But, enough of this (you'd think that my military experience would
have taught me not to volunteer, but noooo... ;-) ).  I have another
suggestion.

     I've been thinking about this for a while, and I've decided that I
really like the Shattered Imperium as a background.  If the new milieu
is supposed to be 80 years in the future of the current timeline (hmm...
does that make it "Traveller:  The Next Generation?"  Sorry, I digress),
would it be possible to keep up with the events in the Rebellion as
well?  I'm not asking for any new products (though I wouldn't refuse
them ;-) ), just a little event-line detail, ala the Traveller News
Service (another benefit of membership in the Travellers' Aid Society).

     Ideally, this should come from one source, in order to keep things
as consistent as possible.  If the people at GDW and DGP don't want to
do it, perhaps another source could be found (I'm not volunteering--I've
used up my quota for today ;-) ).

     I'd just like to see the current environment retain some life.
Of course, I could just continue to use it in my games, but I'd also
like to think that it hasn't been totally abandoned.


     Another thing I'd like to see is a result that bears enough
resemblance to the previous editions that I can hybridize it without
too much trouble (that's what I did with Classic Traveller and
MegaTraveller--mixed and matched until I had a result I could work
with).  However, that's just my personal desire...  ;-)


- --
     Brent Woods

INTERNET:  woodsb@gn.ecn.purdue.edu
USNAIL:  4419 Myrtle Grove Dr.  /  Indianapolis, IN  46236
PHONE:  +1 (317) 895-8690 (voice)


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3194
From: woodsb@ecn.purdue.edu (Brent L. Woods)
Subject: Re: (3184) Solomani and Aslan is in the stores.
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 91 3:56:52 EST


 In TML message 3184, Mike.Metlay@organ.music.cs.cmu.edu (Mike Metlay)
 writes:
 >
 >I just bought a copy and set a copy aside for Dow at my local gaming
 >place, so yours should have it too. A full review follows in a few
 >days, but on first skim it seems to be a very worthwhile successor
 >to Vilani and Vargr (or Cogs and Dogs, as I prefer to call it), but
 >with even better artwork and layout.

     I was fortunae enough to walk into my favorite gaming store (in
Indianapolis, there are two) on the same day it arrived, so I had my
copy in my hands last Friday.  I've read about half of the Solomani
section so far, and skimmed the Aslan section, and it certainly
stands up to the high standards that I've come to expect from DGP.
Wow, Aslan deck plans...  ;-)

     It does lead to a question, though, in view of the impending
changes in the Traveller universe.  In the introduction, the next
three volumes in the MegaTraveller Alien series are named.

     Will these books be published?  Will DGP divert all its resources
away from MegaTraveller and leave this series hanging?

     Personally, I hope not, since I want to have the entire series.
These books are so good that they're worth buying just to *read*, let
alone use in gaming.  That's just my opinion, of course, but that was
what I felt about the original three-book Traveller set and got me
started on this merry-go-round in the first place.  ;-)

 >Now I need to come up with a good nickname for it.....

     "Lamers and Lions?"  ;-)  Sorry, but I don't much like the
Solomani.  ;-)


- --
     Brent Woods

INTERNET:  woodsb@gn.ecn.purdue.edu
USNAIL:  4419 Myrtle Grove Dr.  /  Indianapolis, IN  46236
PHONE:  +1 (317) 895-8690 (voice)


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3195
From: Marc Alexandrovich Volovic <mav@cs.huji.ac.il>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 91 00:51:36 PST
Subject: PBEM, MT


Taking a deep breath! OK - following a spate of screams, I am willing to 
ASSIST (a-la A. Solomon) with the next run of the PBEM...

I don't know HOW I can assist, but I am willing.


+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Marc A. Volovic                           email: mav@lizardo.huji.ac.il |
| Linguistics Dept                          snail: P.O. Box 23114         |
| Hebrew University                                Jerusalem, 91230       |
| Jerusalem, Israel                                Israel                 |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                       Linguists do it cunningly                         |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+

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

End of TML Bundle
*****************

From jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com Mon Dec  2 00:29:35 1991
Received: from relay.tek.com by engrg.uwo.ca;
	(id AA02790) Mon, 2 Dec 91 00:29:06 EST
Received: by relay.tek.com id <AA00602@relay.tek.com>; Sun, 1 Dec 91 21:00:49 -0800
Received: from wrgate.wr.tek.com by tektronix.TEK.COM (4.1/7.1)
	id AA01171; Sun, 1 Dec 91 21:03:32 PST
Received: by wrgate.wr.tek.com (5.51/7.1)
	id AA03894; Sun, 1 Dec 91 21:00:29 PST
Received: by metolius.WR.TEK.COM (4.1/7.1)
	id AA03773; Sun, 1 Dec 91 21:00:25 PST
Message-Id: <9112020500.AA03773@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>
To: dan@engrg.uwo.ca (Dan Corrin), bfwong@ocf.berkeley.edu (Raven Blackburn),
        anthony@cs.pitt.edu (Michael Anthony Kapolka),
        mcknight@f104.n170.z1.fidonet.org (Chuck McKnight),
        fantasci!traveller@engrg.uwo.ca (Joseph "Jo" E Poplawski),
        jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com (James T. Perkins)
Subject: TML Bundle #264: Msgs 3195-3205
Reply-To: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Precedence: bulk
Date: Sun, 01 Dec 91 21:00:24 PST
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com>
Status: R


TML Bundles come from the archives of the Traveller Mailing List,
maintained by James Perkins, traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com.

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

Date: Sun Dec  1 21:00:21 PST 1991
From: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Subject: TML Bundle #264: Table of Contents

-AMN- --Date--- --Sender--------- --Subject-----------------------------------
3196  28-Nov-91 Dave Johnson      Thoughts on the new Traveller System, << Well
3197  29-Nov-91 d9bertil@dtek.cha Re: Solomani and Aslan... << > From: Mike.Met
3198  29-Nov-91 yngve@softlab.se  Re: 3192: Viruses, Trojan Horses, Logic Bombs
3199  29-Nov-91 Marc Alexandrovic Neo-Traveller, opinions and my 0.02 NIS << Ro
3200  29-Nov-91 kirsch@rhea.infor A Character Generator and some remarks on TRA
3201  28-Nov-91 Adrian Hurt       Traveller revision << Having read lots about 
3202  30-Nov-91 Cynthia_Higginbot SV and the nanomachine from Hell << I've been
3203  30-Nov-91 Mike.Metlay@ORGAN The cover of Solomani and Aslan << The cover 
3204  30-Nov-91 Joe Heck          Traveller News Service << Does anyone happen 
3205  01-Dec-91 CDF1@PSUVM.PSU.ED GEnie, GDW, and TML << I've gotten a couple o
3206  01-Dec-91 KELLOGG@ducvax.au Computer and Semiconductor Technology Problem

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3196
From: Dave Johnson <D.M.Johnson@newcastle.ac.uk>
Subject: Thoughts on the new Traveller System,
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 91 13:18:32 WET

Well having read all the comments so far I thought I would add a few more,

First when MT came out I thought I would have a look at this, yeah I
like the idea of the Rebellion (Images of the Decline of the Roman empire came
to mind) and thought that this would be a good setting to bring some new
players into the realm of Traveller, and to get some bad habits out of other
players I know, now being (as he put it) the top, Top Gun pilot of the navy
demanding instance respect on any planet (he was also a baron), he had to watch
what he say how he acted towards others, in order not to get himself killed, he
was also used to belong to the "lets block that bullet with my body" group. MT
provided the lethal combat that I like (and as it should be) in order to
encourge players to think of interesting and different ways out of trouble.

        But as I read the errors were terrible and started to drive me crazy,
(I have to thank TML for providing me with access to the errata sheet as when I
first purchased MT roleplaying support in my home town was zero). So MT was
used just to provide characters and history, and this worked well. I am not
into designing ships but design planets and when the DGP produced the World
Builders handbook I loved it. Most adventures I did were planet based, with
space Traveller a small but still required part. As more supplements arrived I
purchased them and these all provided me with a better system to run my
adventures, I even purchased COACC, which I liked as a concept and it provided
more ideas, as a whole I liked MT and have put a lot of money it to it. The
task system is good, it what I had been using with the group I played with for
a long time but had never written down.

So if GDW are going to get me to spend money on the new version I would like to
see the following things (some of these have been mentioned by others, I am
just adding my weight to the course. I should just add that I have never played
TW:2000)

     (1) A simple basic rules set, in a boxed set (aka classic Traveller) or a
single book providing enough to sit down and play the game if you are a complete
begineer.  Simple starship construction rules, simple System construction rules
and character charaction should all be in these rules, easy to find and use.

     (2) Supplements for more detailed starships and systems should come later
in order not to swap the starting GM with rule upon rule for just background
details. It is my preference that supplements considering history on background
should contain few or no new rules but a coherent source book for provide
background and ideas for adventures.

     (3) Combat did not feature much in my adventures but what I used of the MT
combat I liked, it might not be the best (or the most realistic) but if you
start trying to get combat to be more like real life, most systems I have seen
fail as the rules expand and get more complex. I like my combat to fast and
deadly, just like a real life firefight. In most cases you don't know what has
happened until its over (Speak from experience in Cadet training corp)

     (4) The GDW should not destory the history of the Imperium, every thing
that has happen in the Imperium should still have happened, and be coherently
linked in with the next timeline. (A jump in time would not effect me greatly
as I am not currently running an andventure, and will not be for sometime to
come).

     (5) If possible the new system should allow a bit of backwards
compatabilty in order to allow me to use the rules I already have, don't change
the star system structure. I like it - IMHO it is the best method I have seen of
designing star systems I have seen in any SFRPG.

I hope this has provided some constructive comments and I will wait and see
what GDW brings out (but I am not holding my breath as I thinking about buying
a car and the insurance rates in Newcastle equal about 16 copies of the basic
MT set for just third party)

yours

Dave J

- --

+-------------------------------------+---------------------------------------+
| David M. Johnson                    | If the radiance of a thousand suns    |
| c/o Electrical and Electronic Eng.  |   were to burst at once in the sky,   |
|     Merz Court                      | That would be like the splendor       |
|     Newcastle University            |   of the Mighty One...                |
|     Newcastle upon Tyne             | I am become Death                     |
|     NE1 7RU                         |   The destroyer of worlds.            |
+-------------------------------------+                                       |
|Janet : D.M.Johnson@uk.ac.newcastle  |                                       |
|ARPA  : D.M.Johnson@newcastle.ac.uk  |                The Mahbharata.        |
|UUCP  : ...ukc!newcastle!D.M.Johnson |                                       |
+-------------------------------------+---------------------------------------+


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3197
From: d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se
Subject: Re: Solomani and Aslan...
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 91 9:20:40 MET

> From: Mike.Metlay@ORGAN.MUSIC.CS.CMU.EDU
> Subject: (3184) Solomani and Aslan is in the stores.
 
   Then you can answer the one question I had about it:
Did they follow the Vi&Va precedend and have both races present on the cover?
If so, did they find a situation for the cover art where an Aslan and a 
Solomani is in the same place and not obscured by the plasma-flashes? :)

- -bertil-
- -- 
"If the Solomani had been Vilani, think about the jumpdrive royalties they
 would have sqeeezed out of the Aslan!"

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3198
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 91 09:14:42 +0100
From: yngve@softlab.se (Yngve Larsson)
Subject: Re: 3192: Viruses, Trojan Horses, Logic Bombs, and Worms...

> ... or why the neo-Traveller designers at GDW should be smeared with
> bacon drippings and thrown in a weasel pen.
>

Mark makes a very correct (if somewhat heated) treatise of why a "computer
virus" never could achieve the aims of GDW. This article reminds me of nothing
else than a physicist fuming about how a fusion gun (as in Trav/MT) could never
work, or how FTL violates relativity! Just as a conveniently disregards their
opinions, I would disregard Mark's.

As a computer scientist, I would be very careful about saying what could and
what could not be done at the TL 15-16-17 region. Going even higher in the TLs,
I just defines this as 'magic', and who knows, maybe the perpetrator (the
Emperor?) has access to some fancy artifacts? Of cause, with 'magic' anything
is possible.

About Neo-Traveller in general:

Actually, I'm thrilled about the revision. I never liked MegaTraveller, and
have never bought a single MegaTraveller product (except Challenge). Frankly,
I hated the box art, and could never get in the mood for the very chaotic
Shattered Imperium. When the errata appeared on TML, I resolved to stay with
my classic set.

But from what I have read here on TML (forwarded from Genie), I think that
GDW is serious this time. But they DO need to do something about their proof-
reading department.


		Yngve

- ------------------------
Yngve Larsson			email yngve@softlab.se
SoftLab ab			phone sweden-13-21 24 70
Teknikringen 14
S-583 30 Sweden

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3199
From: Marc Alexandrovich Volovic <mav@cs.huji.ac.il>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 91 06:29:01 PST
Subject: Neo-Traveller, opinions and my 0.02 NIS

 
 
Rob/Carl can you shift this to GENIE?
 
Hello,
 
        I, too, am one of those '77 crowd. Actually - the '77 Traveller
got to this misbegotten place in '82... But, I got the books, finally and
played. I got the Mega-Traveller late, as usual, but played with that
some, too. Again - I am among the VERY few in Israel who uses non-TSR
rules... This is self-advertisement, please pardon me.
 
        The rule changes... Well - I would like to have a PROOFED vehicle
design system... I am not Rob Dean (i.e. I _AM_ like Rob Dean, but I have
less time) and have disigned only tens of vehicles, not hundreds... But,
in ANY game I have ever purchased, I first ran to the design system. Same
for weapon design.
 
        Combat should be quick and very deadly. I usually take a single
hit as incapacitating... So, I can fudge the rules if I need, but prefer
the rules to be ready made.
 
        World Generation? Well - WBH sounds very good, I have not seen it
yet. But I would like to see it come out at the same time as the major
alien races, atlases and so on.
 
        No galactic super computer virii, please.
 
        And, I hereby solemnly promise that I will NOT BUY Neo-Traveller
if it uses TWILIGHT/2000 SYSTEM.
 
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Marc A. Volovic -                       Procrastinator and do-no-gooder|
| mav@LIZARDO.huji.ac.il     Snail: P.O.B. 23114, 91230 Jerusalem, Israel|
|    A student in Dept. of Linguistics, Hebrew University, Mt. Scopus    |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                       Fencers do it with rapid thrusts                 |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3200
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 1991 16:04:40 EST
From: kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de
Subject: A Character Generator and some remarks on TRAVELLER 3 (?)

Hello folks,

I have uploaded a character generator for MEGATRAVELLER. It uses the Basic
Character Generation System. It is written for IBM PC and compatibles using
Borland Turbo Pascal. It's freeware and you can download it from sunbane
(129.100.100.12).

Some additions to the discussion about MEGATRAVELLER successor:

I like the MT system, but I see two major disadvantages:

1.) Get rid of the 6g max. maneuver drives. I don't like this restriction,
    especially because most of my starship designs have enough energy
    resources to get more acceleration.

2.) Try to create a 3D starmap system. I don't like the simple 2D Hex
    system used now. It is easy, but the average distances between the
    stars are to short.
   
A remark to the layout of the rulebooks:
    It is really hard to find an important point if you search for it.
    I think a register would help to find the rules you need.
    Suggested words:
    Weapons: list, price, availability
    Skills: Admin, Broker...

- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Juergen Kirsch
Institut fuer Informatik, Universitaet Bonn
Germany
kirsch@rhea.informatik.uni-bonn.de

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3201
From: Adrian Hurt <adrian@cs.heriot-watt.ac.uk>
Subject: Traveller revision
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 91 11:05:27 GMT

Having read lots about the new version of Traveller on the TML, I shall
make a few comments as well.

Scrap the MT task system.  As someone pointed out, the only difference
between someone with INT 2 and someone with INT 15 is a DM of +3.  In
reality, the INT 2 person is going to have trouble figuring out how to
use a chair, never mind how to use a computer, while the INT 15 person
will not only write a program but probably redesign the computer.  Or,
using DEX instead of INT, a DEX 2 person will either have the gun the
wrong way round, or drop it before getting a finger near the trigger;
a DEX 15 person will draw the gun, fire a few shots, twirl it a few
times round the finger, and put it back in the holster.  This is what
a DM of +3 means?

Bring back the old tables of weapons, in which each type of weapon had
its own DEX modifiers associated with it.  "He's too clumsy to use a
rifle.  Give him a shotgun."  For melee weapons, substitute STR for DEX.

Space combat: I would favour a variant of the old Book 2 system, with
expanded damage tables.  Something like the High Guard damage tables,
but adjusted so that small ships can do more than shoot pieces off each
other's manoeuvre drives and fuel tanks.  In fact, the way I handled it
was to replace the standard DM of +6 for all non-spinal mount weapons
with a DM of +target USP size code, -weapon USP code, maximum of +6.

Background: forget the virus idea.  I support the suggestion that
someone else made, to the effect that if you want lower technology
and an anarchic galaxy, set the game in the time of the Long Night.
The concept of a computer virus wiping out the whole Imperium just
doesn't work for me.  For a start, as has been said, it would also
wipe out all interstellar travel.  At least, it would until the
Zhodani realised that this was the chance they had been waiting for,
and took over the whole Imperium, probably meeting the Solomani
somewhere in the middle.  Unless someone is going to try to convince
me that the virus also affects their computers, all that happens is
that all Imperial computers are scrapped, and replaced with Zhodani
or Solomani machines.  And that assumes that someone with INT > 7 has
not hit on the idea of buying computers from any other race that can
supply them, and selling them in large quantities to the Imperium.

- -- 
 "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

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3202
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 91 08:44:13 CST
From: Cynthia_Higginbotham%agwbbs@cs.tulane.edu (Cynthia Higginbotham)
Subject: SV and the nanomachine from Hell

        I've been out of touch for a while, and haven't yet had the
time to wade thru the massive file of backlogged TMLs that accumulated over
the last 2 months, so forgive me if my comments don't quite hit the mark.
        It is my understanding that GDW, for whatever reason, wishes to
establish a Traveller milieu that is several TLs lower than the current
Hi-Stellar Imperial levels, a Long Night of sorts.   As a computer
scientist
who has cleaned more than one virus off of infected machines, I gritted
my teeth at the "Computer Virus" notion that has been mentioned, but
instead of dismissing it, my husband and I put our heads together to
come up with a plausible scenario for wrecking Hi-Stellar computers
around Known Space.  If you like it, use it; pass it along to GDW, they
might like it.
 
        This scenario is based on two assumptions:
        1) High Stellar computers have some important material that is not 
used at lower tech levels; perhaps a better superconductor that enables
faster
processing at a greater bandwidth or something.  This material is one of
the
boundaries of Hi-stellar technology; you must have Hi-Stellar technology to
fabricate it.
        2) It is possible to use nano-technology at Hi-stellar TLs, BUT
that
particular technology has been neglected by the Imperium for whatever
reason.  
(Other paths were developed for the likelier applications, as in tailored 
commensual organisms for medical applications, etc.  Use your imagination.)
 
        I have also assumed, based on Lester Smith's and other's comments, 
that whoever developed the "CPU Virus" had vast R&D resources to work with,

and sufficient resources to implement this scenario.
 
        Scenario: A nanomachine is developed with a two-stage program.  
 
        Stage 1 causes it to reproduce itself and spread itself across the 
Imperium and beyond.  The nanomachine is in the size range from bacterium 
to amoeba; it obtains material for reproducing itself by scavenging from 
its environment.  It has a self-limiting feature in its reproductive
program 
such that it will not reproduce when the local population density of
nanobugs 
is over a certain level -- this is to prevent it being prematurely detected
and eliminated on an Imperium-wide basis due to hardware failures from it 
scavenging excessively from the electronics.  The nanobug is attracted to,
and reproduces in electronic equipment and computers using the "hi-stellar
superconductor" (The material mentioned in Assumption #1, above).   Further
details are left to your imagination: the idea is that this nanobug is
spread
with Imperial electronic technology to every piece of electronics
contacting
it, over the next X years.
        State 2 kicks in after some number of years have passed,
predetermined 
by the designer of the nanobug, but long enough to allow the nanobug to
spread
across the Imperium and beyond.  In stage 2, the nanobugs aggressively
attach 
the "Hi-Stellar superconductor" wherever they come in contact with it, and 
breed explosively.  Any given infected computer will be destroyed in
minutes 
to days, depending on the intial level of infection (and I wouldn't bet on
it 
taking days...).  Hi-Stellar electronics cease to exist; the effects of
this 
have been adequately described by other posters.  
        Assumption 2 is necessary for two reasons: (1) nanotechnology has 
never been implied at any level in previous Traveller, MT, etc. material, 
except possibly by the Ancients, and yet it is a technology we (TL8) are 
starting to build the first primitive tools in, and (2) if it were common, 
there would be ways to detect and prevent this sort of thing from happening
in 
the first place.  The scenario depends on this sort of attack being totally

unexpected and unlooked for, which seems plausible given the implied lack
of 
nanotechnology use in the Imperium.
        If you don't want to permanently limit TL expansion to TL 13, tops,

you can assume that (1) there are alternatives to the "Hi-Stellar 
Superconductor" that weren't developed because it was better, cheaper, 
whatever, that could be developed during the Recovery, or you could assume 
that the nanobug itself uses the "Hi-Stellar Superconductor", and, tho 
programmed not to attack other nanobugs, depends on the stuff to duplicate 
itself -- eventually, it will all be locked up in other nanobugs, and the
bugs 
will just sit there until they wear out and "die", thus removing the threat

over time.  It could be a long time - how long does it take for a well 
designed nanomachine to wear out?  Or you can (3) use your imagination and 
come up with your own excuse for reviving Hi-Stellar, if desired.
 
        Credit where credit is due department: this scenario came out of 
trying to figure out how to make a version of Larry Niven's Superconductor 
Plague from Ringworld that could be programmed to start after a delay time
for 
spreading... Steve thought of the nanomachines.
 
                                -- Cynthia & Steve Higginbotham
 

- -- Via DLG Pro v0.985b

agwbbs!cynthia_higginbotham@cs.tulane.edu

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3203
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 91 12:33:36 EST
From: Mike.Metlay@ORGAN.MUSIC.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: The cover of Solomani and Aslan

The cover of Solomani and Aslan is a bit bizarre; it depicts a starport,
probably on Terra. A pair of Aslan are travelling down an escalator, 
studiously ignoring the two SolSec enforcers regarding them suspiciously.

What's REALLY weird is the Droyne and the two Zhodani in the background!
And UNLIKE V&V, there's no "blurb" about the photo on the back over, alas.

metlay

PS. Given the Solomani mindset, how about "Rats and Cats"?

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3204
Date:         Sat, 30 Nov 91 14:59:43 CST
From: Joe Heck <CSPECJH@UMCVMB.missouri.edu>
Subject:      Traveller News Service

Does anyone happen to know of a source for all the background TNS reports
that have been published between DGP and GDW? I have quite a few from the
JTAS, but almost nothing from Challenge, and I'm looking to up my background
of the Rebellion era a bit (no - I never used it in campaigns, I kept all my
players in the 'dead' area between the last frontier war in the Spinward
Marches and the opening "shots" of the Rebellion).

If nothing else, would anyone be willing to copy archives they have and let
me send them a SASE to get a copy?

- --- And finally - yes, they did manage to get the Aslan & Solomani together
without firing shots - they're in a starport and the aslan are distinctly
avoiding eye contact with the Solomani. There's also a droyne in the background
and a couple of other humans dressed akin to the old pictures of Zhodani...

Thanks,
           Joe

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Joe Heck
(314) 882-2131

InterNet: CSPECJH@umcvmb.missouri.edu
BitNet:   CSPECJH@UMCVMB
cc:Mail:  MUCCGW.CSPECJH@SSGATE.MISSOURI.EDU

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3205
From: CDF1@PSUVM.PSU.EDU
Date:    Sun, 1 Dec 91 18:58 EST
Subject: GEnie, GDW, and TML

I've gotten a couple of blasts from a certain person on GEnie about the
TML notes that I put up on GEnie.  You will probably see these surface on
TML in time.  I blasted back but the sequence did raise a certain potential
problem.

I would ask anyone who _wants_ there stuff to be transmitted to GEnie to use
"GENIE" as the first word of the subject.

Due to some time constraints, I have posted based on the subject line without
reading the article ahead of time.  Some of the articles have been a bit
inflammatory but I'm not going to be the one to selectively edit.  Anyway,
I suppose that sometimes there will be those who want to flame GDW but not
necesarily have it passed on to GEnie.  So, by putting GENIE as the first word
in the subject line, I can quickly chop out any non-GENIE article and post it
on GEnie.  No muss no fuss and prevents unwanted posts.

I also asked the offending party on GEnie to direct his comments directly to
the writer not the poster (me).  Don't shoot the messenger.

Thanks.

 *-=Carl=-*  INTERNET - cdf1@psuvm.psu.edu    | Be wary of strong drink.     |
             DELPHI - WULFGAR  GEnie - C.FAGO1| It can make you shoot at tax |
 Carl Fago   State College, PA                | collectors -- and miss!      |


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3206
Date: Sun, 1 Dec 1991 18:08 CDT
From: KELLOGG@ducvax.auburn.edu
Subject: Computer and Semiconductor Technology Problems in Traveller

Hi,

Here are a few ideas/thoughts on Traveller III.  I would greatly appreciate
it if someone would pass this along to GDW via GEnie.

Semiconductors:
A few words about the next generation of semiconductors.  I worked for a
couple years on diamond growth techniques at the Naval Research Lab.

Problems with silicon:  Well, it does not perform very well under high
temperatures.  When the silicon gets too hot your computer will crash.

Now, powerful computers require a LOT of circuitry imprinted into them.
The larger the number of circuits, the more heat generated by them.
When it gets too hot, it will crash.  Some of the more powerful computers
today require extensive cooling (liquid nitrogen) to keep them operating.
The avionics of the F-15 must be cooled by passing the aircraft's fuel
over the circuits!  Silicon based sensors must be placed far from the
aircrafts engine heat in order to function.

So, in order to get a really powerful computer (model 3?  Model 4?) the
semiconductor used must be superior to silicon in regard to its heat
characteristics.

The next projected semiconductor is going to be silicon carbide.  I'll
guess Silcon Carbide is going to be the TL 9 semiconductor.  The have
already begun to get single crystal wafers of Silicon Carbide.

But, an even better semiconductor will be Diamond.  Right now all we can
manage is polycrystalline diamond wafers which are no good for computers,
but give it a few years (decades at the outside) and single crystal
diamond wafers will be available.  (Say at TL 10)

Diamond (doped with boron) is an EXCELLENT semiconductor.  Durable, able
to withstand high temperatures and still keep functioning, radiation hard,
and on some scales of semiconductor quality I have seen is THREE orders of
magnatude superior to silicon.

Ok, so now we have a 'BUG' (virus?  Nanobug?) that attacks CPUs.  Well,
I gather it doesn't destroy software, but somehow physically damages the
CPU of a computer.  Well, let me tell you diamond is pretty hard to damage.
There have been tests conducted with diamond circuits (yes they have been
made already on good old TL8 Earth)  For instance, a transistor circuit
printed onto a diamond.  They put an Acytelene torch on it!  And in the
middle of the flames it still worked very nicely.

This CPU 'BUG' is going to have to damage a circuit like that.

A more likely senerio is that rather than attack the chip of the CPU, this
'BUG' would try to attack the connections of the chip.  They would probably
be more vulnerable than the chip itself, disconnect the chip and you have
destroyed the CPU.

But!  If his 'BUG' attacks the basic wirings of the chip, it will be
attacking all the wirings of the computer system.  That means that all
wiring of all electronic devices is going to be subject to attack.  Thus
it would not only wipe out all computer CPUs but every other electronic
device extent.

No maneuver drives, no jump drives (even if they had a computer capable of
guiding them, they would still be dead), no fusion reactors, no lasers,
no gauss rifles, no plasma guns, no ACRs, not even combat armor and battle
dress with horns on it, nothing left for the good old Star Vikings to play
with.
- -------

Computers in Traveller:
I keep mentioning this, but I really think that a revision of Trav needs
to define what the computers are, and what they can do.  This is why I feel
a computer design system (from the ground up) will help enourmously.  I
have seen people asking the same questions about Traveller computers since
it came out.  So, I'm not the only one who has some confusion on the subject.

A question I have often seen asked is 'What is all the volume taken up by
the computer?'  Some maintain that it is work station volume, but given the
fact that we are now taking control panels and holotanks into account, this
is obviously not true.  After all, a grav speeder is not going to have
room for a work station.  Furthermore, multiple computer installations would
not increase the demand for a computer work station volume.

On the other hand, a TL 11 hand computer Which is equivalent in power to a
model one takes up considerably less volume than a normal model 1 computer
and costs FAR less.  But the TL 8 and TL 15 model 1 computers take up the
same volume.

Computer Power:
Another frequently asked question is 'How powerful is this computer?'
There is no clear answer to this question.  For years, I used the guideline
that the computer listed was the most powerful computer that could be built
at its tech level of introduction.  Thus the most powerful computer at TL 8
(model 2/bis) would have the equivalent computer power of a Cray
supercomputer.  (That sound about right to you folks?)

Now if you look at the model 2/bis, it doesn't do a heck of a lot for you in
combat.  I think having a Cray as part of your gunsight or radar installation
would get you much better results than the old model 2/bis.

On the other hand, lets look at the old Model 1.  It is first introduced at
Tech Level 5 (World War 1 computer?).  At that low tech level, it is 100
times larger and costs 100 times as much as it does at TL 8, but it's there.
Well, the old mechanical computers didn't have a whole lot of power.  I
would bet the scientific calculator I carry in my briefcase could easily
outperform it.

Now, lets look at what a model 1 can do in Traveller.  Well, it can control
a one parsec jump!  (On the other hand, we don't know an awful lot about
interstellar jumps, maybe the math isn't so hard...)  That's not a very
good indicator of it's power.  What else can it do?  Well, according to
GDW's adventure 'Knightfall', the ship's model 1 computer, can TALK!  Hmm!
Well that makes it more powerful than my calculator.  And I never heard of
a computer built during the early part of the century that could talk!
Some of it could be explained by the fact that the ship's computer is
TL 15, and not 5, and advances in programming techniques will certainly
advance by then.  But if a TL 15 model 1 is more powerful than a TL 5
model 1, then why do they give the same performance bonuses?
Wierd, Wierd, Wierd...

Maybe someone else uses a different guideline to come up with an idea of
how powerful these computers are?  If so, please let me know.  Help!
Metlay?  Rob?  Anybody?

You see the ambiguities here?  These are things that needs to be cleared
up for first time gamers trying to understand.  Heck!  I've been playing
Trav for years and I don't know the answers!

Thus, I think a new revision of Traveller really needs to address this.
I think a computer design system would give people a MUCH better idea
of what we are dealing with here.  If nothing else it would define just
what a computer can and can not do.

Thanks,

Scott S. Kellogg
PS.  If volunteers are needed for evaluating the Traveller Revision,
my address:

Scott S. Kellogg
Physics Dept.
Allison Laboratory
Auburn University, AL 36849
Home   (205)-826-7677
Office (205)-844-4674

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

End of TML Bundle
*****************

From jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com Thu Dec  5 00:22:10 1991
Received: from relay.tek.com by engrg.uwo.ca;
	(id AA04629) Thu, 5 Dec 91 00:20:40 EST
Received: by relay.tek.com id <AA00328@relay.tek.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 91 21:00:40 -0800
Received: from wrgate.wr.tek.com by tektronix.TEK.COM (4.1/7.1)
	id AA08176; Wed, 4 Dec 91 21:03:25 PST
Received: by wrgate.wr.tek.com (5.51/7.1)
	id AA03459; Wed, 4 Dec 91 21:00:22 PST
Received: by metolius.WR.TEK.COM (4.1/7.1)
	id AA18502; Wed, 4 Dec 91 21:00:17 PST
Message-Id: <9112050500.AA18502@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>
To: dan@engrg.uwo.ca (Dan Corrin), bfwong@ocf.berkeley.edu (Raven Blackburn),
        anthony@cs.pitt.edu (Michael Anthony Kapolka),
        mcknight@f104.n170.z1.fidonet.org (Chuck McKnight),
        fantasci!traveller@engrg.uwo.ca (Joseph "Jo" E Poplawski),
        jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com (James T. Perkins)
Subject: TML Bundle #265: Msgs 3206-3207
Reply-To: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Precedence: bulk
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 91 21:00:16 PST
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com>
Status: R


TML Bundles come from the archives of the Traveller Mailing List,
maintained by James Perkins, traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com.

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

Date: Wed Dec  4 21:00:11 PST 1991
From: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Subject: TML Bundle #265: Table of Contents

-AMN- --Date--- --Sender--------- --Subject-----------------------------------
3207  01-Dec-91 Robert S. Dean    Part 16, GEnie (long) << ************ Topic 2
3208  01-Dec-91 Eric Edward Moore Revision. << Well, here's my 2 nanocredits wo

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3207
Date:     Sun, 1 Dec 91 20:22:44 EST
From: Robert S. Dean  <rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  Part 16, GEnie (long)

 ************
Topic 26        Wed Aug 09, 1989
M.MIKESH                     at 22:33 EDT
Sub: Publication Development                

 This is a forum for the discussion of new and upcoming Traveller products.
 Participants can offer suggestions and share ideas for projected
 publications, or critique new releases and announce errata.
 ************
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 26
Message 205       Fri Nov 29, 1991
S.OLSON4                     at 15:21 EST
 
Lester,

    RE: bell-curves & modifiers - the fact that a +1 doesn't mean as much to a
high-skill character as it does to a low-skill character is one of the great
ADVANTAGES of the 2d6 vs 1dX system.  Law of diminishing returns, and all
that.  If you're good at something, an improvement of 5% isn't nearly as
noticeable as it is when you're bad at it.
    Auto success is also a concept that should be avoided, if possible: there
are some things that someone who isn't sufficiently skilled simply cannot do.
Luck's great, but there are times when it's not enough.  Somebody with a skill
level of 1 should not be as able to perform Very Difficult tasks as someone
who has a skill level of 4, but under the current proposal that's the way it
would work.
    What types of dice are we talking here?  One of the things that I always
(after encountering D&D) liked about Traveller was that it didn't make you
carry a whole pile of dice around with you.  4 six-siders were usually
sufficient.  Now we're talking d20's, d100's, probably some d6's, etc.

    RE: Virus - This idea is, still, unnecessary and a cause of great
heartburn for those of us who make our livings using computers.  If you were
somehow determined to destroy the computers of the Imperium from the inside
you'd have to start working 100+ years in advance, and you'd have absolutely
no guarantee of even moderate success.  The job's simply too big.  The worst
part of this thing is that it isn't necessary to do the job, and has the nasty
effect of making things look all to much like T2K v1.

    RE: Intimidation - Truth.  If this bunch is intimidated, we'd really be
bad off on our own.  I can see how someone with a project on the bubble,
though, might be a little bit circumspect.


Mark,

    RE: Stat ranges - Actually, for certain races, stats went as high as 20
(Virushi Str & Dex).


Kevin,

    RE: Task level names - Good point.  Average can easily be misconstrued,
and probably shouldn't be used here.


 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 26
Message 206       Sat Nov 30, 1991
M.MIKESH                     at 13:39 EST
 
 Les -
      <In T2K and D-Con, things never really get better, I suppose. Or
 more accurately, the PCs can make things better, but they can never
 really FIX the way the world is. In Traveller, on the other hand, the
 Star Viking era is just one part of the overall history.>
      But there's no real difference here.  In T2K, things also get
 better, at least by 2300. I think of Neo-Traveller as 'dark future' in
 that its set in a future setting where the history is pretty bad for
 at least the span of a typical adventuring career.
      <We have already sketched out a time line reaching beyond that
 era and into the future--a time line that will keep us extremely busy
 with adventures, sourcebooks, and novels>
      A word of caution: In talking with Traveller players, a lot were
 excited by the Rebellion and the glorious conflict among Lucan,
 Dulinor, Margaret, and so on.  They were disappointed to realize that
 the activities of their characters had no influence on the outcome.  A
 lot of this probably stems from REBELLION SOURCEBOOK.
      I'm not sure if gamers really want a dynamic setting, dynamic in
 that major events are controlled by the game company, changing the
 background under them whether they like it or not.  Under classic
 Traveller, things weren't that way.  Sure, the Fifth Frontier War came
 rolling in.  But it rolled by out again leaving things largely
 unchanged.  It was actually useful in that the ref could tie a lot of
 things he invents to the recent war, and do so at his leasure.
      So, I think this would be a good thing -- a largely static
 setting beset upon by temporary conditions that could have a large or
 small effect on a campaign depending on the referee.
      Parallelling the AD&D product line might not be a bad idea.
 Novels could involve these 'temporary conditions', giving color to
 worlds and subsectors.  Adventures and subsector sourcebooks could
 then provide game related details to what the novels covered, and fill
 in other things for parallel adventuring.
                                                                   MIKE
 ------------
 ************
Topic 29        Mon Nov 18, 1991
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff]         at 00:43 EST
Sub: The WISH List                          

You know that the new Traveller is coming soon to a game store near you - but
is you had your way, what would you want to see in it?
 ************
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 72        Fri Nov 29, 1991
K.BRENNAN2 [Kevin]           at 12:25 EST
 
Regarding the virus:

  All else aside, it's not that unreasonable for such a thing to be  CAPABLE
of affecting most computers within the Imperium. Remember,  Challenge #54
mentions standardized IDP's for weapons, etc., so I'd  expect that computer
architecture is also standardized. 
  Now, if it affected ALIEN computers I'd think it was stupid...
  (Note that this does not mean that I approve, just that varying 
architecture is not likely to be a problem within the Imperium.)
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 73        Fri Nov 29, 1991
B.BORICH [Kagekiha]          at 15:20 EST
 
    <Bertil> Glad you got my late return letter and glad to hear from you.
Right now I'm hoping that GEnie adds an Internet Email link if things work out
okay.

    <Couple this with the fact that new system characters tend to consolidate
their skill points, rather than dispersing them quite as much> Yes, but some
of us like that wide dispersal of skills.

      <3) Having generated several T2K2 and DC characters, I question the
likelihood of them having many skills at level 8. Look at  Dara Schwartz in
DC, or both sample characters in T2K2. I see a  lot of 2's, 3's and 4's, but
not many 8's. (OK, ONE 7). The other sample character in DC has a few high
skill levels, but is a  total klutz outside of Empathy related skills. Are you
sure that  we won't get a universe of bumbling fools, especially now that 
sucess chances have been reduced still further?> Having created one of those
characters I somewhat agree, though perhaps if I had just concentrated on 2 or
three areas I would have been better off :)  (If I were GMing DC my first
official rule change would be doubling the skill points given per term)
    James King I believe had a review of DC in which he stated something about
GDW's 50-year old characters (to paraphrase very loosely).
    Of course that one of the reasons, I like going over to DC/T2K character
generation (it's easier to increase the skill points).
    <Due to Les' recent comments, I have to say that my opinions of the
revision are radically changing.  A lot of my fears have been have been
soothed and I'm actually feeling that this will be something positive and
worth waiting for, instead of an inevitable to be dreaded and lived with.> It
sounds good, but does it look good? Still waiting to see.............


DEFINITION:
    Computer Design Scientist: A person who specializes in the ART of
designing computers.


 <As for the Computer Virus associated with Star Viking, I have talked to
 Frank and it will not be a computer virus as we currently think of the the
 term.  (Although I will confess that that was his first thought).  Rather
 it will be a program that takes advantage of a rather universal current
 architecture flaw and attacks computers in such a way that main processor
 replacement is required.  There is an assumption that computer production
 is controlled by other computers which are vulnerable to attack.  I also
 felt it was important that the failure be masked initially as a straight
 production problem/flaw to allow the virus to spread.  It is the
 combination of massive loss of main processors along with production 
 shutdown caused by the loss of main processors (I love catch-22s) that
 causes the long night.  Note that since the person initiating the virus is
 the Emperor it could be dispersed by him from several key manufacturing
 facilities as part of a technological innovation given free to
 manufactures or at least something along those lines.> I presume a better
concept has since come to mind? This idea really bites the big one.

<The program is transmitted machine to machine similarly to computer virus.
 It is the part of the computer it attacks that is different.  Rather than
 atacking memory it destroys the CPU.  There is a big assumption that the
 existing viral safeguards could be circumvented which would be no easy
 task.  My assumption was that this would be feasable because those programs
 were guarding against memory assaults.  Hey this is a big gimme, but then
 so is most science fiction.  At any rate, the lag time before the program
 takes effect is similar to a virus and is how it gets so widely dispersed.
 CPU failure should look very small when the virus is first introduced but
 increase exponetially as the virus takes effect.  "Seeding" production
 facilities insures their shut down leading to the lack of replacement
 CPUs.  All of this spirals with the social collapse causing lack of
 transport to provide manufacturing materials and food for the people.>
    Oh goody goody, I'm supposed to take my TL8 floppy disk and stick it in a
TL5 computer, and of course I'm somehow supposed to also transfer this
material to a F-16 fighter at the same time. Please give me a break. And I
could have bleeploads of fun toggling this virus into my Altair or IMSAI 8080.

< Let's assume that I run
 the CIA (or something) and have found a virus that would turn oil into  
 useless but corrosive sludge that would over a period of months destroy
 the engines that use it.  I'm crazy, my parents lived next to a tollway
 and died of Carbon Monoxide poisioning (at least so I think) so stopping
 all engines seems like a pretty good idea.  The virus lives in the tankers
 (I seed), it lives in the factories (I seed), it lives in the gas tanks
 and the build up will destroy the engine that burns it (not right away but
 in a month or so).  How am I doing this I'm sending operatives out with
 kits to check for someone doing this to us and doing the test seeds the
 oil/gas.  I told my reasearch team to go figure out a way to do this to
 Iraq now that we have the virus and they came up with the kit.  Suddenly
 tractors don't go farmers can't plant crops and the world starts to
 starve.  Yeah they can switch to horses, but a farmer with a horse can
 support far fewer people than one  with a tractor.  They know the problem,
 they know the solution, but most of the internal cumbustion engines no
 longer work.  Worse most of the planting didn't get done.  How do they get
 the raw materials to the factory to make the new engines without them?
 How do they get decide who gets fed (oh they could get by this year by
 depleting seed stocks and breeding stock, but they would certainly starve
 next year without seeds to plant or animals to breed)?   How do they get
 the food they have to where the people are?>
    Guess I'll have to use those local LPG vehicles for one.....but than
admittedly gasoline has a bit less variety than CPUs. Admittedly, it would
probably be a tough couple of years as engines are rebuilt to use other fuel
sources. And if you want you could always use ethanol in the meantime also
(with associated problems).

    <Frank's assumption is that Traveller societies are pretty close to that
 dependent on computers.  The fall is not from TL15 to TL6, but from TL15
 to TL0 and then the problem is how far can the survivors come back. Also I
 have always interpreted Traveller TLs as being the TL that a planet could
 support on its own.  I could go one step further and even say it is what
 the planet can support given the support it gets from other worlds.  How
 many worlds do you think it takes to support a TL15 world?  I wouldn't
 think most TL15 worlds are self-sufficient and if space travel is
 interupted they will suffer economically.  For lower TLs it is almost
 certain these planets import higher TL stuff to make their life easier and
 are vulnerable through these imports.  Want an analogy I remember seeing a
 program recently on the Amazon Basin Indians where they live extremely
 primitive lives, but the chief still has a motorcycle to get around on and
 most villagers now use bicycles.>  This is interesting as ALL PREVIOUS
PRESUMPTIONS I've seen indicate the reverse of that. And while Amazon  Indians
might use a motorcycle or bike, they don't necessarily die if they lose it. 
And not all worlds are TL15 either. If this level of trade is correct, the
Rebellion should have f__ked up trade so severely, that your virus would have
definite troubles traveling anywhere, let alone between factions. After all,
all the starport capacity went into constructing warships basically, and all
those merchant ships out there are limping along on old parts, those that
don't get shot-up anyway. Gee Whiz, guess I might been right about trade being
important, but even I never thought it was that important.

<[ As a total aside, the only virus I can conceive of that would do the
   job GDW *wants* theirs to do, would be a real, *organic* virus that
   has an appetite for doped Gallium-Arsenide (or the TL15 equivalent),
   ala the 'Andromeda Strain'.  Now *that* would not only be nasty, but
   also almost, *almost* believable. ]> I was hoping you were using something
like this at least (those favorite little critters of Mike's), though this
still has the problems of what materials to eat.

<All else aside, it's not that unreasonable for such a thing to be  CAPABLE of
affecting most computers within the Imperium. Remember,  Challenge #54
mentions standardized IDP's for weapons, etc., so I'd  expect that computer
architecture is also standardized. 
  Now, if it affected ALIEN computers I'd think it was stupid...
  (Note that this does not mean that I approve, just that varying 
architecture is not likely to be a problem within the Imperium.)> Actually,
running a more homogenous type universe than most Traveller GM's, even I never
assumed this except in the different computers used aboard STARships, even
than I'd have severe doubts thinking on it some more (while we don't have the
Mark XII standard processor we do have one that is configured to communicate
like one with your other processors, or lets watch a 680xx imitate an 80xxx
processor via code).

    Having played/worked on more variaties of computers in my first 7 years of
dealing with said (including a two year hiatus from the beasts), than most
have in 25 years (not my opinion). I have yet to find an easy way to transfer
information between the suckers. Plus I'm still waiting for that paperless
office (all I've seen is more ways of generating paper). Anyway, I'm wondering
what all those practice hacker runs and maintenance cycles are for (yes, there
are companies out there that hire companies to break into their computers, and
some companies even run weekly and monthly maintenance checks on their
equipment).

    And no this is not a very good rebuttal, but than computer design is not
my specialty, I just try to keep up with all their different arguments of what
design is best. I guess once they make this a science we won't have to worry
about that problem, will we?

    I actually too pissed to bother forming good rebuttals.

    Signed,
         Computer Artist (and don't tell me Programming is a science, only
some of the tools are).


P.S. IF YOU REALLY WANT A VIRUS, USE NANNIES. Of course the problem with this
is the years to cross the Imperium P.P.S. The other problem you have with the
virus is also the time it takes to cross the Imperium, and granted Emperors
are not necessarily intelligent, but why would his subordinates allow him to
sabotage their own computers (well, granted humans are dumb at times)?
P.P.P.S. Didn't someone say something about secrets not being secret once two
people knew about it (let alone more than 2). Let me see, the message goes
something like this to let's say only 200 worlds "Dear Admiral (or those
concerned), we want you to have all computer CPU manufacturing companies to
install defects in their structures so that we can destroy them."

P.P.P.P.S. Please feel free to ignore my comments, I can always feel free to
have the Rebellion be the cause of the Dark Night, or remember KISS (or
perhaps even Occam's Razor).

P.P.P.P.P.S.   And of course, what are all those other alien races gonna be
doing in the meantime (okay guys, the Imperium's fallen, now remember, we
can't open hostilities with them till they pick themselves back up again). I
presume you have something going on here too. I just hope it's more
intelligent than the proposed virus (not that viruses are intelligent you
understand, at least not under normal circumstances).
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 74        Fri Nov 29, 1991
S.OLSON4                     at 15:49 EST
 
Kevin,

    RE: Virus & Standardized computers - The IN and Imperial bureaucracies
_MAY_ have semi-standardized systems (though not likely, look at the mess in
the US armed forces and agencies), and the big megacorps _MIGHT_, nobody else
will.  Why?  Because trade simply isn't that important in the Imperium, and
because each local world that has the population needed to produce these
beasts will do so themselves.  And when they do that, they'll introduce
various changes to any standard design (to take into account any special
circumstances) and pretty soon they have their own system.  After all, if they
were all producing the identical computer, then you'd a) have no competition,
and b) have to pay license fees to somebody for the use of their design.  And
if it's old enough to be unlicensed, then it's probably not worth the bother
of producing.
    Trade in the Imperium has ALWAYS, from day 1, been said to be primarily
luxuries.  Yes, Ag worlds export agricultural products and In worlds export
finished (or partially finished) goods, but most worlds (excepting the low-pop
worlds) can survive just fine without imports.  They might have some rich
people's toys break down, and life might not be as pleasant as before, but it
certainly won't collapse.  I mean, look at the Long Night!  The collapse of
the Rule of Man didn't result in everyone suddenly going back to square one
and starting over.  Things just slowly crumbled, and the various planets
slowly lost contact.  Read Piper's _The Cosmic Computer_ and _Space Viking_
for a very good explanation of what happens.
    Even if you use the "eater" concept of a virus, most of the big-ship
computers that you really want to get are going to be at least partially
optical.  Now, this is a problem, because now you need something that eats
glass.  It's doable, but it will leave the normal computers alone.  And just
how are you getting all of these things into position?  And what about those
Hiver computers the IN's been buying.......


                   Scott

P.S.  This isn't to say that Star Vikings doesn't interest me, because it
does.  All I'm saying is come up with a better way to explain it.  Anyway, the
way's already sitting there looking at you: the Rebellion.
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 75        Sat Nov 30, 1991
M.MIKESH                     at 13:40 EST
 
      Wooh.  Its really hard to digest all this.

      Bertil Jonell: "My personal suggestion would be to let people who
 know as little as possible about the game do the proofreading and
 playtesting."
      I really like this idea.  Joe Fugate has mentioned on occasion
 that Traveller writers tend to write from the perspective of familiar-
 ity.  While I agree there's no point in trying to draw in entry level
 players, Traveller needs to attract established players from other
 game systems.
      Bertil's suggestion sounds like a great idea to catch slip-ups.
 To this end, I'd like to offer the Washington Metropolitan Area
 Gaming Society (WMAGS).  They sponsored the lion's share of RP
 tournaments at Origins '91.  They already do official playtesting for
 other companies, something the organization wants to do much more of.
 They'd love an opportunity to assemble groups for Neo-Traveller
 playtesting.

      Steven Bonneville: "You could have Vargr and human groups
 competing in Corridor and Lishun, and in Corridor they could deal with
 relatively vital factions making attempts to stop them on the fringes
 of the sector."
      Steven does have a point.  Why does the new setting have to
 involve all of Imperial space?  Like TRILLION CREDIT SQUADRON,
 narrowing the scope to a single sector or smaller sounds like an
 attractive option.
      Under classic Traveller, all GDW did was the Spinward Marches
 till later.  We had the wall map that showed where the rest of the
 Imperium was and the other interstellar states.  But we didn't really
 know much about all that, and it didn't really matter.  (I loved
 Traveller Digest's sector series and the expanded scope brought by
 the Rebellion.  But I think it got the game into a lot of trouble.)
      The same could be done with Diaspora or some other sector.
 Here, things are pretty bad right now.  Elsewhere, who knows?  Let
 a licensee work that out.  But here be the setting for STAR VIKING
 and Neo-Traveller, and this is what the products for the next year or
 two will support.

      Computer Virus:  Whether DV be plausible or implausible by
 today's understanding, keep in mind that Traveller does incorporate a
 number of gimmes.  One of these is that simple wetware can create a
 spectrum of psionic effects.  Swallow that, and DV isn't so far
 fetched.  (I bet I just opened another nasty can of worms.)
                                                                   MIKE
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 78        Sun Dec 01, 1991
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff]         at 03:21 EST
 
 Also, I really DID want this to be a place to say what you wanted to
 see in the new revision... If you can't edit out some of the more offensive
 messages to post elsewhere I would appreciate the entire batch going
 elsewhere. Most of the stuff seems okay but some of the messages aren't
 very constructive at all.

 As long as I'm on the subject of these messages - I would be really
 curious to find out a few things about the people who DON'T want
 the T2K 2nd ed. rules type system: A) Have they ever used it, read it,
 or know anything FIRST HAND about it. B) Do they use the MT task system
 (most of the people have said yea or nay on that subject but I am 
 curious about the others).

 - Jay
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 79        Sun Dec 01, 1991
C.FAGO1 [Carl Fago]          at 12:40 EST
 
Re: Smaller chunks...

The last was about the smallest that will come through.  What's the difference
between one large message and 20 smaller ones???  Seems to me one larger one
is preferable.

Re: Posting elsewhere and Editing...

1)  I will _not_ edit the posts.  They are a service to the GEnie, the TML
members, and GDW, and (I thought) DGP to see their customers' reactions.  I do
edit non- NeoTraveller articles out of the TML but I will not edit the basic
article.  Nor do I necessarily read the articles prior to post.

2)  Since this isn't a _one_ person show, how many others want the TML stuff
stopped??  How many want it to stay for the time being? Be aware that the
appropriate articles are showing up on TML (without editing I might add).

At least the efforts of Rob and I are appreciated on the TML.

Heck, since DGP is discontinuing Traveller support, why is this topic so
worrisome to DGP?

 +-------------------------------+------------------------------+
 | *-=Carl=-* cdf1@psuvm.psu.edu | You can have peace.  Or you  |
 |            GEnie - C.FAGO1    | can have freedom. Don't ever |
 | Carl Fago  State College, PA  | count on having both at once.|
 +-------------------------------+------------------------------+


 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 80        Sun Dec 01, 1991
B.BORICH [Kagekiha]          at 13:18 EST
 
Mike,
    <CPU's creating psionic effects> Granted, but I don't think so at the TL's
available, in any case you still have a dispersal problem (for the area they
want to cover).
    Though you could say it was an Ancient discovery ala Black Globes.

Jay,
    Well, sometimes offensive things need to be said, just so long as they
don't get too personal (though I would say the Computer designer is taking a
bit of flak for his idea, and well, all I can say is that the idea stinks,
it's too complicated, when there are simpler solutions).
    Anyway this area seems to be just as much for what people want to see as
well as what they don't want to see.

    T2K, read parts of it, used it never, played it never. But than I don't
like the concept, anymore than I did Aftermath's (though with some alteration
I could probably survive it).
    DC, read it, have not really used it yet, played it once. For a horror
type RPG I love it, for an RPG in general, I'm still undecided, though I'll
probably like it. I know the first thing I'd do if I used it would be to
increase the skill points available by double.

All,
    I think we all can settle on some points from the discussion/arguments so
far:
    1st:  No virus, let the rebellion be the cause.
    2nd:  Light behind the claw (spinward marches stay roughly intact).
    3rd:  No errata (i.e. probably no more than one pages worth at least,
            people make mistakes, the idea is to make only a few and not
            to rush things).
    4th:  A complete set of vehicle building rules, with perhaps a fast
          system for just starships(?) in the main rules (possibly ships
          under either 5ktons or 1ktons in size).
    5th:  MTA's and WBH still available.

    (Care to vote on it?)
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 81        Sun Dec 01, 1991
K.BRENNAN2 [Kevin]           at 13:22 EST
 
   I KNEW that I should have typed that message about computers offline - I'm
always a bit rushed when I don't.

   Anyway, about IDP's (from Challenge #54, p. 54):
   "Sorku's comments refer to the widespread adherence to  Imperial Data
Package designs as the standard for widely used  designs of weapons, vehicles,
and heavy equipment.
   "While use of IDP designs has never been required or urged by the Imperium,
most member-systems have used these data packages  as blueprints for the
production of crucial systems.
   "In addition to being very user-friendly and well-supported  with
supplementary programs and inexpensive industrial start-up programs, most
worlds have found that the use of IDP's aids their economies by enabling them
to be conversant with, and capable of meeting, the maintenance and equipment
needs of visiting  starships and crews."

   Granted, the article doesn't refer to computers, but I'd be  willing to bet
that the same thing applies. Also, Traveller literature has never mentioned
compatability problems when  computers communicate.
   Before this, I had assumed that weapons, vehicles, and heavy equipment
varied wildly. In fact, all three seem (to my  admittedly non-expert mind) to
be far more subject to local  variation than computers.
   Now, if you accept this, it still doesn't mean that the virus idea is
necessarily a good one, just that it's possible. There  are still many, many
difficulties to be overcome:

   Distributing the thing: Technological innovation? I think not. A TL 16
blueprint would only be useful to TL 16 worlds, and if  it's any lower in TL,
it's not an innovation. Besides, won't some of the billions of computer and
software engineers notice  something? And, if it has only a few release
points, it could indeed take centuries to circulate. And I might question if
it  would ever spread to the other factions, who might be using incompatible
computers by this time.
   (Actually, having it fail to destroy the other factions sounds like a
pretty good idea to me. Without the Solomani, Vilani,  Antares, and Daibei,
the ex-Imperium is going to be overrun by  Aslan, Hivers, and Vargr. The
factions, OTOH, don't have the  resources to conquer what's left. Also, for
what it's worth, I'd be much more willing to play in this universe.)

   Security: The "First Law of Security" states that the chance of a given
secret leaking rises proportional to the _square_ of the number of people
aware of it. I think this is what Bryan was looking for.
   I concur with Bryan and Scott about trade: most worlds appear to be largely
self-sufficient.

   However, our disagreement about the homogenity of computers is partially
tied to the fact that we're arguing from different  starting points. I am not
discussing what I think the situation  _should_ be; I'm just discussing what
the literature suggests it  is and what I think GDW is assuming it is.

   Basically, I think any argument that ignores these points will  not
convince GDW:

   1) They want Imperial civilization to collapse.
   2) They want it to collapse over a year or two.
   and 3) They want it to be done with a computer virus.

 "Logic? The man's talking about logic! We're talking about UNIVERSAL
ARMAGEDDON!"  - L.H. McCoy
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 82        Sun Dec 01, 1991
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff]         at 15:19 EST
 
"Why is this so worrisome to DGP?"

It's not. It's annoying to me PERSONALLY because I started this topic with a
specific goal in mind. I don't ask that those messages not be posted, only
that they go elsewhere. I don't want anybody censored but my original
intention was for this to be a CONSTRUCTIVE discussion of things people want
to see in the new Traveller revision. This way, the GDW folks can look through
here without having to wade through alot of nonsense messages from people that
don't have much to ADD. 

Carl, if you're not even reading those messages and don't know what they
contain then DON'T post them here. Topic one or the Publication  Development
topics will get read as well as this one. Personally, I don't think personal
attacks on GDW belong ANYWHERE in this BBS but I'm not a sysop and don't have
any control over that. Saying that GDW should by covered with meat by-products
and thrown to the carnivores is NOT what I consider appropriate and I'll bet
that the folks at GDW will take stuff like that into consideration when
measuring peoples comments.

- - Jay

 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 83        Sun Dec 01, 1991
C.FAGO1 [Carl Fago]          at 18:10 EST
 
Jay, the point being that there is a lot of information gathered and I don't
have the time to wade through it all and I will not selectively edit.

Oft times topics go a different direction than originally intended. This is
not a bad thing in general.

Anybody who reads any topic or BB or email or mailing list has to realize that
the burden of content is on the writer, not the person or company providing
the service (this has already been borne out in a court of law, I might add.)

With the good comes the bad.  If there is a person writing offensive things
that are already covered in the rules for GEnie then, when it has been pointed
out, I will remove _all_ articles from that person.

Again, I will not selectively edit a post.  The bad comes with the good.

BTW, how do you propose I determine what is "good" vs what is "bad"? I think
we have already seen several long messages that you would have determined to
be "bad" and not posted while I would have thought they were "good".  GDW can
ignore the "garbage" as well as I or you can.

Due to my own time constraints, I will not divide up the TML to conform to the
Topic list.  What I can recommend is that you treat the individual posts in a
TML post as being from the person who wrote it and if you have something to
say, say it to that person.  I will even go so far as to forward email so long
as the number of messages doesn't get too large.  Remember the old adage,
"Don't shoot the messenger."

 +-------------------------------+------------------------------+
 | *-=Carl=-* cdf1@psuvm.psu.edu | You can have peace.  Or you  |
 |            GEnie - C.FAGO1    | can have freedom. Don't ever |
 | Carl Fago  State College, PA  | count on having both at once.|
 +-------------------------------+------------------------------+


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




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

Archive-Message-Number: 3208
Date: Sun,  1 Dec 1991 22:32:25 -0500 (EST)
From: Eric Edward Moore <em21+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Revision.

Well, here's my 2 nanocredits worth.

1) Keep something _like_ the MT task system, it was reasonably easy to
use and gave people with a little skill to do something easy with a
reasonable chance of success, but even the most experienced character
needed to work on the hard tasks.  I'll admit it needs work, I'd
reccomend: 
	a) Less variation in task time (perhaps none?) if any it
should be skill-modified.

	b) Multiple "pre-requisites" without which you get big minuses

EX:

Task, to fire a shotgun, Routine, Required: Dex 4+ Shotgun 0+, 1
round, DM+ shotgun skill, Dex.

2) Keep the world generation system.  (Actually I prefer book 6's
physical world generation, the math is harder, but the physics still
works in pathological cases (I *like* trinary systems...))

3) Keep the character generation system.  This and the world
generation system I feel are the neater features of Traveller, You
can't imagine (OK, you can) the fun I have trying to extract my
characters personality from his service history....

4) Combat should be simple (Kill the "High Pen" and "low pen" stuff,
needlessly complex, pen > armor = full damage, pen < armor damage =
damage -armor + pen would do.  Or something of that complexity.)

5) Combat should be deadly.  Pudditat get shot, fall down go boom.

6) Hand to hand with blunt instrumens should *not* be deadly.  My
first MT game a player hit someone with his pistol, instead of
shooting him (didn't need a murder rap too...).  Poor victim died....
(At least the rules thought so...)

Any stupid ideas contained above are due to either my own incompetence
or a supervirus attacking the CPU of my system.....

	-Love, Kisses, and a Neutron Bomb
		-Eric the Finn

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

End of TML Bundle
*****************

From jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com Thu Dec  5 00:39:36 1991
Received: from relay.tek.com by engrg.uwo.ca;
	(id AA04660) Thu, 5 Dec 91 00:38:45 EST
Received: by relay.tek.com id <AA00334@relay.tek.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 91 21:01:02 -0800
Received: from wrgate.wr.tek.com by tektronix.TEK.COM (4.1/7.1)
	id AA08179; Wed, 4 Dec 91 21:03:44 PST
Received: by wrgate.wr.tek.com (5.51/7.1)
	id AA03461; Wed, 4 Dec 91 21:00:31 PST
Received: by metolius.WR.TEK.COM (4.1/7.1)
	id AA18516; Wed, 4 Dec 91 21:00:26 PST
Message-Id: <9112050500.AA18516@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>
To: dan@engrg.uwo.ca (Dan Corrin), bfwong@ocf.berkeley.edu (Raven Blackburn),
        anthony@cs.pitt.edu (Michael Anthony Kapolka),
        mcknight@f104.n170.z1.fidonet.org (Chuck McKnight),
        fantasci!traveller@engrg.uwo.ca (Joseph "Jo" E Poplawski),
        jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com (James T. Perkins)
Subject: TML Bundle #266: Msgs 3208-3210
Reply-To: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Precedence: bulk
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 91 21:00:25 PST
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com>
Status: R


TML Bundles come from the archives of the Traveller Mailing List,
maintained by James Perkins, traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com.

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

Date: Wed Dec  4 21:00:21 PST 1991
From: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Subject: TML Bundle #266: Table of Contents

-AMN- --Date--- --Sender--------- --Subject-----------------------------------
3209  01-Dec-91 bart@cs.uoregon.e Re: (3190) comments on system changes << [ Th
3210  02-Dec-91 Mark F. Cook      Solomani & Aslan Src.book Query << This has b
3211  02-Dec-91 Robert S. Dean    Revision, Part 15.5 << Sorry about this, fire

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3209
Subject: Re: (3190) comments on system changes
Date: Sun, 01 Dec 91 20:41:51 -0800
From: bart@cs.uoregon.edu

[
The discussion below should maybe be taken offline, but as
usual I can't resist "one more online response" :-).  Our
revered moderator should feel free to edit this or censor it
entirely, and I'll try to refrain from extending this discussion
further in public unless other TMLers express interest.

> Tom Harris
>> Me (Bart Massey)
]

First, let me thank Tom Harris for providing us with much new
detailed information on the DV!  This was the kind of thing I
was hoping for in response to some of the earlier TML queries...

>>Speaking as a computer scientist of sorts

> Gee, I was speaking as a real computer scientist.  Sorry to be so
> sarcastic, but your article has a attitude problem.

Sorry -- I didn't really want to get into my qualifications in
detail since I didn't think that they were that important to the
discussion, but since you sort of asked, let me just mention
that I've been programming computers for almost 15 years now,
I'm about 6 months from my MSCS here at UO, I spent 3 years as a
professional computer programmer and system administrator, I
spent two terms teaching undergraduate CS at Portland State
University, and I've done a lot of hobby electronics, both
digital and analog.  Hopefully, this is adequate background for
understanding some of what computers do and can do.

You're right, I do have a bad attitude about the proposed
virus.  Let me explain again the fundamental reasoning behind
my earlier letter:

	Several people on the TML described a trivial method
	(moving the setting to another part of the galaxy) of
	obtaining a desired effect in the setting for SV (low to
	medium technology, but with starships).  They also
	voiced what I feel were valid complaints about the
	method GDW proposed to obtain this effect (a "Long
	Night" caused by computer viruses).  The responses I
	saw to these complaints from GDW didn't seem to me to
	evince *any* sentiment other than "we're smarter than
	you give us credit for, and so you should trust us when
	we say our way is superior" (although this may have
	been a bad reading on my part) and I am frankly hesitant
	to "trust" GDW after the MT debacle.
  	
It was based on these perceptions that I wrote earlier.

> I'll grant that
> the idea of a virus that could do what was described falls totally in the
> realm of science fiction, but being allowed to make any pre-assumptions
> you choose how would you make the Traveller universe stop?

Distance, distance, distance!  Just put the SV setting far
enough away that it could be reached from "known space" only
through *extreme* effort, if that.  Then set it up however you
want.

If you want an analogy, consider 14th century Europe, 14th
century China, and 14th century America.

> Frank thought that computers were the way to go and I made
> some suggestions.  If you don't think it will work then present
> something better in this forum with the same effects.

Well, assuming that I *did* want the effect you're intending to
achieve, I would probably just adopt the method used by one of
the all-time great sci-fi classics, Asimov's Foundation
Trilogy, and let the mysterious forces of sociological
"psychohistory" do the job.  Heck, the post-rebellion MT
universe already looks enough like the fallen Roman Empire to
me to make the whole thing plausible anyhow.  If you wanted to
be really faithful to the original you could use
specially-trained telepaths as psychohistorians.

But I sure wouldn't use this or any other idea without having a
bunch of independent and qualified people review it first for
obvious problems.  And I'd sure listen closely to what they had
to say about it.

> Personally my choice of attack would be the jump
> drives, but I don't know the physics to figure out how to do it.

Well, for example, as several of us physicist sorts (my
undergraduate degree is a BA in Physics) have noticed
(particularly Dow Reider, if memory serves) it is possible to
build perpetual motion machines out of thruster plates -- I
believe I could build one with the jump drives as well under
the current rules.  Assume for a moment that this is so.

Let's assume, then, that this energy being produced during jump
doesn't come from "nowhere", but from some source unknown to
the builders of jump-drives.  Now, let it run out :-).

Note that this is an off-the-cuff idea which might not work out.
So what's the first thing I'd do with it (once I'd fully
elaborated it) if I wanted to use it?  I'd *run it by the
physicists on the TML* and see what they thought of it...

> Rather than
> atacking memory it destroys the CPU.
....
> My assuption was that this would be feasable
> because those programs
> were guarding against memory assaults.
> Hey this is a big gimme, but then
> so is most science fiction.

OK, first of all, let's agree on some common terminology.
First, let's call this thing a "worm" instead of a virus --
maybe then we can both agree that this is what the DV actually
is.  For the purposes of this discussion a "worm" is a computer
program which spreads by copying itself from computer to
computer.

A "CPU" (lit. Central Processing Unit) is a collection
consisting of "memory" together with a permanently hardwired
"control".  "memory" is storage which will be altered during
normal execution of computer programs (thus, the CPU contains a
bunch of internal "registers" (both directly user-visible and
otherwise) which are a form of memory, but the CPU typically
also runs with some larger amount of "peripheral" memory
attached).

Now one of the more straightforward things to do in TL7-8 CPU
design, as I understand it, is to check that no possible memory
state can lead to the CPU hardware or control being physically
damaged.  Why is this in principle so easy?  Because one uses
existing computers to do "worst-case" analysis, and
over-engineers the hardware and control to handle the worst
case.  Why is this almost always attempted?  Because it's not
possible at TL7-8 to determine that there is no path from the
initial memory state(s) to this worst state.  Indeed, there are
sound computer-theoretic reasons why this latter problem is in
general insoluble at *any* TL.

Which isn't to say that CPUs aren't built which are vulnerable
to the sort of worm described above.  But I'd be willing to
wager that there's no "common architectural flaw" in current
CPUs which makes them all vulnerable to the *same sort* of
software attack, and that there never will be.  (EXERCISE: find
out how to damage the CPU of the machine you're reading this on
from software.)

> At any rate, the lag time before the program
> takes effect is similar to a virus and is how it gets so widely dispersed.
> CPU failure should look very small when the virus is first introduced but
> increase exponetially as the virus takes effect.

Better yet, make the worm activate the destruct code everywhere
at once, using global clocks.  ("real" viruses with long lags
must affect the host populations exponentially rather than
instantaneously because they have no global clock available,
and would probably "choose" to do so anyhow because destroying
their entire host population is an "undesired" side-effect
rather than a goal.)

> "Seeding" production
> facilities insures their shut down leading to the lack of replacement
> CPUs.

Seeding production facilities shouldn't be *necessary* for the
worm; I assume you just want to *make sure* the worm reaches
these spots, which is sensible.

> All of this spirals with the social collapse causing lack of
> transport to provide manufacturing materials and food for the people.
> >(2)  If all the computers are destroyed, how the heck are the
> >Star Viking ships driving around?  You want to jump a starship
> >under manual control?  Good luck -- you'll sure need it!
> (3) is the partial answer to (2) i.e. not all technology dies
> and once the problem is known protection can be taken and some
> recovery done.

Ahh, but you can't have it both ways (at least not easily).
IMHO the most plausible "protection and recovery" scenarios
would lead to a mixture of TLs from the low to the high end.
If *any planet* in the region manages to retain TL13, it could
bootstrap the others to that level in a straightforward
fashion...

>   Frank's assumption is that Traveller societies are pretty close to [totally]
> dependent on computers.  The fall is not from TL15 to TL6, but from TL15
> to TL0 and then the problem is how far can the survivors come back.

OK, I didn't understand this (although see directly above).  

> Also I
> have always interpreted Traveller TLs as being the TL that a planet could
> support on its own.  I could go one step further and even say it is what
> the planet can support given the support it gets from other worlds.

OK, there's two distinct interpretations of planetary TL in two
sentences.  We've had our own discussion on the TML about what
planetary TL means, and one thing I thought we pretty much
decided is that the planetary TL is some kind of average over
various planetary technologies, which raises additional
questions.  One thing it would be nice to see in any new GDW
rules is a very detailed discussion in a single place of TLs
and what they represent.

> I wouldn't
> think most TL15 worlds are self-sufficient

Hard to say.

> and if space travel is
> interupted they will suffer economically.  For lower TLs it is almost
> certain these planets import higher TL stuff to make their life easier and
> are vulnerable through these imports.

	"`Is that what you're setting your hopes on, man?  What
	do you expect?  A housewives' rebellion?  A Jacquerie?
	A sudden uprising of butchers and grocers with their
	cleavers and bread-knives shouting `Give us back our
	Automatic Super-Kleeno Atomic Washing Machines?''"
			-- Isaac Asimov, "Foundation"

I've always wanted to use that quote somewhere :-).  But I agree
that if you could destroy all the computers in a TL15 culture
simultaneously you might well send the culture back to TL0.
Seriously, reread the Foundation Trilogy -- it'll probably give
you some good ideas about more *subtle* ways of doing what you
want.

>>(4)  Do you really believe the "common architectural flaw"
>>argument above?  If so, then answer these:  Do you believe that
>>all TL7 bridges contain a common easily exploitable
>>architectural flaw?
>They do.  Use of Aluminium superstructures as shown in the Falklands.
>We are currently in the process of changing them all back to steel.]
>>Is this more or less likely than that all TL4 bridges did (HINT: think
>>resonance)? 
>They did.  That's why we made TL7 bridges with so much electronic garbage,
>TL4 radios are so easy to jam once you know how.

Oops.  I should have made myself clear -- I was using "bridge" in
the Webster's II sense (1) "a structure spanning and providing
passage over an obstacle, as a waterway", not (6) "a crosswise
platform above the main deck of a ship from which the ship is
controlled".  An understandable misunderstanding, given the
Traveller milieu :-).

BTW, we knew how to jam TL4 radios at TL4, so I would call that
more of a "unavoidable technological difficulty" than an
"undiscovered architectural flaw", but maybe I'm just
quibbling...

> >Is this a fair analogy?
> >What other analogies of this sort might one draw
> >(IDEAS: automobiles, electrical devices, plumbing)?
> Haven't you noticed recalls of new ideas across auto corperations to fix
> such flaws e.g. the change to timing belt rather than the timing chain
> several years ago caused numerous engine failures which the manufacturers
> paid for when they broke.  What about the Hinsdale fire several years ago
> Mother's Day and its effect on telephones service for the entire Chicago
> area.  Plumbing how about Legionare's disease and its relation to the
> new vent system in the convention hotel.  We are vulnerable to disasters
> the examples abover were just pulled off the top of my head.
> >Do they lead to similar conclusions (SUGGESTED ANSWER: yes)?
> Yes, you bet i.e. system normal all f***** up.  Flaws like this exist in
> all human societies and most of what we produce.  The ability to exploit
> them may well be in the realm of science fiction, but that's part of
> Traveller isn't it.  We tend to be dependent on some bit of technology and
> if it fails or we streach it too far, our society will fold up and go
> away.  For the Mayans this was slash and burn agriculture vs population
> pressures. For the Sumarians it was irregation vs salt buildup in fields.
> For our current society it may be the internal cumbustion engine/pollution
> /progress vs the atmosphere.

Here, I think, we reach the crux of the argument.  For me, and
IMHO for many in the TML, a variant of Occam's Razor is an
important tool in SFRP game design and play.  I'd phrase it
like this: "One should not multiply unexplainable entities
without cause in the design of SFRP games or adventures".  So
far, there's really only been a few "Big Black Boxes" in
Traveller -- jump drives, antigrav, and thruster plates, for
the most part.  Note that many TML respondents (count me in)
seem to hate the thruster plates for the very reason that
fusion rockets would achieve the same effect in an
*explainable* way.  I oppose the BBB DV idea because I think
the idea of simply moving SV elswhere physically allows one to
achieve the effect desired much more "simply".

> >Finally, riddle me this:  GDW is making noises about "listening
> >to customer input".  I've seen at least 5 distinct messages
> >approving a suggestion that the Star Viking setting be
> >explained by simply putting it in another part of the galaxy
> >from Traveller -- an area with low max TL.  This seems to me to
> >be reasonable and practical while still allowing the SV
> >universe adequate latitude for development.  So WHY KEEP PUSHING
> >THIS VIRUS THING???
> 
> You get the same amount of support either way.  They get much more reuse
> by just leaving things where they are.  So the decision is probably based
> on keeping R&D costs to a minimum.  What I'm trying to say is the impact
> of the reuse of the Traveller universe is the same on you in either case.
> For example, even if they put it in another part of the universe then you
> won't see anymore updates for MT anyway so you will have to exist with
> what you have and if they put in the existing universe then you will have
> the same effect by ignoring it.  Where you choose to go with Traveller is
> up to you, not up to GDW.  None of my Traveller running was ever done in
> the Imperium or even the same universe by my choice and to avoid these
> problems with not liking someone elses dicision about the game.  
> Personally I agree with some of your statements above, I thought 2300 +
> 1000 or more years or putting it so far in Travellers future that MT is
> unaffected might be an even better way to go.  But if for business 
> reasons GDW has decided to drop support of MT then you have to make a
> choice about whether or not you will continue your support or MT.  Its not
> that bad of a decision either way you pick its just a matter of preference.

I think what you're trying to say here is that by setting SV in
the near-future in the "known space" of MT/Traveller, GDW gets
the ability to re-use much of the background material from
Traveller.  I agree.  I think they're also giving up an
important thing which hasn't been much discussed, namely the
ability to do Trav/SV crossover adventures, but let's assume GDW
doesn't care, for business reasons, ever to be able to do so.
They're also giving up the ability to *change their mind* and
start supporting MT again, which is not a trivial thing, but
again, assume they don't care, because they made the right
decision the first time.

Given all that, I don't think that it's the *idea* of setting
SV after a "Long Night" which bugs me so much, it's that I
still don't like or believe the whole DV *mechanism*.  I think
others may still be hesitant as well (anyone?).  So invent
another one!  "Long Night" scenarios are millicredits per
kiloplot in SF, and I personally am much more inclined to
believe in Niven/Pournelle's "superconductor virus" or even
your own "oil-damaging virus" than in the DV.  All I'm
suggesting is that whatever scenario you come up with, run it
past us first.  We'd be happy to criticize it, and even suggest
ways to improve it.  But once it's set in stone it's no fun for
us anymore.

Finally, assuming that you're still dead set on a computer
virus, here's an alternative scenario you may find appealing:
a disgruntled TL21 scientist writes a complicated collection of
programs which spread through galactic computers in spite of
being detected and understood, because they simply don't cause
enough trouble to be worth the effort (e.g. a program which
broadcasts jokes on a ship's intercom in the evenings -- or
imagine software Tribbles, if you will).  These programs *very
slowly* get more troublesome (e.g. the program is replaced by
one which sometimes starts broadcasting jokes just before a
complicated jump), but by the time people begin to realize how
annoying and dangerous the whole thing is getting, the
debuggers, repair robots, everything is full of them.  Further,
the higher the TL, the more troublesome and common the programs
are.

As a result (insert complicated sociological forces here)
everybody begins to use higher TL computers only in "safer"
situations.  Eventually, *usable* computing ends up at some low
TL, and the rest of society follows.

The prettiest bit of the above scenario is that you can still have
TL18 computers, robots, etc.  They will just act strangely and
unreliably, making it iffy whether it's better to work with them
or without them.  Endless fun for the Ref.  (See e.g. a TML
description in an earlier volume of a repair robot which tended
to go batty, or the classic Terry Carr SF short "The Robots Are
Here" ...)

But is the above scenario at all plausible?  I'm sure the TML
members will let me know, and if they say not, I'd sure invent
something else...

At any rate, it'll be interesting to see how the whole thing
turns out.  Thanks again for your feedback, and if I've
offended you or anyone else who's been reading our exchange, I
hope that you will accept my humble apology.  Please take my
word for it that I have only my own best interests at heart :-),
and that it is very much in my best interests for GDW to do the
best SFRP games possible.  Take care,

					Bart Massey
					bart@cs.uoregon.edu

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3210
From: Mark F. Cook <markc@hpcvss.cv.hp.COM>
Subject: Solomani & Aslan Src.book Query
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 91 1:13:12 PST

This has been bugging me every since the issue of MT Digest where the
Fab Four (AB 101 & Co.) visit Terra, and now it's resurfaced with the
map of Terra in the new S&A Sourcebook.

What the *HELL* does AECO stand for?!?

> PS. Given the Solomani mindset, how about "Rats and Cats"?

The same nickname occurred to me, Mike.  You're pronouncing it kind of
funny, though.  I didn't think the 'B' at the beginning 'Rats' was silent. :^)

Later,
	- Mark C.

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3211
Date:     Mon, 2 Dec 91 10:28:17 EST
From: Robert S. Dean  <rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  Revision, Part 15.5

Sorry about this, firends.  It's been a bit of a hectic weekend, and I uploaded
part 16 last night without checking to see whether or not I had uploaded the
file below.  I hope this won't cause any major confusion.

Rob Dean

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


 ************
Topic 26        Wed Aug 09, 1989
M.MIKESH                     at 22:33 EDT
Sub: Publication Development                

 This is a forum for the discussion of new and upcoming Traveller products.
 Participants can offer suggestions and share ideas for projected
 publications, or critique new releases and announce errata.
 ************
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 26
Message 198       Thu Nov 28, 1991
M.MIKESH                     at 16:33 EST
 
 Sub:  Computer Virus

 Lester -
      <Jeez, Mike: Diaspora isn't even out of editorial yet. What makes
 you say it has a cyberpunk flavor?>  Sorry, allow me to clarify.
      I didn't mean Diaspora the book, but Diaspora the sector.  In
 phone conversations with Chuck Gannon, it sounded like GDW would aim
 to create a density of support for Diaspora Sector, rather than
 scatter it all around the Shattered Imperium (Vland, Daibei, ...).
      I didn't know how far the "virus thing" would spread.  It could
 envelope all of Charted Space, or range only 100 parsecs from, say,
 the Hive Federation for all I know.  But it seemed a safe bet it would
 get Diaspora, so I mentioned that.  (Perhaps I should have said 'new
 setting'.)
      By 'cyberpunk', I don't mean hard core cyberpunk (netrunning and
 cyberspace), but fringe elements like the 'dark future'.  That GDW
 chose a computer virus also seems to suggest cyberpunk.
      Like Mark Turnage, I am more confident from your message in the
 direction things are taking.  I see possibilities.  My single biggest
 concern remains, though, is if the virus spreads into the Corridor.  I
 explain why in Tiffany Star 29 which should arrive there Friday.
                                                                   MIKE
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 26
Message 199       Thu Nov 28, 1991
LESTER.SMITH                 at 17:08 EST
 
Thanks for the clarification, Mike.

Dark future, huh. Hmm. I suppose I ought to be quick to say that while T2K and
D-Con are definitely dark future games, we are NOT taking that turn with
Traveller. In T2K and D-Con, things never really get better, I suppose. Or
more accurately, the PCs can make things better, but they  can never really
FIX the way the world is. In Traveller, on the other  hand, the Star Viking
era is just one part of the overall history. We  have already sketched out a
time line reaching beyond that era and into the future--a time line that will
keep us extremely busy with adventures, sourcebooks, and novels (yes, even
novels) for at least the next decade. Of course, exactly how that time line
proceeds will depend a great deal  upon input from Traveller players as it
unfolds. 

The important thing, I think, is that we have a plan, and that the plan
excites us and spurs us on. I only wish the things we have in  production were
already out and on the shelves. 

Later, 

 Les
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 26
Message 200       Thu Nov 28, 1991
LESTER.SMITH                 at 18:27 EST
 
Greetings again.

I'd like to take a minute to talk a bit about the D20 task system we're
planning for the Traveller revision. 

First, the skill or attribute level you have is your target number for an
Average task. Easy is vs. twice that number; Very Easy versus four  times the
number. Difficult is vs. half the number; Very Difficult vs.  one-fourth. For
instance, a character with a skill level of 8 would be rolling for the
following numbers or less: 
 Very Easy: 32
 Easy: 16
 Average: 8
 Difficult: 4
 Very Difficult: 2

If you don't have any skill at all, you roll percentile dice vs. your 
controlling attribute. For instance, an Easy test of Observation, for a
character with no Observation skill but an Intelligence (Observation's
controlling attribute) of 14 would be 28% (percentile roll vs twice the
attribute level).

A roll of 20 always misses (5% chance), and a roll of 1 always hits ( (again a
5% chance), unless the referee decides otherwise.

Now for task philosophy. Mundane, everyday tasks are not rolled for. Does the
character have an applicable skill? Yes? Then he or she succeeds.  Every day
tasks with some risk of failure involved become Very Easy or  Easy. Success
means PERFECT PERFORMANCE; failure means less than perfect, depending upon how
badly the roll missed by. Example: I make my Navigation skill roll exactly,
and I enter the system right on target; I fail it by 2 points, and I miss my
window by enough distance to make my landing 2  hours late (or some such
determination by the referee). 

Now, some people have been arguing that a character with skill level 1 in
Traveller has roughly a 50% chance of succeeding at an Average task, while a
character with a skill level of 1 in T2K2, for instance has only a 10% chance.
That's very true. But given the change in task philosophy, a character from MT
trying for an Average task with a skill level 1 would,  when converted to the
new system, be making a Very Easy task roll with a  skill level of 2--a 40%
chance of success. Couple this with the fact that new system characters tend
to consolidate their skill points, rather than dispersing them quite as much,
and that reasonable tests can be made vs  the related attribute, and I think
you'll find the new system works very nicely. It certainly won't leave a
universe full of bumbling fools, as  might have been suspected.

As I've said before, I realize that the new system FEELS different from the
2D6 one. And that's a valid point. But the 2D6 system has some  problems of
its own. My own complaints about it have always been that  tough tasks price
low skill levels right out of the market, and that  doesn't feel right to me
to have no chance at all if a character has at least a modicum of skill. For
instance, a MT character with a skill level of 2 has no chance of succeeding
with with a Difficult task. But the equivalent character in the new system
would have a skill level of 4,  needing a 2 or less for a Difficult task and a
1 or less for a Very  Difficult task.

Also, the 2D6 bell curve has always bothered me. (I realize I'm treading upon
sacred ground here, for some, but it's the truth.) A +1 modifier  does not
mean the same jump for a character with skill 10 as for one with skill 6, for
instance. In the new system, a +1 is a +1 is a +1.

Those are my comments for the moment. Any questions or comments? I'd be happy
to respond.

Sincerly, 

 Les
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 26
Message 201       Thu Nov 28, 1991
J.FETTERS1                   at 19:27 EST
 
I don't know if this has been mentioned before (it's hard to keep up with all
this), but how long after the rebellion does this virus event take place?
About the new task system: I always liked the fact that I never needed to buy
any "fancy" dice for Traveller, but, as you said Loren, I was terribly
frustrated when a character had no chance of making a difficult roll. 
  Does this mean that the new character generation system is non-random? 
Somewhat like DC? I wouldn't mind that one bit, since the fact that one can
customize his character in DC appeals to me.

Thats all for now... Jim
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 26
Message 202       Thu Nov 28, 1991
GDW.SUPPORT [Loren W.]       at 20:45 EST
 
Right, Jim, the new character generation system will be very much like DC's.
    How long til the virus? well...that'd be telling...
       Loren
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 26
Message 203       Thu Nov 28, 1991
M.TURNAGE1                   at 21:10 EST
 
Les: Thank you!  This is exactly what I've been wanting to see.

  Well, regardless of how I turn out to like this, its obvious y'all have
thought this part through.  One suggestion, though:  When you finally print
this task system, retrofit it to DC and T2k...they've been sorely needing one
(heck, I was about to upload my own to the DC topic...grumble, grumble...:).

  I'ts going to take some time to play with this one.  I'm assuming skills are
remaining at 1 to 10 ranges, with stats remaining as they were in the old min:
2, max: 15 range.  Please correct me if I'm wrong.  If you could give some
examples of tasks (especially combat- related ones...that's where the
mechanics of a system sink or swim), that'd be helpful.

  I appreciate your concerns with system mechanics and, frankly, agree with
them.  Les, its so refreshing to hear a designer that has _any_ real worries
about game mechanics.  After some of the kludges that have come out from
various companies (Not to name any names...), at least some thought's going
into this one.

  And I'm even more confident after your comments about the direction being
charted...frankly, when this was first announced it sounded VERY arbitrary,
spur-of-the-moment and, well, idiotic.  Not anymore.

  I think this is gonna be good, folks.

Mark
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 26
Message 204       Thu Nov 28, 1991
K.BRENNAN2 [Kevin]           at 21:28 EST
 
   Les, I can see several problems with the new task system  right off. Taking
it point by point:

   1) First of all, I suggest that you rename the task levels, possibly using
the MT pattern (Simple, Routine, etc.). Not only does this allow for easier
task conversion from MT stuff, but it eliminates a _very_ confusing aspect of
the current setup.
   GM's who look at the pattern you've got there will tend to assume that
Average tasks are average and assign them to tasks  that are, well, average,
like the Jumping example you mentioned.  In short, most tasks a character
attempts will get an Average difficulty rating.

   2) Aside from your mention of a character with an Int of 14 which I assume
means that the stats are getting reworked, I can see problems with the
unskilled tasks. That character will get  WORSE at Observation if he acquires
any skill level below 3.  While I like the idea of allowing characters to
attempt tasks  without necessarily having the skill, should they really be
less  competent once they learn something?

   3) Having generated several T2K2 and DC characters, I question the
likelihood of them having many skills at level 8. Look at  Dara Schwartz in
DC, or both sample characters in T2K2. I see a  lot of 2's, 3's and 4's, but
not many 8's. (OK, ONE 7). The other sample character in DC has a few high
skill levels, but is a  total klutz outside of Empathy related skills. Are you
sure that  we won't get a universe of bumbling fools, especially now that 
sucess chances have been reduced still further?

   4) Whaddya mean, a character with skill level 2 has no chance  of
succeeding at a Difficult task in MT? They need to roll 9+ on 2D6, and that's
only if no characteristic mods are involved,  which they usually are. Might
you have been thinking of a  Formidable task, perchance? <g>

That's all for now, but I'LL BE BACK...

  Oh yeah, one other thing. Be careful with the conversion system. A 
character from MT should not be vastly superior or inferior to one in the new
system. 
  That was a problem in T2K2, where my converted mechanic was better than a
SAS character generated under the new rules. MUCH better. At everything.

And a happy Thanksgiving to all you Americans...
 ------------
 ************
Topic 29        Mon Nov 18, 1991
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff]         at 00:43 EST
Sub: The WISH List                          

You know that the new Traveller is coming soon to a game store near you - but
is you had your way, what would you want to see in it?
 ************
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 64        Thu Nov 28, 1991
W.LIAW [Mac]                 at 02:29 EST
 
Another thing to the wish list, the name of the game. I never did like the
name MEGATraveller. It makes the game sound kind of.. silly. It would be great
if the name goes back to Traveller.

    Mac
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 65        Thu Nov 28, 1991
S.OLSON4                     at 08:16 EST
 
    Oooh, Metlay must have fallen out of bed on Wednesday to spark all that.

    On his point #6 about the name "Star Vikings", even if they are sometime
explorers and merchants, that fits exactly with the real Vikings (as a people,
not in the actual use of the term amongst the Scandanavians).  It also fits
quite well with Space Viking, in particular the later sections, where actual
reiving wasn't a prime goal.

    In response to the question about possible "intimidation", I don't feel
intimidated, but then I also have not really concerned myself with being
published either.  I make lots of noise when I find something wrong (any of
the old GEnie hands can report my reaction to FSotSI), and give credit when
it's due.


    On Scott Kellogg's stuff -

    RE: rifle-3 vs medic-3 - Somewhat true, although not as much as you might
think.  Shooting is a skill that is easy to learn up to a certain level (which
varies by the individual) and gets much tougher after that.  People seem to
have some level of innate skill (hand-eye coordination and ability to judge
leads and distances) in this sort of thing and progress to that level is easy
and requires only a limited amount of practice.  Getting over your innate
ability limit, though, is something that requires a lot of practice.  The
people who shoot for Olympic teams and so on are shooting 75-100 rounds a day,
just to stay where they are.....

    RE: fuel requirements - Yes, we should, but no, we shouldn't.  Clear? 
What I mean is that I agree that the fuel consumption is way out of whack for
the high-tech fuel sources.  A problem I see is that if we fix it, then we
(again) throw out every old design and start over again.  Hmmmmmm.  Maybe if
we doubled J-fuel requirements we'd stay something close to current designs,
but still...


    Loren, I think you've got critical mass on designers willing to help.  Any
suggestions?  (Maybe I should test-run this fuel consumption change....)
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 66        Thu Nov 28, 1991
B.BORICH [Kagekiha]          at 13:06 EST
 
         ***************ALERT!!! ALERT!!!***************
         ***************TERRORIST AT WORK***************

    WELL SORTA,

    <Virus> Well I was hoping this was just a rumour that would die. And I'll
leave it at that for now, though Metlay has some points on that area (Seeing
the theory might be believing, I presume the computer designer has taken
courses in alien computer design? The virus will work on all computers TL5-16?
On each different worlds computer systems? On analog and digital systems?
etc.... Let's say computer treatment in Traveller has never been a strong
suite, though the change in MT was a big improvement).

    <Scott Kellogg> On DC character generation (which I'm most familiar with,
as versus T2K). It probably takes roughly as long to get a decent character in
the system as it does in MT or Traveller, maybe a tad longer, the advantage
lies in the fact that you can increase the skill points given per year quite
easily, which is probably the first thing I'd do (for DC or MT), as I prefer
characters who are skilled and in their prime (early to mid-30's).
    It does take the character a higher skill level to perform well though,
but as the player gets to allot the points in the skill areas available this
problem isn't to bad, and it's easier to pick up skill levels too (at least I
think so).

    Okay all, I have sent GDW the TML bundles I have, which is through 212.

    <being intimidated by having GDW/DGP on GEnie> Not particularly,
especially as they seem uninterested in the MT section most of the time
(actually DGP being on GEnie was the only reason I signed on in the first
place, HIWG and FASA being the primary reasons I stayed on).
    I would have to say once again, that sometimes I wonder if these guys know
what their doing on occasion, I understand some of the problems they've run
into, but others seem to be self-inflicted (FSotI, lack of adventures, MT's
errata). Sometimes I wish they where more activist like FASA and WEG, although
they seem to be doing so with DC currently.

Loren,
    What I mean by more activist in the above paragraph, is that FASA and WEG
ask for advice, you guys just seem to sit around and wait for it to drop into
some sort of black hole.
    FASA also started a playtest area for selected GEnie users.
    It's not that I expect GDW to drop everything and listen to us
exclusively, or even listen to us all the time. But some of the time would be
nice. GDW's attention to the MT area on GEnie has been poor till recently,
DGP's has been to, but at least they had an excuse (that being only part-
timers).
    In the meantime the MT area here has been drifting along on the sufferance
of HIWG support (which I think says alot, as it makes the MT area the only
Category that doesn't have the support of the company that makes the game).
    If it hadn't of been for HIWG, I probably would have lost interest in
Traveller a long time ago, heading in my own direction as far as Space RPG's
go (which might still not be a bad move).
    TRAVELLER in my opinion is still the best overall rules set and universe
around in my opinion (although I still have a large tendency to alter both,
it's the only one around I could survive with as is, well, except for the
errata).
    As for Star Vikings, well, let's say it's something I always wanted to do
with the right bunch of players, although on different scales. It sounds like
fun, it sounds exciting, but I'd probably ignore it, if I were going to do
something like that I'd do my own, if I used the current Traveller universe,
I'd probably use one of the previous Long Nights. But that's my problem not
yours, I'd say go for it, I'm always free to ignore it if I want.
    In the meantime, I'd like to do what I can to make sure that things work
out okay, currently the only axe I have to grind is to make sure that whatever
rules come out, come out okay.
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 67        Thu Nov 28, 1991
LESTER.SMITH                 at 17:45 EST
 
Metlay: Thanks for the post. Thanks for your frankness. I'd sincerely  rather
have you saying such things (and with such emotion) out in the open as you
have, than to have someone boiling over inside and polite on the outside.

Let me repeat, though. We're in this business because it's fun.  Honestly, I
set aside a career in business writing or teaching writing  in order to take
this job, despite the fact that it pays less and  takes longer hours. What
makes it worthwhile, though, is that it's fun.

Next, when game rules are less than good, sales slump, no matter how  slick
the product looks. And if a company gains a reputation for poor  rules, that
reputation becomes very hard to reverse. If you think we're relying upon
selling slickness, you're plain wrong. 

Are people intimidated that we're on-line? I certainly hope not. You,  Metlay,
seem to perceive some sort of gulf between us and gamers. That's why I keep
insisting that we ARE gamers. The only difference between us is that our
livelihood depends upon games. But game store owners and  employees are in the
same boat. Do you perceive a gulf between you and them, as well? 

Jeez, if the posts here are those of intimidated gamers, I'd hate to have to
deal with them when they're feeling free to speak openly. 

I've said it once, and I'll repeat it: We let our interest in Traveller lapse.
We got involved in other things. But we're back in the Traveller business,
both feet. 

We ARE listening to the posts here. Loren and I are both on line just  about
daily, and Loren has been capturing these posts and taking them to work, where
we discuss them with Frank, Dave, and Nick. The posts ARE  shaping the way
things are being done. 

Now, all things considered, Star Viking is coming. The virus is coming. And
we're revising Traveller's character generation and task systems to  make them
compatible with our other games. As we see it, T2K2's systems  are a natural
outgrowth of the original Traveller system, just as MTrav's are. We need to
bring the two branches into one again, and the T2K2  system is better, so
that's the way we're going. (More about the task system in topic 26--I think
it is--where I normally post.)

Loren is currently working things out for GDW to have an on-line, face- to-
face discussion of the coming year for Traveller. And I encourage you all to
mail us your rules variants, comments, criticizms, and whatnot (preferably
ground mail, so we have paper to hand around without the  intermediate steps
of capturing and printing). 

In conclusion, Metlay, you say that the proof is in the pudding, and  that
you'll be convinced when you have the final product in your own two hands.
That's all we can ask. 

Sincerly, 

 Les.
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 68        Thu Nov 28, 1991
M.TURNAGE1                   at 21:10 EST
 
  Due to Les' recent comments, I have to say that my opinions of the revision
are radically changing.  A lot of my fears have been have been soothed and I'm
actually feeling that this will be something positive and worth waiting for,
instead of an inevitable to be dreaded and lived with.

  I still stand by everything I've said before.  Do I still have problems and
doubts: you better believe it!  We, as gamers in general, have been burned
before.  And this is a BIG step...there's still a lot that can be flubbed. 
The proof, as Metlay said, will be in the final product.  GDW _must_ be open
to our feelings if this is going to work, but we've also got to understand
their posistions and be willing to listen to them as well.

  That said, back to the wish list and reiterating some things.

1)  The consensu view on here is that the original publication MUST BE
COMPLETE.  We've got to have enough to cover all the classic areas...in
general detail; this means system building, character generation, equipment,
background, *starship/vehicle operations and design!!!*, trade/merchant rules,
etc.  With the Basic Neo-Traveller set you should be able to handle any of the
classic travelling situations, including the areas covered by the supplements,
to some degree...admittedly abstract in many areas.  This especially includes
large combats and fleet actions.  This doesn't mean I have to have Neo-Striker
or High Guard III -The Wrath of Meson Cannons; it does mean I should be able
to tell the players "Well when the Reds with their fourteen cruisers fought
the Blues with their ten cruisers and light carrier, the [insert color here]'s
won..." after two or three die rolls.  Leave the gory details to the specific
supplements.

    I think the idea that should be aimed at here is the "Levels of Detail"
one that came up in the discussions about AI way, way back. GMs should be able
to go into as much detail as prefered.  Let the basic system handle a general
level of detail sufficient enough to provide compelte play: ie, if I never
want to pick up a supplement I can still run the game.  Let supplements handle
more specific areas; if the GM or players want to go to the trouble, have the
material there...but don't make it impossible to run the game if they DONT
want to go to the trouble.

    A good breakdown could be:  Basic rules.  Detailed Vehicle/Equipment
design rules.  Detailed System rules (ala World Builder's).  Detailed mass
combat/military campaign rules (Mercenary/Striker).  Detailed Fleet
combat/Strateic level rules (High Guard/Trillion Credit Squadron).  Ultra-High
Tech technologies (TL 16 +)  Detailed racial rules, and so on.

    With the detailed supplements could also come the non-Imperium genre items
(particularly all the various technologies bandied about for Starship
Operator's Manual Vol 2).  Alternate genre/historical period settings...a
popular one would be a "Prologue" source book that covered the period between
the end of the Rebellion and NT.  As someone suggested, 2300 AD could live
again.  Maybe even Space:1989? This'd also have the big plus of allowing GDW
to have more than one SF game...meaning *licenses!* (Its estimated that so
many books are being licensed by SJG at this point that in ten years, world
books'll be coming out for novels not to be written until sometime in the mid-
21st century :)

Mark

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

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

End of TML Bundle
*****************

From jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com Thu Dec  5 00:24:20 1991
Received: from relay.tek.com by engrg.uwo.ca;
	(id AA04638) Thu, 5 Dec 91 00:23:32 EST
Received: by relay.tek.com id <AA00337@relay.tek.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 91 21:01:13 -0800
Received: from wrgate.wr.tek.com by tektronix.TEK.COM (4.1/7.1)
	id AA08182; Wed, 4 Dec 91 21:03:57 PST
Received: by wrgate.wr.tek.com (5.51/7.1)
	id AA03465; Wed, 4 Dec 91 21:00:41 PST
Received: by metolius.WR.TEK.COM (4.1/7.1)
	id AA18531; Wed, 4 Dec 91 21:00:36 PST
Message-Id: <9112050500.AA18531@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>
To: dan@engrg.uwo.ca (Dan Corrin), bfwong@ocf.berkeley.edu (Raven Blackburn),
        anthony@cs.pitt.edu (Michael Anthony Kapolka),
        mcknight@f104.n170.z1.fidonet.org (Chuck McKnight),
        fantasci!traveller@engrg.uwo.ca (Joseph "Jo" E Poplawski),
        jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com (James T. Perkins)
Subject: TML Bundle #267: Msgs 3211-3227
Reply-To: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Precedence: bulk
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 91 21:00:35 PST
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com>
Status: R


TML Bundles come from the archives of the Traveller Mailing List,
maintained by James Perkins, traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com.

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

Date: Wed Dec  4 21:00:31 PST 1991
From: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Subject: TML Bundle #267: Table of Contents

-AMN- --Date--- --Sender--------- --Subject-----------------------------------
3212  02-Dec-91 PHB100@PSUVM.PSU. Trav revision << Hello all, I've been watchin
3213  02-Dec-91 Nicholas Sylvain  GENIE: A Possibly Ex-Customer's View << Well,
3214  02-Dec-91 "J.A.F.O."        Of bacon fat, gamesdesigners and weasel pits.
3215  02-Dec-91 "J.A.F.O."        The ancients << I am currently running a camp
3216  02-Dec-91 Brian G. Vaughan   << Most of the suggestions I'd like to make 
3217  02-Dec-91 Arturo Perez      Playtesting New Traveller << I'm willing to d
3218  02-Dec-91 Joe Heck          GENIE: Question for Loren K. Wiseman << This 
3219  03-Dec-91 richard@agora.rai On the Collapse (Re: Wish List) << Good Comme
3220  03-Dec-91 wew@naucse.cse.na Truncated files << It seems like every other 
3221  03-Dec-91 James T Perkins   Re: Robot creation << [Edmund (aka Adam Naylo
3222  29-Nov-91 Adam Naylor       Re: TML MSDOS floppies << [Edmund (aka Adam N
3223  02-Dec-91 Adam Naylor       Traveller Questions << [Edmund (aka Adam Nayl
3224  03-Dec-91 Nicholas Sylvain  Solomani & Aslan? NOT! << After tossing some 
3225  03-Dec-91 Mike.Metlay@ORGAN GENIE: A response to Lester Smith's response.
3226  02-Dec-91 burt@ptltd.COM    GENIE: T3 (Trav 3, the next generation) << --
3227  03-Dec-91 gt4534b@prism.gat GENIE: Traveller revision << Everyone has bee
3228  03-Dec-91 "C. Roald"        genie -- an outsider's comment << I don't kno

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3212
From: PHB100@PSUVM.PSU.EDU
Date:    Mon, 2 Dec 91 11:08 EST
Subject: Trav revision

Hello all,

I've been watching this discussion for a while with no intention of adding to
the confusion, but I've changed my mind.  This may be of some small interest to
the TML, but is primarily aimed at GDW via GEnie.

First some background to let everyone see where I'm coming from:
I've played in several different gaming systems (D&D, RuneQuest, Classic Trav,
plus GM-modified versions of the above).  In addition, I attempted to Ref
a short MegaT campaign.  About four years ago I created a character in T2Kv.1
but never had a chance to run him in a game.  This is the extent of my gaming
experience.  In particular, please note I have no experience with T2Kv.2

1. With that out of the way, let me start off by saying I like the task system
   in MegaT and I would be sorry to see it go.  It's not totally realistic, but
   no skill resolution system is (and if they were, the game would likely be
   nearly unplayable).  It is one of the aspects that makes MegaT different
   from other gaming systems.  The explanation of how it works allows the ref
   to create his own tasks very nearly on the fly in a gaming session.

In case that isn't clear enough, let me state it directly:
   -- Please don't remove the task system.

2. The ship design system:  I have not used it extensively, and so I don't feel
   I am qualified to comment on it IN MY OWN KNOWLEDGE, but I've heard many
   negative comments about it.  I like the idea someone put forth (I think it
   was a TMLer) about modular ship design, i.e. I'll take one 400 ton hull, one
   standard sensor package, one model 9 computer, 2 triple beam laser turrets,
   etc.  Where the costs and attributes (power consumption, volume, etc) of
   each item is enumerated in a single table.  I like this idea.  It makes ship
   design easier for those of us who aren't into the details of it and only
   need a quick ship encounter for our party.  Another specific complaint I've
   heard about the ship design system is the lack of variation in price due to
   tech level (such as in GURPS).

3. I don't like the virus idea.  The arguments already put forward by other
   members of the TML go for me also.  Assuming I like the new system, I will
   NOT use this senario, at least not as I've heard it so far.  If the official
   senario is different from what I've heard so far, I will reconsider using
   it.  If you absolutely HAVE to collapse the Imperium, I think a MUCH more
   likely reason is economic collapse due to the Rebellion.  But remember, if
   the Imperium collapses, for whatever reason, what keeps the Zhodani, Hivers,
   and the other interstellar cultures from taking it over?

4. Let me close by saying I am very interested in playtesting your new system.
   If you are interested in using me as a guinea pig, I can be reached on the
   Internet at PHB100@psuvm.psu.edu   or via snailmail:
       Paul Baughman
       225 Computer Building
       University Park, PA  16802
       (814) 863-8125

- ----------
In the dark no one can hear the color of your eyes.
Disclaimer:  This is me.  Do I sound like anyone else?

Paul Baughman          PHB100 @ psuvm.bitnet
                       baughman @ gis.psu.edu

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3213
Date:         Mon, 02 Dec 91 13:32:48 EST
From: Nicholas Sylvain <NPSYLV%WMVM1.bitnet@VTVM2.CC.VT.EDU>
Subject:      GENIE: A Possibly Ex-Customer's View

Well, now that the TML has a direct line into GEnie and the connected
folx there, I figure it's a good opportunity for me to let loose.

Classic Traveller --- A Good Start

If we are to try and truly *GET IT RIGHT* this time, I think a brief look
into the well-loved game that started it all is in order. After all, if I
hadn't bought a LOAD of Traveller stuff (and loved it all), I probably would
never have tried MT (and I nearly didn't, but thank the PBEM for that.)

What did I love about Traveller? Simple (perhaps too simple), playable rules
that never got in the way of the play. Logical rules organization. Convenient
packaging. (I never had problems 'porting Traveller!) Classic style in the
presentation. (Basic black with the print in a one-color shtick was a nice
way of doing things. Certainly made them stand out, IMHO.) And MODULES!

LOTS of modules. FUN, interesting, playable! And yet informative as well,
building up the background as they came out. I have extremely fond memories
of Kinunir, Leviathan, Prison Planet, and even Murder on Arcturus Station.
The regular does of JTAS helped as well.

MegaTraveller -- Running in Place

A few steps forward, a few steps back. There was enough here for me that I
don't consider any of my MT spending wasted (except for my shameful weakness
in buying the COACC abomination), but at the same time, I am now very much
aware of its shortcomings. A multitude of opinions have gone over the ether,
so let me use a legal conceit and add my own.

MT: Concurring Opinions

The task system. One of the best ideas, I like it immensely, together with
the fleshing out of the skills system.

World Builder's Handbook and the Alien modules. Great stuff, especially for
all of us people who get tired of a universe with so many humans. I liked
Starship Operator's Guide because it helped to fill in information that is
important to understanding -- helpful when you are trying to GM or play a
situation where the rules aren't of help, and even more, give some more
clues about 'day to day' character existence. (When you consider just how
many characters spend significant amounts of time aboard ships, the more
this can be fleshed out, the better.

The design system -- I like an integrated, detailed design system. When it
comes to starships (especially), I really enjoy building ships from the
ground up and tailored to suit, with significant detail. (I do agree that
a quick-design system might be useful in some situations, reminiscent of
the classic traveller system - one from column a, one from column b, put
the pegs in the holes, and voila, instant starship. just add water...)
I liked Striker, so naturally I appreciated the MT design system, with
one caveat -- as has been expressed, when I want to, I like being able
to design lasers and missles, etc. while also having some prepackaged
systems to choose from otherwise.

MT: Dissenting Opinions

Frankly, I never was real excited about the Rebellion background, as I am
a decided "Behind the Claw" person, obviously going back to Classic Traveller.
I *liked* the idea of concentrating on a one or two sector region and doing
it *in depth*. Anything more was nice. (I wouldn't really mind if the rest of
the Imperium & Co dropped off the face of the universe - just keep the Zhodani,
Aslan, Vargr, and such. We need more aliens, not fewer.)

I can see the usefulness of a totally die-based character system, but I tend
to prefer player-dictated character generation. When I play a character (as
in the mammoth TML-PBEM), I generally settle on a concept after some thought
and then create the character's skills and history based on that idea. It is
part of the reason I liked T2k (1st ed) --- some randomness in personal
characteristics, then skills are bought and allocated.

On a related note: more descriptive material in terms of the character
generation would be useful to me: i.e. some more information on educational
institutions (does it work on the BS/MS/PhD system we have?) and the like.

An intuitive (if that is possible) space combat system with a better flow
and a real feel of excitement (personal combat too, I suppose.) I think that
some more detail would be nice, as I think it's a little too abstract in
both cases, and when that's so, you just don't get as worked up about it.
The design system lets you build ships down to the bunkbeds, but you can't
destroy it quite that way... Combat is chaotic, lethal and dangerous, and
decidedly so if you are talking about FGMPs and Meson Guns, armor
notwithstanding.

- ---

As to the question directed to us T2k skeptics, I read the system as it
was presented in 2nd ed, and didn't much care for it (along with other
parts of the new ed) so I never wasted my money on it or any other system
which has used it.

(I have to comment on the complaints about some comments not being
constructive. It seems akin to a situation where somebody says "We are
going to rip up the Constitution. Taking that as a given, do you have any
constructive comments on what we should replace it with?" If you want to
make a fundamental shift in Traveller, no doubt you will do so, but you
have to grin and bear it when outraged people speak up.)

If the idea is to create a Long Night situation, I think you should put
it IN THE LONG NIGHT! Why go to the trouble of aggravating everybody
(especially those in the know) to create a situation when you've already
got the situation set up? I for one would be interested to see materials
that are set in Traveller's past, somewhere in between early spaceflight
and "modern" 1000-1100 era history. If you did that, I for one just might
stick around and even buy it. The KISS principle is valuable here -- or,
to put it another way, why open a new can of worms that aggravates people
when you don't have to? The virus idea is per se stupid.

Enough for now. (And if Traveller 3 gets botched up, I suppose I can always
go back to wargaming....)

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,
 the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
                   -- United States Constitution, Amendment 2

Nicholas Sylvain (npsylv@wmvm1.cc.wm.edu)
Marshall-Wythe School of Law
College of William and Mary

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3214
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 91 14:24 GMT
From: "J.A.F.O." <BSU646@vaxa.bangor.ac.uk>
Subject: Of bacon fat, gamesdesigners and weasel pits. (TRAV REVISION)

This is all getting rather heated isn't it? It seems that both sides are pretty
 much entrenched so lets not get all WWI over this any more than we have to.

1) If the designers don't want to listen to the criticism (impolite or no) then
they don't have to. (they don't seem to be doing so anyway)

2) Those of us who are not in favour of the proposed changes (me included) 
should keep our cool offer advice and if necessary vote with our wallets.

3) maybe someone should start some other less heated debate...... like why
is Aslan soceity such a blatent rip-off of the samurai and does "rats'n'cats"
change anything?


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3215
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 91 17:43 GMT
From: "J.A.F.O." <BSU646@vaxa.bangor.ac.uk>
Subject: The ancients

 I am currently running a campaign based in rebellion era Domain of Deneb,
in which my party are acting as part of an expedition surveying and working
on ancients sites. 
  I have a few queries:-
1) has anyone got any official info not in the Megatrav' rules that concerns
the ancients? (esp. the Antiquity site) or unofficial I ain't proud! :)

2)Anyone got any cool ancient artifacts?

3) How come imperial researchers haven't twigged the 'secret' of the ancients?

4) what happens if they do?

I have my own ideas but judging from the response to the DV I reckon there are
some fecund imaginations out there I can tap too! :)
			JAFO

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3216
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 91 15:26:23 -0800
From: Brian G. Vaughan <bvaughan@ocf.Berkeley.EDU>


	Most of the suggestions I'd like to make about any future
version of Traveller have already been made, and I won't waste your
time repeating them.  I have two points I'd like to make.
	The first is simple:  the task system should remain more or
less the same, except with regards to combat.  Edit that to your
hearts' content.  That is the one part of the task system that needs
improvement, from what the martially inclined have said.
	The second point concerns the changes in setting.  I have the
impression that the reason that the powers-that-be want to change the
setting is that the one we use at present is too highly defined, and thus
too confining.  I can see how one might feel this way.
	The source of the problem is, however, that it is assumed that
there can only be one official Traveller universe.
	Consider this:  publish a basic game book that describes the
rules, and that includes an appendix describing, briefly, possible
universes in which a Traveller campaign may be set.  This could include
a description of the "classic Imperium" as well as the "Star Viking" era
that has been discussed, and perhaps a few other alternatives as well.
	Supplements describing these universes in more detail could be
produced, but the idea should be that they are optional supplements, not
the "official" definitions of what the universe is.

					Brian G. Vaughan
					bvaughan@ocf.berkeley.edu

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3217
Subject: Playtesting New Traveller
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 91 18:11:12 -0500
From: Arturo Perez <aperez@caribe.Prime.COM>

I'm willing to do playtesting.  Maybe I can convince
some of my cronies to help.


Arturo Perez
ComputerVision, a division of Prime
aperez@cvbnet.prime.com
Too much information, like a bullet through my brain -- The Police

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3218
Date:         Mon, 02 Dec 91 21:49:24 CST
From: Joe Heck <CSPECJH@UMCVMB.missouri.edu>
Subject:      GENIE: Question for Loren K. Wiseman

This is a short request for some information. My local gaming group here
in Columbia, Mo has been hunting down all sorts of GDW stuff from Dark
Conspiracy to Twillight 2nd Ed and Cadillacs and Dino's. We wanted to check
out this new system before we asked anything in particular about it. The
one big thing we noticed that was lacking was a design system for the game -
something we feel will be required in some form for Traveller.

Is there anything you can tell us about the specifics of the design system
that might be used? Or is it going to be akin to TW2000 and just come with
a huge amount of supplements detailing all sorts of vehicles, guns, and gen.
equipment?

Thanks,
             Joe Heck (& friends)

PS: Thanks for passing this into Genie from the TML!

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Joe Heck
(314) 882-2131

InterNet: CSPECJH@umcvmb.missouri.edu
BitNet:   CSPECJH@UMCVMB
cc:Mail:  MUCCGW.CSPECJH@SSGATE.MISSOURI.EDU

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3219
From: richard@agora.rain.COM (Richard Johnson)
Subject: On the Collapse (Re: Wish List)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 91 7:13:42 PST


Good Comments, Bart.  (Bart Massey and his long-ish analysis of
why ahd how computer TL could or couldn't fall.)  I feel, however
that any time you have a system set up where the speed of 
communication is limited to the speed of locomotion, you have an
anarchy brewing.  Again at any TL.

That is, it is *MUCH* easier to justify total collapse of the 
Empire because of the sheer physical limits of information transfer.
The economics brining it forth seem fairly elementary and obvious.
No intergalactic computer breakdown is needed.

However (and this is a BIG "but") I think that out here are many of
us who might actually enjoy playing an RPG set in a universe where
there is a fairly consistent, fairly high TL.  Consider the "Star
Wars" RPG as an example.  Destroying the Empire would have a cooling,
though not chilling, effect on our playing.  Please leave us a place
in the universe to play.

One final nit-pick.  It's about the "TL7 Architectural Flaw" of
using Al rather than Fe for the major component of materials for
bridges of warships.  It's not actually being replaced.  It isn't
really a flaw.  Aluminum is lighter and cheaper than Iron.  Its
use enables more and better fire control and anti-missile defense.
Its use enables the ship to be faster and more maneuverable.
And this design flaw was never employed universally.

The flaw noted was was that some ships were not designed to 
contain fires.  The Al alloys used in the Sheffield class 
were themselves flammable.  The correction being employed is 
to provide better compartmentalization, better fire resistance in 
the alloys, and rework of through-bulkhead runs (cables, pipes, etc.).

Then there is also the doctrinal flaw of switching off your fire
control radar when you suspect incoming terminally-guided missiles...
=======
Please continue to keep us up-to-date on the design changes, and
we'll continue to whine and bitch until we see the new boxes.  :=)
- -- 
Richard Johnson     richard@agora.rain.com
Sue Congress!

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3220
From: wew@naucse.cse.nau.edu (Bill Wilson)
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 1991 08:25:22 MST
Subject: Truncated files

It seems like every other digest that I get is truncated.  Any ideas?

[This is probably a problem specific to this user (I get full digests!)
If this is a more common occurrance I'd like to know -- James]

- -- 
Let sleeping dragons lie........                    | The RoleMancer 
- --------------------------------------------------------------------
William Wilson (wew@naucse.cse.nau.edu | wilson@nauvax)
Northern AZ Univ  Flagstaff, AZ 86011

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3221
Subject: Re: Robot creation
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 91 08:46:32 PST
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.WR>

[Edmund (aka Adam Naylor) is not a TML member, as his account will
disappear soon - please send all responses to both the TML and
anaylor@gara.une.oz.au -- James]

Adam Naylor <anaylor@gara.une.oz.au> writes:
> So if you have any info on robot creation I would be happy.
I don't have anything, nor do I know of anything that has passed through
the TML.  Try locating a copy of Classic Traveller Book 8 Robots.  One
good place to find out-of-print new and used game materials is by writing a
place that deals in used Traveller stuff:

	Weekend Warrior
	8116 Van Noord Ave.
	N. Hollywood, CA 91605
	USA

	Telephone: (818)988-1441

> PS thanks for you previous stuff
You're welcome!

James
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Traveller Mailing List Administrator	     James T Perkins @ Tektronix, Inc
traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com	     Beaverton, Oregon, USA
    "How many ancients can dance on the head of a pin?" - Scott Kellogg

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3222
From: Adam Naylor <anaylor@gara.une.oz.au>
Subject: Re: TML MSDOS floppies
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 91 13:57:48 EST

[Edmund (aka Adam Naylor) is not a TML member, as his account will
disappear soon - please send all responses to both the TML and
anaylor@gara.une.oz.au -- James]

Actualy I am not inquiring about this but about something else

The Traveller errata contains alot of stuff I was querying about, but
there are somethings I was wondering about . 

1) In the advanced mercenary section it claims that promotion for
officers is only allowed for those number listed under paratheses (what
ever) . However the paranthses is not listed . In what assignments can

a mercenary (or a naval officer for that matter) be promoted . 

2) There is no guideline for other races . Does this assume that UUP is
standard for all races . What about a + 1 to Str and End and a -1 Dex - 1
Educ for an aslan ?? It makes sense . 

3) If a player from a low tech world joins the imperial army, wouldnt he
be exposed to higher forms of technology, and thus have access to shipsboat,
grav vehicle, and gauss rifle skill . 

4) At higher technologies, it assume (according to the referees companion) 
that all (or most) of the combat military wears battledress and fights with

energy weapons . But the only people who have access to this are army comm
andos and marines on ships troops . 

5) Is there anything on the imperial army in the rebellion (or at anytime)
the rebellion sourcebook is very sketchy . 

6) When creating a world it gives a + 4 DM for any with an atmos of 4-9 and

a + 4 dm for Pop 8+ . This mean that these worlds stand a very goo chance of 
belonging to a dwarf star systme, which means that they are automaticaly 

outer system planets and habitable . 

7) If the world is in a habitble zone and is the moon of a gas giant, then
the other moons stand a dam good chance of having a population in excess (by
a great margin) of the homworld . The same thing occurs for moons of
the home planets . 

8) Merchant characters have no access to 'bulding' stats such as end or str, 

and no access to Jack Of all trades which I assume would be a standard skill
for merchants . Nor do they have access to naval architecture . 

9) Can mercenary characters from low tech worlds who have combat rifleman
skills use a gauss rifle 

10) Does a person in the army have to be in the imperial army (couldnt he
belong to an independant military force of the planets government) . 


11) What if the character wishes to join the army but comes from  a world

with a pop of 4- . According to the rebellion sourcebook, a world of a pop of
4- has a little chance of having an imperial army presence.

12) What exactly is meant in the naval career of strike, battle, and so forth

I mean it would be rare that a member planet would become so bad the imperial
government would send the navy in ?

13) What is exactly meant by social class . I mean it doesnt really do 
anything in the game except mean a higher montly upkeep cost . 

14) I adapted the sailor occupation to enhanced status by changing the
naval enhanced characters skill a bit (ie vacc suit to wet suit) . However
would a high tech world actualy need a wet navy (I assume they have coast

guard) and with the adaption where would the assignments come into it (as 
12 above) . 

15) If you fail to get into the occupation of your choice you get drafted . 
To the military careers no less . How does this fit into the 'imperium' 

universe taking unwanteds and putting them in the military . 

16) If you do get drafted you can have a possibility of coming from an 

asteriod belt and becoming a sailor !!!!!, pretty stupid . 

17) Thats all I can really think of right now . Im not hassling the game
I believe it to be the best sci fi games on the market . Its just that the
rules clarification is a bit misty at the best . If you could get some
answers for me I would be gratetful . I cannot access FTP anymore cause our
UNI just took those rights away from us . I hope I havnt been to pressumtous
asking these questionms but challenge and the journal are to far away to 
post to (mail) and the regularity of magazines arriving here is best to none 
(I am still waiting on the aug-oct issue) . 


Anyway ask your friends etc what they think and please furish me with some
answers . Oh and tell scott kellogg his vehicles are brilliant (cause 101
vehicles simply cannot be had in australia, it just does not exist on the
shelves) . Also ask him exactly how he designs floorplans (Please if that
is not too much to ask) 

Thanks, Thanks, Thansk 


Edmund
.. 


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3223
From: Adam Naylor <anaylor@gara.une.oz.au>
Subject: Traveller Questions
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 91 13:19:11 EST

[Edmund (aka Adam Naylor) is not a TML member, as his account will
disappear soon - please send all responses to both the TML and
anaylor@gara.une.oz.au -- James]

Er I am not sure how to do this, but I have a few questions anyway ......

1) When can a 'mercenary' officer get promoted ? . The book says that they
cannot when the promotion number is listed in parenthises, yet none of them
are (save for garrison) . 

2) The referees companion states that the majority of combat troops at tech

14-15 wear battledress and use energy weapons . Yet the only way theses troops
can gain access to the battledress skill is if they are a marine on ships
troops or a commando . Why not say that army and marines from tech 14+
planets gain the battle dress skill on the infantry column instead of vacc
suit ? 

3) Merchant Characters : Have no access to stat building skills at all . 
More importantly they cannot gain access to Intelligence building skills, or
Jack Of All Trades . Why not in the merchant life have no 2 as Physical 
intead of carousing, have no 5 as mental instead of + 1 Edu, and have
the cadence skill column of leader, jot, instruction, and carousing instead
of just carousing . 

4) Naval Characters : What does strike, battle, and the others actually mean ?
In the current period of the rebellion I can understand but most naval 
characters would have had thier careers before this ? I am sure that strike and
siege missions would have been fairly rare before the rbellion . Could

some one give a description of this for me ?

5) When can naval officers get promoted ?

6) Imperial Mercenaries : Wouldnt they have access to higher tech level 
weaponary . Surely the imperium woulndt have thier troops stationed on 
planets at that planets tech level (look at the marines in vietnam) .

7) Does the player have to belong to the imperial army . Some planets would
have thier own military forces surely, as would many megacoprs (ling standard

products fit in here) 

8) Sailors : Where do sailors fit into the scheme of high tech planets . I 
mean I made up a capitol character who got drafted into the wet navy when
he lived on Glisten !!!! Wouldnt the army at higher tech levels cover this ?

9) Where do flyers fit into the world of the high tech planet ?

10) What are the rules for other races in character generation ?

I will post my other questions shortly

I would appreciate any answers quickly cause I loose my account real soon


Thanks in advance ?

Edmund



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

Archive-Message-Number: 3224
Date:         Tue, 03 Dec 91 12:30:41 EST
From: Nicholas Sylvain <NPSYLV%WMVM1.bitnet@VTVM2.CC.VT.EDU>
Subject:      Solomani & Aslan? NOT!

After tossing some ideas at Mike Metlay, we've settled on a new slang term
for the new alien module:

                          Fascists & Furballs

Comments? :)

Now, all I have to do is stop my gaming store from selling out of it. Again...

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state,
 the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
                   -- United States Constitution, Amendment 2

Nicholas Sylvain (npsylv@wmvm1.cc.wm.edu)
Marshall-Wythe School of Law
College of William and Mary

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3225
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 91 12:27:04 EST
From: Mike.Metlay@ORGAN.MUSIC.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: GENIE: A response to Lester Smith's response.

Les:

Thanks for your recent letter. I wasn't able to respond before this, as
my feed from GEnie to the TML was slacking off and actually SPENDING TIME
WITH HIS FAMILY FOR THANKSGIVING! The bum. I'm having him shot, of course.
|->

Regarding my emotional outbursts, well, I'm an emotional guy at the core.
It makes me a better scientist, a better gamer, and a MUCH better musician.
If I can't throw myself into a game with a reasonable amount of intensity,
then I won't bother with it at all-- there are better pastimes out there,
like Traveller, or composing, or (for that matter) kissing my wife. |->
My misgivings remain, and I am unsoothed by your reassurances. But even as
no one can make me support a game I hate, no one can make me castigate a
game that I like. So I want to see whether I like NeoTraveller....

Now, on to substantive matters. From the recent post on the task system,
which (on the face of it) seems workable, I've divined that the very
basics of character generation will be altered. Well, whatever. But there
are a few problems that should be addressed. First of all, as was mentioned
before here, an "escape clause" should be included that allows not only
unskilled characters to default to Intelligence-based rolls, but also anyone
whose training can't give them as high a plus as the default roll can. It's
silly to lower your chances of success by getting trained. Second, the 
bell curve aspet of the task system in MT was one of its best points, because
it more closely resembles reality than a flat continuum. However, with a d20
roll (POLYHEDRA in TRAVELLER?! My HEART! |-> ), at least there's enougreh 
resolution for reasonable skill shadings. In the interest of simplicity,
I would concede the flat scale, but not entirely happily. (My vote would bwe
for a 2d10 system, which is what my home-brewed rules use for skills.)

The statement that the future of Traveller is part of a larger timeline
that is not as ultimately "futile" as DC or T2K2 heartened me somewhat,
but the fact that y'all are unwilling to budge on the supervirus despite
a welter of less-than-enthusiastic, and well-reasoned, responses is still
a major source of worry for me. You might convince me otherwise when I see
what you're doing, but it really does sound ill-thought-out and highly
impractical. So many better ideas have been put forth here....

I am also still awaiting an answer on my offer to playtest the rules. The
surest way to get me on your side is to let me see what you're planning
to push while I still have a chance to improve it. Not necessarily wrench
it around to my point of view; IMPROVE IT. What are the odds that I'll
get that chance?

metlay

Loren:

A couple of years ago I approached you and Marc about the possibility of
a Traveller novel. Well, I'm still sitting on the manuscript, never having
heard whether or not a deal was struck between GDW and a publishing house.
Now that the Rebellion and the pre-Rebellion years are no longer going to
be supported, I doubt that my current work would be publishable, so I'll
probably make it available on GEnie or the TML in installments. But I *am*
still interested in writing Traveller fiction, so if novels are in the 
works, I'd like a crack at one....

metlay

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3226
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 91 10:14:13 EST
From: burt@ptltd.COM (Burton Choinski.)
Subject: GENIE: T3 (Trav 3, the next generation)


- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let me throw out my application as a rules tester for world generation,
ship and vehicle generation and general mechanics.

(is this going to GDW?  I hope so)

Some comments on some of the rules I would like Loren at all to see...
===============================================================================
1) Worlds
   Time to chuck the 1d6 mentality.  If, as you say, Traveller is heading
   toward a d20 system, world design and generation should be more detailed,
   at LEAST as detailed as variety allowed by 2300ad, with some of the 
   World Builder's Handbook thrown in as well.

   One of my big gripes with the old system was the VERY FUDGY Size-Atmo
   connection.  Have the new system generate Size and Density at least.
   Mass and Gravity can be calculated via lookup chart (like in 2300ad).
   
   I have a set of formulas I Palmed off (someone's, Mr. Brudick?  I
   can't remember) STARFORM program.  This program generated random star
   systems, any I grabbed and reworked some of the formulas to allow the
   feeding of 2300ad data to get useful information.  For Example, given
   Size and Gravity, with a slight random factor and taking into account
   how much solar energy the world receives (this process is actually
   simpler than it sounds), you can come up with a single number representing
   molecular escape velocity.  This MEV can be compared to a simple table
   of elemental MEV ratings...If the world MEV is less than that required
   for O2, then you will obviously not have a T-Norm world.  If not 
   high enough for water vapor, the world will be dry and desert like.

   I can create some of these charts if you (at GDW) wish, in a d20 or
   whatever format.

2) Ships
   For god's sake, relegate the G-maximums to the circular file!  While the
   Jump idea is nice, I think the Stutterwarp Idea is better.  However, to
   keep the same flavor as traveller, you CAN make a balance -- Jump ratings
   indicate Cycle rate.  A J-1 ship can cycle 1 Parsec/week, a J2 can
   cycle 1 Parsec in 4 days, 3 days for J3 and J4, 2 Days for J5 and J6,
   1 day for J7 to J9, 12 hours for J10+, etc.

   Power required is based on "guestimated" ship surface area (for the
   jump field, a surface effect) times the cyclic power drain based on the
   J rating.  This WOULD explain why small craft are not suitable for
   jump drives (area goes down a LOT slower than volume due to the power
   laws)

   G rating is, of course, based on mass divided by reaction drive thrust.
   Ships CAN use grav plates for secondary propulsion,
   thus avoiding the need to make holes in the tarmac.  However, thrust
   should drop off as a factor of "current" gravity.

   Example: Grav Tank 100t, produces 200t of grav thrust for 2G's on a 1G
   world (total accelleration = 1G).  At 3.3 planetary radii the gravity is
   now 0.1G.  Thrust is now 20t.  The generators now provide 0.2G thrust, vs
   0.1G, for 0.1G net accelleration. 

   Obviously, PROPULSION grav generators are largely ineffective when
   out of the gravity well, but great for getting your ship off the pad and
   a couple thousand KM out before you turn on the fusion drive.  I would
   think this would be REQUIRED procedure for any civilized world (who
   wants a fusion lance pointed in your direction spewing all sorts of evil
   things -- give me a couple score KM of atmosphere, thankyou)

   This gravity requirement does not effect grav PLATES, which
   magnify the gravitational effect of the ship.  

3) Vehicles
   Definitely, as Scott Kellogg mentioned, have a very detailed vehicle
   design system (including bits of Striker and MT, with additions from
   COAAC and palming of ideas from 2300ad.  Keep this system as the BASE,
   having it in a supplement book.  However, crank out some basic module
   rules and incorporate them in the main rules so that we can design vehicles
   form DAY ONE without a Cray.  Since the modules are built using the base
   rules, compatability is assured...

4) Science
   Yeah, I know some tradeoffs have to be made to keep the SF flavor
   (FTL, Anti-grav, etc), but please please PLEASE watch the bad science used
   to make the rules fit.  For example, in the MT Ref Guide, Radios are
   a BIG botch job.  I can accept that radios might very well get lighter
   with TL, even with increasing range. (hell, I can accept that Grandfather
   has radio's the size of chicklets that have a parsec receptive range).
   But don't expect me to swallow that with decreasing mass you get a linear
   decrease of power.  Be it back pack or walkie talkie, it's still going to
   take X watts of power to transmit a clear signal Y miles.  Mass isn't the
   limiting factor, distance is (with it's spreading of the EM signal).
   
   I talked with someone from the SCI.OPTICS internet group about power
   requirements for laser communications.  I have the formula somewhere and
   can get it to you if you wish, but it basically boils down to 
   "Power equals Signal frequency", increasing via the square law IF the
   laser beam "spot" is larger than the receiver.  A Gigabit laser will require
   1000x the power of a megabit laser, no matter how you slice it.

5) Characters
   Like I said before, I like the "resume" feel of old traveller, but feel
   that character's are shafted when you compare them to what comes out of
   Mercenary, High Guard or Scouts.  The latter three require TOO much
   rolling of dice, however, so a happy medium between the two systems, AND
   ONLY USING THIS SYSTEM would be ideal.

   Remove SOC as a characteristic.  The characters can roll for a basic
   social level, if you so desire, but I think titles are best left to
   career mustering out or career effects.  
===============================================================================
Burton Choinski                                       Phoenix Technologies, LTD
"All opinions are mine, not Phoenix's"                            Cambridge, MA
===============================================================================


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3227
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 91 14:25:02 -0500
From: gt4534b@prism.gatech.edu (JARRIO,MARTIN MICHAEL)
Subject: GENIE: Traveller revision

     Everyone has been throwing in their two (or more) cents' worth in about
the latest Traveller revision, and I figure that its about time for Marty the
TML Spectator to transform himself into Marty the TML Contributor. So here
goes....
    
     I'm not going to go into which parts of the rule should be kept and
which parts should be scrapped. Enough has been said about this by countless
others. Oh well, what the hell; I'll keep it short. Keep MT task system and
character generation rules. Scrap ship design and ship combat rules. As far
as the rest of the system, I'm not too concerned.

     What really needs work in my opinion is *format*. I'm not talking 
about the sloppy way the MT books were put together; that's more of a tech-
nical boo-boo, rather than a philosophical problem. (Nevertheless, get it
*right* this time!) What I want to see most is a division of all new
Traveller materials into one of two topics: rules-related information (ie
character generation, tasks, combat, world design, and so on), and official
campaign-related materials (for example, Imperial Encyclopedia info, maps 
and UWP's for the Imperium, Aslan/Vargr/Vilani/Solomani sourcebooks, and
info on the Rebellion). KEEP THESE MATERIALS SEPARATE. I hate to shout it,
but if neccessary, I'll yodel it from the top of Stone Mountain (the closest
mountain I know of). I run my own alternate campaign universe and have almost
no need for the official universe. I might sprinkle in bits of it that
pop up in magazines like The Megatraveller Journal, but I don't want to shell
out bucks for sourcebooks which are half-full of useless information. Two
examples are The Imperial Encyclopedia and The Referee's Companion. Both of
them have some useful info, but they have just as much junk (at least, for me
its junk). Why not mix 'n match the two books to make the IE and the RC just
what their names imply?
     An avid fan of the official universe might not mind, and perhaps that
puts me in the minority. But it really chaps my buttocks (if you'll permit
me a colorful colloqial expression) to have to buy stuff I don't want just  
because its mated up with something useful. I'm a bit upset with GDW in this
respect--it seems like they're trying to get that extra buck out of those of
us who operate outside the official universe. Maybe that judgement is too
harsh, maybe nobody at GDW ever though to look at it from an maverick's point
of view. But they should. It certainly wouldn't hurt the aficionados of the
official universe if the two topics were kept separate, and it would surely
increase my likelyhood of investing more cash in Traveller products. The 
big question here is: am I a minority of one? I hope not!
 
JARRIO,MARTIN MICHAEL            |  Everyone's out to get me, and frankly,
Demented Physicist               |    its starting to make me paraniod. 
Georgia Institute of Technology  |
uucp:	  ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!gt4534b
Internet: gt4534b@prism.gatech.edu

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3228
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 91 16:41 -0400
From: "C. Roald" <HOBBIT@AC.DAL.CA>
Subject: genie -- an outsider's comment

I don't know if there's really any point in me saying this, but maybe if
enough people say the same thing, it might have some influence.

I'm more or less totally ignorant of MegaTraveller -- the only time I have
ever played it was in the TML pbem, and mechanics and such were almost
entirely absent from the players view.

I do run a 2300AD pbem, but again in almost two years I have hauled out the
game mechanics ONCE, made a couple of die rolls, and then went on with the 
game.  I have nearly all the worldbooks--I kept buying them because they were
GOOD, and I enjoyed reading them even if I never got a chance to use them.

The only MegaTrav book I own is the Rebellion Sourcebook, and it seemed like-
wise well-written and well-thought-out. (Never having seen old Traveller, I
have no particular emotional reaction to "what's been done to The Empire".)

If I buy any of NeoTraveller, or whatever it is to be called, is going to 
depend on two things: a reasonable price, and the quality of the background
material.

I don't know--maybe you will be able to present this virus thing with enough
explanation to make it plausible. I won't prejudge the issue.  My big
question is WHY?

There seem to be some terribly fundamental objections to this virus--not
arguments based on current understanding of computer science, but things
like "how can every computer everywhere in the Imperium be vulnerable to
one attack form?" "why hasn't the military (e.g.) thought of it before? and
why aren't there defences?"  It seems awfully improbable that any attack
form could be developed to the total perfection required to destroy trillions
(quadrillions?) of computers WITHOUT CONCURRENT DEVELOPMENT OF DEFENCES.

Anyway, I won't beat that argument any more.  I'll grant that with sufficient
ingenuity, a scenario could be devised.

But why? It's practically a Law of Nature not to use two explanations when
one would do.  AND YOU ALREADY HAVE TWO PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE EXPLANATIONS,
JUST SITTING THERE.

(1) The Imperium apparently already has a Long Night in its history (I'm not
    an expert). Why create another one?

but better yet,

(2) practically my first thought on reading the Rebellion Sourcebook was, "how
    the hell can they clean up this mess?". Simple answer: they can't. The
    various factions exhaust each other in fighting, contract on themselves
    and abandon vast swathes of space.  Petty empires arise, bombard each
    other, and die, dragging the tech level down.  All organisation fails,
    and gradually Man's space presence in these forsaken regions is reduced
    to lone raiders and reavers, preying off of nearly defenceless planets.

Voila, Star Viking.  Practically a historical inevitability, and no viruses
to insult anyone's intelligence.  Also, fractured regions of the Imperium
remain, for those who like things the way they were, and in the frontier
reaches, virtually any degree of tech and chaos is possible, for those
who like such things.

It sounds fantastic to me.

   roald.

- --
I want to laugh and sing.	-- Gauss the Dawg

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

End of TML Bundle
*****************

From jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com Thu Dec  5 00:36:48 1991
Received: from relay.tek.com by engrg.uwo.ca;
	(id AA04653) Thu, 5 Dec 91 00:36:15 EST
Received: by relay.tek.com id <AA00339@relay.tek.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 91 21:01:21 -0800
Received: from wrgate.wr.tek.com by tektronix.TEK.COM (4.1/7.1)
	id AA08187; Wed, 4 Dec 91 21:04:05 PST
Received: by wrgate.wr.tek.com (5.51/7.1)
	id AA03467; Wed, 4 Dec 91 21:00:50 PST
Received: by metolius.WR.TEK.COM (4.1/7.1)
	id AA18545; Wed, 4 Dec 91 21:00:45 PST
Message-Id: <9112050500.AA18545@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>
To: dan@engrg.uwo.ca (Dan Corrin), bfwong@ocf.berkeley.edu (Raven Blackburn),
        anthony@cs.pitt.edu (Michael Anthony Kapolka),
        mcknight@f104.n170.z1.fidonet.org (Chuck McKnight),
        fantasci!traveller@engrg.uwo.ca (Joseph "Jo" E Poplawski),
        jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com (James T. Perkins)
Subject: TML Bundle #268: Msgs 3228-3243
Reply-To: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Precedence: bulk
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 91 21:00:44 PST
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com>
Status: R


TML Bundles come from the archives of the Traveller Mailing List,
maintained by James Perkins, traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com.

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

Date: Wed Dec  4 21:00:40 PST 1991
From: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Subject: TML Bundle #268: Table of Contents

-AMN- --Date--- --Sender--------- --Subject-----------------------------------
3229  03-Dec-91 Ed Sharpe         Medical Slow Drug << Hello, I am new to the T
3230  03-Dec-91 bonnevil@stolaf.e AECO, also Zho Invasion << On AECO Starport/D
3231  03-Dec-91 gsw@whservd.att.C Re: New Traveller << Scott Kellogg writes: > 
3232  04-Dec-91 Hans Rancke-Madse Seeker products << Does anybody know anything
3233  04-Dec-91 Hans Rancke-Madse What will DGP do? << It seems that GDW is bou
3234  04-Dec-91 d9bertil@dtek.cha GENIE Replies << <As long as I'm on the subje
3235  04-Dec-91 richard@agora.rai Metlay's Novel << Mike, you (with some seriou
3236  04-Dec-91 richard@agora.rai GENIE: NeoTraveller << Too much indecision. W
3237  04-Dec-91 Mike.Metlay@ORGAN AECO << African ECOsystem. metlay 
3238  04-Dec-91 bonnevil@stolaf.e Lessons Not Learned? (Revision) << One part o
3239  04-Dec-91 Robert S. Dean    Revisions, Part 17 << The following messages 
3240  04-Dec-91 givler@bermuda.ra The Twilight 2K system. << In all this talk o
3241  04-Dec-91 "J.A.F.O."        The Wish List << 1) Ok so the New traveller w
3242  04-Dec-91 "J.A.F.O."        Star-lust! Sex and aliens in MT << After the 
3243  03-Dec-91 "J.A.F.O."        History and TAS << Is there any way for those
3244  04-Dec-91 KELLOGG@ducvax.au GEnie: MegaTrav design flaws << Hi folks, Ok,

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3229
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 91 13:25:09 PST
From: Ed Sharpe <esharpe@phad.hsc.usc.edu>
Subject: Medical Slow Drug

Hello, I am new to the TML and this is my first posting, so please be gentle with
me.  :-)

First some back ground on me.  I consider myself a wargammer who does RPG's. 
Keep this in mind when you flame me.  My latest traveller campain had the players
running a TCL 15 marine platoon.  I used a lot of Striker in the campain.  Anyway
for my problem.  One of the players was something of a munckin and abused
medical slow drug.  To resole that problem I have written the following set of tasks
for use of medical slow drug.  I would like your CONSTRUCTIVE criticism of them. 
Note: I used 7+ instead of routine. (or what ever the word is for a roll of 7+). 
Note I can post my vehicle & robot designs if people are interest, but be warned
that they are Striker designs and not Mega-Traveller designs.  Thank you.


                      The Use of Medical Slow Drug in Traveller

To diagnose the Injury
7+    Medial, Education,        30 Seconds,         Uncertain, Non-Repeatable

To Prepare and Administer Medical Slow Drug
7+    Medical, Education,       10 Seconds,         Uncertain, Non-Repeatable

To Avoid a Negative Medical Slow Drug Reaction
7+    Medical, Endurance,       3 Hours,            Uncertain, Fateful, Hazardous,
      (Doctor, Patient)                             Non-Repeatable

HTK   ==     STR+DEX+END        Recovery     ==     END*3

Failure Table (1, 2, or 3 D6) (Uncertain) 
1     +1/2D6 hours recovery
2     +1D6 hours recovery
3     +2D6 hours recovery
4     +3D6 hours recovery
5     *1D6 hours recovery
6     *2D6 hours recovery
7     *3D6 hours recovery
8     *1D6 hours recovery       1/2 HTK Recovered
9     *2D6 hours recovery       1/2 HTK Recovered
10    *3D6 hours recovery       1/2 HTK Recovered
11    *1D6 hours recovery       No HTK Recovered
12    *2D6 hours recovery       No HTK Recovered
13    *3D6 hours recovery       No HTK Recovered    
14    *3D6 hours in comma, further medical treatment needed, no HTK recovered.
15    +3D6 days in comma,  further medical treatment needed, no HTK recovered.
16    +3D6 weeks in comma, further medical treatment needed, no HTK recovered.
17    +1D6 Wounds         *3D6 Hours Recovery       No HTK recovered.
18    +3D6 Wounds         *3D6 Hours Recovery       No HTK recovered.

Notes:
      Alien Species raise the difficulty one to two levels (Referee determined).
      Hasty attempts raise the difficulty level by one & the lower the time factor.
      Cautious attempts lower the difficulty level by one and raise the time factor.
      A Hasty Slow Drug Reaction can not be made.  
      A Cautious Slow Drug Reaction can be made.  The time factor is doubled.
      The time of the Slow Drug Reaction is uncertain.
      Without a Diagnosis and Preparation skill roll, a Slow Drug Reaction roll
      becomes a 11+ roll, and failure automatically rolled on 3D6.
      For each No Truth result on skill rolls add 1D6 to the failure table.  For each
      Some Truth add 1/2D6 to the failure roll.  ie: a No Truth on the Diagnose,
      Preparation, and Reaction roll requires a 3d6 roll on the failure table.


Ed Sharpe
esharpe@phad.hsc.usc.edu^Z

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3230
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 91 16:50:41 CST
From: bonnevil@stolaf.edu
Subject: AECO, also Zho Invasion


On AECO Starport/Deepsite:

When I saw this in Invasion: Earth, I always figured that it meant
something like "Africa-Europe Cooperative Organization", since it is
the only starport in the area, and it is in North Africa on the Med.
I really don't know for sure, though.

On Zhodani invasion of a weakened Imperium:

I really doubt that the Zho's _want_ the Imperium.  Their focus is really
much more to coreward, and the territory and resources they have committed
to that focus is simply staggering.  As it is they have their hands quite
full with the Expeditions.  A total collapse of the Domain of Deneb would
lead to an invasion -- but only one far enough to secure their own borders.
The Frontier Wars have been claimed to be a Zho attempt to get the Imperium
to leave them alone, and not try to move in on them.  Now, they might get
tangled up in a war they don't want, but I don't think they plan on driving
into Deneb if they can help it.
That's not to say that the Aslan, Vargr, and Solomani, as well as anyone
else in the area, won't give Imperial conquest a shot....

- --Steve

"Mega- what?  What does the metric system have to do with a SF-RPG?"

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3231
From: gsw@whservd.att.COM
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 91 18:59 EST
Subject: Re: New Traveller

Scott Kellogg writes:

> Problem:  How do we get them to listen to us?  The only way I can think of
> is a psy-ops campaign.  If we just yell and flame at them, they will NOT
> listen.  So, I think we have to calm down our tone a bit.  If we come across
> as REASONABLE people I think we have a shot at it.  I mean if we have
> complaints about the revisions, I think we had better be able to come up
> with alternative ideas rather than saying, 'I don't like this'

You're right.  Unfortunately, many of us also have time constraints.
I, for instance, have a great deal of catching up to do at work
(having just returned from vacation).

If we really want to provide REASONABLE and CONSISTENT alternatives,
then someone will have to take some time to compile people's ideas.

	[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
	[[							  ]]
	[[	TMLer Joe Heck has already offered to do this	  ]]
	[[	as I announced a few days ago.  Please make sure  ]]
	[[	to send your comments to the TML and/or to Joe	  ]]
	[[	directly at cspecjh@umcvmb.missouri.edu. He	  ]]
	[[	Will summarize the responses and post the digest  ]]
	[[	to the TML, where it can be passed on to GEnie.	  ]]
	[[							  ]]
	[[					-- James	  ]]
	[[							  ]]
	[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

I think that many of us have similar, or at least compatible, ideas
about what to do with Traveller.  If someone would be willing to
look at my ideas and incorporate them into a "proposal" of sorts,
I'd be willing to put my name on it.  Then, we could present it to
GDW and say "The following x people talked about it and would like
collectively to see these things: ..."

So, would you like to do such a thing?

To get you started, I'll name a few of my preferences:

o PROOF-READ it and have a few dozen non-gamers try to learn the rules
  by reading it!!!!!!

o The name "Traveller", or "Traveller, 3rd edition".  No fancy prefixes
  or suffixes or whatever.

o A good task system.  The MegaTraveller system is good (although not
  quite so perfect as some have been claiming recently).  I haven't
  seen the T2k2 rules, so can't comment on them.

o The Traveller background.  Don't totally ditch everything that is
  out there now.  Moving the timeline forwards is OK by me, though.

o A STABLE background.  We don't need galactic revolutions taking
  place.  It's nice to be able to create campaigns in the official
  universe without having to take such things into account.  It's
  OK to have a section of the galaxy in turmoil, but not all of it.
  A Long Night is also OK, since it is at least stable.  It could
  even be preferable, since it allows GMs freedom when designing
  their campaigns.

o Realistic and CONSISTENT science.  This virus thing seems to be
  REALLY stretching it, even if it's got abilities such as Iasic of
  the PBEM.  I've got to see it to believe it.  Also, stick to
  conservation of energy.  Even with the OLD Traveller rules, any
  player with a small spaceship could single-handedly decimate a
  world.  Jump drives and grav drives are OK as long as you explain
  them and don't get a free ride w.r.t. energy consumption.  Grav
  drives must use as much energy as the difference in gravitational
  potential energy.  Jump drives cannot jump to a higher point of
  potential energy without a commensurate cost.  By the way, this
  is a very good reason why jumps can never be into open space,
  but only into a star system, and wouldn't crash you into a star
  or planet.

o Rules for construction of vehicles/spaceships/robots/guns/whatever.
  They don't need to be in one place, but this is one aspect of
  Traveller which many people seem to like.  They also MUST be easy
  enough to do without a computer and in a reasonable amount of time.
  This is rather important -- there are many GMs and players who love
  to spend time designing things.  It's a form of solo play.

o Keep detailed character generation.  It really adds to the flavor
  of the game.  It's also good to have some randomness, although
  this may be optional.  From my experience, random generation of
  characters and character backgrounds leads to better role-playing
  and less munchkinism, even with experienced gamers.

o Don't make any one character type or character generation method
  vastly superior to any others (if there are different methods).
  The original Traveller fell into that trap starting with Book 4.

o Don't make Traveller or MegaTraveller stuff obsolete.  Provide for
  conversions to the new system.  Where things are changed in the
  new system, don't make them so different that you can't simply
  "fake it" with old characters/designs/etc.

o Does anyone else out there like the 6-sided dice?  I always
  identified Traveller with 6-siders and the 2d6 bell curves used
  for everything.  I'm really sorry to see this go.  I mean it.
  The whole feel is different.  Somehow, the fact that you don't
  need any special dice or equipment gave Traveller a FEEL unlike
  any other RPG.  It sounds strange, but I think that this really
  makes a difference.

Could someone (please) offer to compile a list of these and other
similar ideas and send them to GDW?  Barring that, I hope someone
will at least forward this to GEnie.  (I really wish they'd hook
into the Internet.  They should realize that they would actually
be gaining customers, not giving away their services.  Once people
on their net started getting into more and more mailing lists and
such, GE would have more business than they could handle.  And
people would still use GEnie.  The business they gain would vastly
outweigh the few they lose who have both free access and pay for
GEnie.  I doubt they'd even lose those people.  OK, enough ranting
for now 8-).

Jerry Williams (gsw@gummo.att.com)

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3232
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Seeker products
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 91 9:36:24 MET

Does anybody know anything about two products from Seeker that
I've seen advertised in 'Megatraveller Journal' #2: _Lords of
Thunder_ and _Consumer's Guide_? Are they out? Are they any
good?

      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
"I know there are some people in the world who do not tolerate their
fellow human beings, and I just can't _stand_ people like that!"
                                (after Tom Lehrer)

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3233
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: What will DGP do?
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 91 10:34:20 MET

It seems that GDW is bound and determined to abandon the current
MegaTraveller universe. Wether it be by jumping 80 years ahead as
they plan or by moving somewhere else or even going back to The Long
Night dosen't really matter to me. The bottom line is that I won't be
able to use the new material in my campaign, which is set in the
Spinward Marches in the year 1113. (Why, I haven't even decided yet
if I'm going to use the Rebellion at all!) A starspanning game
universe needs an inordinate amount of background data and IMO the
Traveller Universe had just about reached an adequate amount  -
at least in the Deneb Domain and a few other places. But apparently
GDW consider the large amount of background data _detrimental_ to
new players' enjoyment of the game. If that's the way their minds
work then I'm not going to waste my time trying to persuade them to
support my campaign, and I'm not going to buy any of the new
background material (Now, if they come up with some good rules
and package them seperately, then I'll propably buy the rules.
But that's another matter.

What I'm really anxious to know is: Will DGP drop Megatraveller too?
I gather thaty they are not involved in Traveller III, but will they
retain their licence to do Megatraveller stuff? And do they want to?
Or will they switch to that new game of theirs, AI?



      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
"I used to argue the matter at first, but I'm wiser now. Facts
are stubborn things, but not half so stubborn as fallacies."
                - Stella Maynard in "Anne of the Island"

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3234
From: d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se
Subject: GENIE Replies
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 91 15:26:42 MET

 <As long as I'm on the subject of these messages - I would be really
 curious to find out a few things about the people who DON'T want
 the T2K 2nd ed. rules type system: A) Have they ever used it, read it,
 or know anything FIRST HAND about it. B) Do they use the MT task system
 (most of the people have said yea or nay on that subject but I am 
 curious about the others).>

  I'm not sure if you regard me as a member of the group that don't want the
T2k rules in Traveller, because there are parts of it that I'd love to see 
there and slightly more parts that I'd loathe to see there, but here it is:

  A: T2k: Own, read, used and on occation even played:)
  B: MT Tasks: Use and like.

- -bertil-
- -- 
"It can be shown that for any nutty theory, beyond-the-fringe political view or
 strange religion there exists a proponent on the Net. The proof is left as an
 exercise for your kill-file."

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3235
From: richard@agora.rain.COM (Richard Johnson)
Subject: Metlay's Novel
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 91 6:48:25 PST

Mike, you (with some serious help from Nick, Mark, and Bertil)
DID write a Traveller novel...  :=)

On to NeoTraveller...
Has anyone asked about how, why characters carry personal firearms
everywhere?  And why and how do local governments put up with it?
It seems that with humans, NOTHING scares the local "officials" more
than having an outsider be a direct threat to their perceived power
base.  The logical outcome in the balkanization "Star Viking"
presumes is intensely high law levels and petty warlords.

This does not bode well for science.
- -- 
Richard Johnson     richard@agora.rain.com
Sue Congress!

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3236
From: richard@agora.rain.COM (Richard Johnson)
Subject: GENIE: NeoTraveller
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 91 6:55:17 PST

Too much indecision.

Working on the assumption that at least one TMLer will eventually
be tapped to play test, I'd like to sweeten the pot.

I volunteer I can't believe I'm doing this) to technically review,
proofread, and even do limited rewrite on any portion, or possibly
even all of the new rules.  I have ten years technical writing
experience and know what I'm doing, so I won't screw you up.  If
any of you at GDW (or DGP - I'll make the same offer to Joe for AI)
is interested, drop me a line or call me and we'll discuss terms.
For a project so dear to my heart, you can count on them being
unbelievably reasonable.

Richard Johnson     richard@agora.rain.com 
517 SE 8th Ave
Hillsboro, OR  97123        (503) 640-9209

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3237
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 91 10:07:14 EST
From: Mike.Metlay@ORGAN.MUSIC.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: AECO

African ECOsystem.

metlay

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3238
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 91 09:42:19 CST
From: bonnevil@stolaf.edu (Steven Bonneville)
Subject: Lessons Not Learned? (Revision)


One part of my concern about this "virus destroying the centralized CPU
factories of the Imperium" is two-fold.  First, if the Imperium is reliant
enough on computers that their loss would cause a crash, one would think 
that there would be *MANY* production sites -- surely, not all of them
would be seeded.  One would think that elementary concerns about security
and safety of a proprietary production line would lead to the production
CPU being isolated from outside interference and the planetary network,
just to avoid corporate espionage and tradewar sabotage.

Second, the Imperium did have a lesson about the dangers of concentrating
industrial facilities at the end of the Solomani Rim War.  According to
an old Trav.Digest I saw, part of the reason the Imperium was unable to
follow up after Earth was the destruction, by deep-penetration commandos,
of one of their rear-area Industrial worlds.  You see, it had a highly
centralized life-support system for the populace, since it was located on
a hostile world, and the commandos just went in and blew it away. This
might not be common knowlege, but in the 110 years from the war to the
Rebellion, you'd think that INI, IISS/IB, or IRIS would attempt to suggest
some doctrinal changes to the Emperor, and implement them.

I won't be using this virus in any campaign I might run, because it is 
unnecessary and changes the character of Lucan from understandably 
incompetent, if perhaps a bit crazed, to STUPID.  After all, Lucan is the
only "Emperor" who is likely to try this, what with his "Super Weapons"
(gag) and all.  Can anyone see Norris, Brzk, or Margaret trying this?  Or
the mercantilist, conservative Vilani?  (What, destroy our own megacorps!?!)
I don't think Dulinor would, simply because he believes so strongly in
improving the lot of those in his Domain.  After all, that's how he got
his title.  Would the "Strephon" supporters, or the Brothers of Varian?
Perhaps, since we know so little about them...a darn shame too.  I doubt
it, though.  Or Daibei, a former Sector government?  No.

After all, without a latter-day Arbellatra, the empire will fall all by
itself.  It's already halfway there.

- --Steve

"Mega- what?  What does the metric system have to do with a SF-RPG?"

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3239
Date:     Wed, 4 Dec 91 10:38:25 EST
From: Robert S. Dean  <rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  Revisions, Part 17

The following messages have been posted on GEnie since Sunday evening.  As
you can see, discussion is starting to slow down.  I took the liberty of
deleting a couple of messages that strictly pertain to GEnie's ability
to handle multiple kbyte posts from us.  (-:  (Regardless of whether or not
they are inhibited over there, they don't talk very much, compared to us.
(-: (-: )

Rob Dean

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


 ************
Topic 29        Mon Nov 18, 1991
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff]         at 00:43 EST
Sub: The WISH List                          

You know that the new Traveller is coming soon to a game store near you - but
is you had your way, what would you want to see in it?
 ************
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 84        Sun Dec 01, 1991
M.MIKESH                     at 20:12 EST
 
 Jay -
      <If you can't edit out some of the more offensive messages to
 post elsewhere I would appreciate the entire batch going elsewhere.>
      It almost seems as though Topic 26 has turned into what you
 intended Topic 29 to be.  This seems workable, rather than dumping
 to Topic 3.  But if you have an objection, maybe Rob Dean could
 establish another topic specifically as a GEnie/TML interface.

      A) Have they ever used [T2K], read it, or know anything FIRST
 HAND about it.
      Yes, as a player, not a ref.  Too combat oriented for my tastes.

      B) Do they use the MT task system.
      Definitely.  Its an excellent system, but I won't have a tantrum
 if we loose it.
                                                                 MIKE
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 85        Sun Dec 01, 1991
GDW.SUPPORT [Loren W.]       at 20:19 EST
 
As the person who asked Carl to post the TML messages, I feel responsible. 
Perhaps the solution is to start a separate TML topic, or to post the 
messages in the library. In any case, I am with Carl in that I don't want to
read only good remarks...I specifically asked him to give me all comments
about Traveller. I appreciate what Carl and Rob have done for GDW so far, as
all feedback is useful, even highly critical feedback. 
     I take issue with some people's remarks, but I find I agree with some
others...
           Loren
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 86        Sun Dec 01, 1991
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff]         at 21:45 EST
 
Yeah, a TML topic would be just the thing. That way, those who don't want to
have to wade through buckets of messages can just ignore that particluar
topic.

- - Jay
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 87        Sun Dec 01, 1991
M.MIKESH                     at 23:46 EST
 
 Jay -
      A TML topic will help a lot of folks -- those that casually monitor
 this category.  It'll still have a lot of readers, though, including
 myself.
                                                                      MIKE
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 88        Mon Dec 02, 1991
DIGEST.GROUP [Staff]         at 00:57 EST
 
I'll be reading it myself. I'm sorry if I've been sounding terribly pickey
about this because I don't want to give the wrong impression. I think that the
TML stuff SHOULD DEFINITELY be posted in this category. Since those folks
can't participate in these conversations directly, this is the next best
thing. It also increases the amount of input GDW gets on the new revision
(which is a BIG help I'm sure). The more voices heard, the more of an overall
look they can get at people's perspectives on the subject. My ONLY complaint
is about where the messages are ending up. Most of the stuff seems like it
fits in fine but some of the really vocal folks who have NOTHING positive to
contribute make me cringe because that's not why I started this topic. Again,
they should all be heard, but I didn't think that this was the place to do it.
Since I seem to be the only one who thinks so though, go ahead and keep
putting them here.

- - Jay
 ------------
Category 11,  Topic 29
Message 90        Mon Dec 02, 1991
M.TURNAGE1                   at 21:09 EST
 
78 Jay: I seem to be one of the few, but I've been there all along through T2k
1st _and_ 2nd, and seem to be one of the very rare few that's run it more than
once.  I've also been running MT since it came out.

  I was one of the first to come out against the T2k system...I'm less wary
now, but still casting a VERY critical eye.  My two main problems have been A)
Its lack of a task system and B) Compatibility of characters -- The UPP is a
nice and simple concept, plus I like the idea of being able to do a
character's stats in less than a minute.

  A) is not so much of a problem now, though I'm still playing around with the
task system Les posted in a DC game I've been running -- I figure if it works
for the original system, it should work when modified for Traveller.  BTW,
I've done some number crunching...I actually like its probabilities more than
the MT task system's in a lot of ways.  Be warned: It's a linear system of
probabilities instead of on a bell curve: Routine tasks are harder, while
Formidibles and Impossibles are easier.  I'll upload a detailed analysis soon.

  B) I'm not so sure...if we must see a change in basic statistics, I'd like
to see a simple linear change ie. just add +3 to everything.  I'm not too sure
if I want to see anything added, though I would like to see a Charisma stat;
Social Standing should be kept, but I'd like to see it determined by something
else.

Actually, that should probably be put on the wish list: A more realistic
determination of social standing.  With the end of most large interstellar
governments, this will become much more subjective.

RE the Virus: I may have missed something, but my impression was that the
"virus" quickened the collapse, but wasn't the cause.  I also got the
impression that this didn't get rid of all the computers,only certain ones at
the high TL's, say 14-15.  This hurts the real high-tech planets, but doesn't
directly effect the majority of mid-range TL planets (Tl 9-12).  It also wipes
a lot of the remaining high tech fleets.

   Most probably it _doesn't_ effect non-Imperial computers, and once its
existence is known precautions can be taken.  However, the major damage is
already done.  And every so often, a backwater world gets ahold of a piece of
junk or salvaged computer from one of the higher TL worlds...

Mark


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

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3240
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 91 11:13:21 EDT
From: givler@bermuda.rain.COM (Greg Givler)
Subject: The Twilight 2K system.

In all this talk of how to improve MegaTraveller, and Traveller, The
New Edition, many of you have stated that you have not seen the
Twilight 2K system. Here is how it works in a nutshell. BTW, I have
only read thru most of the rules, not all of them and it was only one
reading at that.

There are three levels of Difficulty. 

Easy, Normal, and Difficult.

The roll for Easy is your skill level X2 or less. So if you have
Wheeled Vehicle 3 an Easy task would be to roll a 6 or less, on a D10
I believe, I could be wrong about the dice involved.

For a Normal Task the roll is your skill level or less. So in the
above example you would have to roll a 3 or less.

For a Difficult Task, the roll is half your skill level, rounded down. In the above
example you would have to roll a 1 or less.

I think this Elegant in and simple. It is easy for the both the GM
and the players to learn. Someone mentioned that you have no way of
succeeding in something that you don't have a skill in. I disagree
with that, this is a role playing game, and the first thing that I
learned about role playing games is that the GM makes the rules.

So I don't have the skill to fly that airplane, if I am foolish, or
desparate enough, to try then the GM will have to assign a task such
as possibly my computer skill because I played lots of flight
simulators. Of course with my Computer skill at say five, I only have
a 20% chance of getting that plane off the ground, and probably less
of a chance to land the sucker. I personally think that my own
chances of taking off and landing a plane, would be less than 20% but
then this is a game, not real life, and our characters are the
exceptional people in this world not the normal ones. If we were
playing normal people then this wouldn't be role playing it would be
life. :-)

Anyway that is the basic Task system. I like it, I never really liked
MT's never could remember which number was for which difficulty
level. Also Combat drove me insane, and who runs all there Traveller
adventures with out combat.

The combat system is just as easy, auto-fire is handled separately.

To hit a Close range it is twice your skill in the weapon that you
are using. 

To hit a medium range it is your skill level.

To hit a long range it is half your skill rounded down.

All weapons do the same damage no matter what the range. The theory
being that with modern weapons you don't lose much in power in these
short ranges. We're talking for the most part less than 1000 meters.

I forget how to handle body armor, but it is easy, and I understood
it on the first reading. I just can't remember and I don't have the
book with me.

Auto-Fire is better than the first edition of 2K, but I still think
needs a little work. The way I think it works is you roll the number
of dice and anything that misses is rerolled on adjacent targets.
Like this:

Your auto-fire rate is 5 that means that you roll 5 d6, every 6 you
roll is a hit on the primary target, any dice that are not 6's are
rerolled and any 6 in that group is a hit on an adjacent target. What
limits auto-fire is the recoil rate of the machine gun being fired.
If you are stronger then it is easier to control the recoil of the
gun. I don't know if this is the way it is in real life, I have only
shot a .22 at tin cans, and a shotgun, also at a tin can. I am sure
that if it is not like real life, someone will tell me. :-)

Greg



- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greg Givler                        | Q-Link: GregGivler
Analyst - Systems Evaluation Group | CompuServe: Greg Givler 76702,647
Commodore Product Assurance        | GEnie: G.Givler
215-431-9100                       | The NET: givler@cbmvax.commodore.com
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 "By the way, don't eat the figs." - Livia to Tiberius after the death of
                        Augustus - I, Claudius PBS
===============================================================================


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3241
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 91 12:28 GMT
From: "J.A.F.O." <BSU646@vaxa.bangor.ac.uk>
Subject: The Wish List

1) Ok so the New traveller will have d20 based tasks....This I CAN live with,
 it would help if you kept the old MT naming systems for difficlty though as has
been pointed out 'average' can be misleading.

2) More modules! and I say again more Modules! The two (count them! 2) that were
produced for MT were good, if you can keep the quality and up the numbers then
so much the better.

3) I have said this before and I'll repeat it again Why not let us poor schmucks
know what is going on in the universe ahead of time? By which I mean a GM can
plan out a campaign ahead of time without having it upset by TAS that comes out
during the campaign, this way TAS can be figured in as part of the ongoing 
flavour eg. To take a rebellion example if my party were on Antares they could
find out about the nova prediction 1st hand from a scientist BUT it would help
if the GM knew there was going to BE a prediction so he could set it up.
y'know "foreshadowing"...... the mark of quality literature?
 The 2300 example being the Kafer war books being out so's a GM can run the 
war at his own pace without running out of info halfway.

4) A more convincing long night inducer than the DV.
   but I supose needs must when profit drives....... Sorry I am being unfair, it
is probably a well thought out idea BUT from the "trust us we know best" type
comments from the Mob in charge it is hard to make a fair assessment (and THEY
can't tell so's not to spoil the surprise... right lads?).

5) If the number 13.5 crops up quite as often in neo trav' as MT there may be
a good few of the local Roleplaying fraternity coming over to the states with
large quantities of bacon fat! PLEASE PLEASE make sure the ship design system
is easier to use! Maybe (as has been put forward) a simple fast'n'dirty way and
a long'n'precise way to achieve similar results, that way you can knock up a 
quick trader type in half an hour (with no computer aid!) and for that extra 
special adventure hook ship that little bit of extra effort......

6)  The deadlyish nature of MT combat is Ok but from my experience of 2300
that system is it is a trifle more realistic, so maybe that system would be
an asset & one one my moans in MT is the lack of a decent hit location and 
damage system (mind you with a PGMP who cares!)

7) More aliens! The galaxy is BIG and the imperium can't be the only large 
state maybe a few new neighbours, the rimward borders for example now THAT
would quiet the Solomani down a bit wouldn't it!??! 
And if there are new aliens make them as good as the Hivers or K'kree,
like actually ALIEN (unlike the pseudo samurai moggies from kuzu).
How about the Primordials from Knightfall? more evidence of them..... new
sites to explore and puzzle at..... (I am toying with using my Gurps Uplift
book for a similar purpose)

long winded but hopefully relevent
			JAFO
ps I hate comunication lags! I complain about acrimony and by the time my 
message is posted people start violently being nice to each other! Xmas?
bah humbug!


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3242
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 91 13:09 GMT
From: "J.A.F.O." <BSU646@vaxa.bangor.ac.uk>
Subject: Star-lust! Sex and aliens in MT

After the response to my message concerning a mixed species love affair i have
been mulling over a few things.....

1) The sexual mores of various races for a start.
It is fair to exclude K'Kree,Hivers and most other non humanoids from this but
has anyone wondered what the base racial attitudes to sex etc. IS for various
races?
  Eg. The leonine Aslan who if they are ecologically like lions will have a part
of the year when females are insatiable, an interseting possiblity in so rigid
a soceity, the social saftety valve could be some ritual.
 Or Vilani whose soceity might suggest some high degree of prudery (don't ask me
why but thats my impression) with again some outlet in soceity.
 The total honesty of Zhodani soceity lends itself to all sorts of setups espec-
ially among the psionic classes, a good example to look at are the Darkover
books By M.Zimmer-Bradley.
  
2) The cop out of the imperium having cultural postulates of Tech 8 earth......
Which bit exactly? Middle class America? East end of London slums? Arab Shieks?
try acting out the postulates of one of those in the other situation and see 
where THAT gets you! Ok so it's a conveinience for us (mainly) European/Us
 priveleged (eg.able to afford games) types to be able to play it But the
year is 5400+ things change! 5000 years ago most peoples ancestors were into
'cultural postulates' a wee bit different from now! Even 20 years ago......
Not all traveller characters are going to have the same basic viewpoint on
life just like even near neighbours on earth.

3) How interfertile are most human races? the kind of havoc 240,000 years of
different selective pressures will have played with fertility between Hom. sap
sub species..... Ok so tech 15 fiddling could put it right but it'll cost to
have kids.

4) The starship crew lifestyle is worth thinking about, hardly ever on your 
homeworld... in lose quarters with the same crew for often years, the kind of
Starship-starport subculture that could spring up. One of my party see's the 
universe as a procession of bars where the drinks and licensing laws are all 
that change.  The kind of bond a small ship crew can form esp. a warship like
a t-type, gazelle or fiery and the fact that the trav' universe is apparantly
an equal opportunities employer meaning sex ratios are roughly equal.  I have
a party that is 60% female human 30%male human and 10%vargr female and that
is an entertaining mixture.

5) Re: the players wanting to 'dirty' things with their PC's? how many of you
get that? Mine don't incidently (of my player group 3 are female 5 male and
males play women females also play men).  Not a terribly relevent point but  
I thought I'd ask while I was on the subject. I find MT and Sf gaming seems
less prone to a that sort of thing than fantasy which I have seen get a bit
'quaff and wench'  maybe it is the civilised nature of imperial soceity that
makes that kind of 'lecher gaming' impractial? Anyone willing to comment?

once again long winded but more relevent!
	JAFO

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3243
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 91 12:10 GMT
From: "J.A.F.O." <BSU646@vaxa.bangor.ac.uk>
Subject: History and TAS

Is there any way for those of us who don't get Challenge to get hold of the
 Traveller News Service? It is the only part of the mag' I am interested in and
that alone doesn't justify the outlay.  Megatrav' Journals Newsbriefs are good
but WAY too infrequent to act as a regular news fix.  I recall someone asking if
TAS on e-mail was possible...? why not indeed?
 FASA have a good thing in their screamsheets in the back of their published
Shadowrun  scenarios and campaigns, if you write in with news worthy bits of
 your own games they may include it in the official universe news, now I don't
 know exactly what HIWG actually -DO- but that can't be a bad idea for the
 trav', MT or "virus Trav"  universe to adopt can it?  What do you people think?
 I hope the 80 year gap between revisions is going to be covered to allow those
of us still running Rebellion not to blunder about in the dark TOO much.
  

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3244
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1991 15:29 CDT
From: KELLOGG@ducvax.auburn.edu
Subject: GEnie:  MegaTrav design flaws

Hi folks,

Ok, here we go:
Here are a few areas where the MegaTrav design system is off by
orders of magnatude.  These are things I would like to see
corrected in a revision of Traveller.

Fission/Fusion/Antimatter fuel requirements.
- --------------------------------------------
A few days ago I put out a note about how bad the fuel
requirements for a fission reactor are.  Well, I looked up the
actual figures and here we are:

The N.S. Savannah, (world's first [only?] nuclear merchantmant)
carried 49 kg of uranium fuel.  According to the article, this
would power the reactor at 80%-20knots for 300,000Nm.  15,000 hrs
at 20.1MW output.  According to MegaTrav rules that same reactor
would burn 7537.5 metric TONS!  Now I don't mind a factor of 2
error here and there between freinds but that is FIFTEEN MILLION
percent error!
(source: Aug 1962 National Geographic "Aboard the N.S. Savannah")

Ok, now how do we revise this without throwing every traveller
fusion reactor out the door in the revision?

Answer:  Simple.  Fusion reactors don't burn Hydrogen, they burn
Tritium/Deuterium (hydrogen isotopes).  It is present in the
hydrogen fuel but in extremely small quantities.  (No I don't
have the figures with me... {Metlay?})  This could account for
the discrepancies in fuel consumption/energy output.

Jump drives make use of hydrogen for cooling as well as a power
source.  Thus they need the extra hydrogen in the mix.

Advantage of this idea:  Now, one could fill a starship's fuel
tanks with deuterium/tritium and have 1000+ times the endurance
for the power plant.  (refined deuterium & tritium would of
course COST a lot more, but military ships could afford it.)

Of course they would still need to carry jump fuel, and dumping
deuterium and tritium into the jump drive when hydrogen will do
would be expensive!  But that would explain why hydrogen was
used.

(Please note:  With the above change in fuel consumption: ie
vastly reduced fission fuel consumption, fission powered
starships are indeed feasable within the MegaTrav design system. 
I have put a few onto the TML and they should be available from
the TML vehicle archives.  I created a minor-{major?} argument
when I pointed out that a Nuclear Damper should be able to
increase the output of a fission reactor dramatically by speeding
up the fission reaction.  Anyone interested in this see the
"Highguard" Class experimental cruiser in the TML archives)

Of course this makes the anti-matter fuel consumption stuff look
absolutely rediculous... But I haven't seen anyone use it.  I
tried a brief experiment and saw that a TL 16 fusion plant was
much more desirable.  In any case, changing the Anti-Matter
consumption isn't going to ruin anybody's day.  I haven't seen a
single design that used it.

Batteries:
- ---------
The batteries are much too expensive.  I have turned out a few
Diesel/Electric submarines (using a similar system to the
recently published Wet Navy) and the subs ended up costing about
as much as a heavy Battlecruiser of the same Tech level.  (a U.S.
Fleet type sub cost as much as the Graf Spee!) This was due
solely to the cost of the batteries.

Admittedly, I'm not sure of the power it stores, but the battery
in my car is about 5 liters in volume and cost me $25.  Well a 5
liter battery in MegaTrav costs about 1500 Cr.  Something is
Wrong here!

Ok, now the battery table is converted from Book 8 Robots.  So,
I'd guess that the writers figured these were high storage/light
weight/small size/high quality batteries to fit inside a very
sophisticated electronic device.

Perhaps, there should be a chart of batteries meant for large
storage as opposed to high quality?  After all, filling a
diesel/electric sub with camera batteries is going to be Quite
expensive...

Maximum Speed
- -------------
Has anybody looked at the max speed table?  The thrust/weight
ratio and it's correspondance to maximum speed is WAY off.  I
strongly suggest that the people revising the stuff take a look
at the actual thrust to weight ratio's of aircraft.
(all speeds below are in kilometers per hour)

Thrust/Wt	Aircraft	Speed	MegaT	COACC
..2G		C-135A		965	240	240
..3G		A-6		1100	360	360
..4G		F-5		1700	480	480
..5G		F-8		1930	600	600
..6G		F-105		2235	720	720
..7G		F-106		2455	840	840
..8G		F-14		2485	960	960
..9G					1080	1080
1G		F-15		2655	1200	1200
2G					2120	2000
3G		X-15		7274	2850	3000
4G					3400	3200
5G					3840	3750
6G					4200
(Note that the SR-71's thrust to weight ratio is .3824 max speed
is unknown but around 3100 kph {Bertil?})
(The X-15 thrust/wt ratio is about 1.15 increasing to 3.3 as fuel
is burned)
(I complied a list of thrust to weight vs max speed which anyone
is welcome to, just ask)

In the light of the above, I think grav vehicles and starships
max speed should be VASTLY higher than they are.  COACC's
aircraft engines have vastly exaggerated thrusts listed, and so
that the aircraft's speed comes out about right.  But any 1G
merchant ship should be about Mach 2+, and any grav vehicle/ship
with an excess thrust of 3G would be about as fast as the X-15! 
(Mach 6+!!)

Rate of Fire
- ------------
Wet Navy/Design and stuff.  The Rate of Fire for big guns is off. 
Perhaps the Ref's handbook doesn't take the loading equipment in
a turret into account, but according to what I have found about
the Bismark, and other TL 6 heavily armed ships, the ROF of a
38cm gun should be 2 rounds per minute, not 1/4; ROF of the 28cm
is also 2 rnds/min, not 1/4, and the ROF of a 20cm gun should be
3 rnds/min not 1.
This of course is only a minor quibble...

If we can hammer these out this revision would really be great!

Falicitations,
Scott S. Kellogg

PS.	One extremely minor quibble:  Challenge 54 gives us a whole
lot of new weapons (YEA!  TL 2 Cannons at last!  Yippee!)  But it
doesn't give us the prices.  A missile launcher weighs 110% of
weight of missile... but no cost or volume.  A torpedo tube takes
up 110% of the volume of the torpedo, but no weight or cost...

Anybody out on GEnie have those figures?

PPS.	The TDR folks had an idea which makes sence:  Have the
chassis damage points of a vehicle be related to the weight of
the chassis.  Thus a heavily armored chassis would be able to
take more low penetration damage than a light one of the same
size.  (The example was one of school bus vs. main battle tank)
But I don't know much about it.  {Rob can you give us a run down
on it?}

Thanks,
Mr. Scott

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

End of TML Bundle
*****************

From jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com Mon Dec  9 00:48:18 1991
Received: from relay.tek.com by engrg.uwo.ca;
	(id AA14703) Mon, 9 Dec 91 00:48:04 EST
Received: by relay.tek.com id <AA01859@relay.tek.com>; Sun, 8 Dec 91 21:00:45 -0800
Received: from wrgate.wr.tek.com by tektronix.TEK.COM (4.1/7.1)
	id AA25139; Sun, 8 Dec 91 21:03:38 PST
Received: by wrgate.wr.tek.com (5.51/7.1)
	id AA27471; Sun, 8 Dec 91 21:00:27 PST
Received: by metolius.WR.TEK.COM (4.1/7.1)
	id AA05609; Sun, 8 Dec 91 21:00:21 PST
Message-Id: <9112090500.AA05609@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>
To: dan@engrg.uwo.ca (Dan Corrin), bfwong@ocf.berkeley.edu (Raven Blackburn),
        anthony@cs.pitt.edu (Michael Anthony Kapolka),
        mcknight@f104.n170.z1.fidonet.org (Chuck McKnight),
        fantasci!traveller@engrg.uwo.ca (Joseph "Jo" E Poplawski),
        jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com (James T. Perkins)
Subject: TML Bundle #269: Msgs 3244-3257
Reply-To: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Precedence: bulk
Date: Sun, 08 Dec 91 21:00:19 PST
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com>
Status: R


TML Bundles come from the archives of the Traveller Mailing List,
maintained by James Perkins, traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com.

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

Date: Sun Dec  8 21:00:15 PST 1991
From: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Subject: TML Bundle #269: Table of Contents

-AMN- --Date--- --Sender--------- --Subject-----------------------------------
3245  04-Dec-91 KELLOGG@ducvax.au A rather bad joke |-> << And now for a rather
3246  05-Dec-91 MacGyver          Re: (3233) What will DGP do? << Hans Rancke-M
3247  05-Dec-91 rem@oz.plymouth.e Wow, fall a little behind, and... << I've bee
3248  05-Dec-91 Adam Naylor       General Traveller Questions << [You can reach
3249  05-Dec-91 Robert S. Dean    Re: (3232) Seeker products << Hans Rancke wri
3250  05-Dec-91 Robert S. Dean    Re: (3233) What will DGP do? << Hans Ranck as
3251  05-Dec-91 James T Perkins   Re: General Traveller Questions << Edmund, A 
3252  05-Dec-91 Hans Rancke-Madse Starship sex << > From: "J.A.F.O." <BSU646@va
3253  05-Dec-91 Joe Heck          GDW and upcoming releases... << A friendly vo
3254  05-Dec-91 Robert S. Dean    Re: (3244) GEnie: MegaTrav design flaws << Sc
3255  05-Dec-91 richard@agora.rai Neo-Traveller << Thanks Bertil for the eye-op
3256  05-Dec-91 bgillesp@lonestar Re: The Twilight 2K system. << I just finishe
3257  05-Dec-91 surman@zulu.lgs.l GEnie: Traveller Revision << Here's some of m
3258  05-Dec-91 Mike.Metlay@ORGAN Vargr kinda love << Actually, the sickest thi

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3245
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1991 17:10 CDT
From: KELLOGG@ducvax.auburn.edu
Subject: A rather bad joke |->

And now for a rather bad joke...  to the tune of 'Groovy kind of Love'

"When I'm feeling blue,
 All I have to do
 Is bark a bit at you,
 Then I'm not so blue.

 When your close to me,
 I can smell you're in heat
 I can feel you breathing
 In my ears,

 Wouldn't you agree,
 Baby, you and me
 Got a Vargr kind of love?


 Anytime you want to
 You can turn me on to
 Anything you want to
 Any time at all

 When I lick your ears,
 Oh! I start to shivver,
 Can't control the quivvering
 Inside.

 Wouldn't you agree,
 Baby, you and me
 Got a Vargr kind of love?


	(Bridge)

 When I'm in your paws,
 Nothing seems to matter,
 If the worlds should shatter
 I don't care

 Wouldn't you agree,
 Baby, you and me
 Got a Vargr kind of love?
 We've got a Vargr kind of love..."


Credit for the hook goes to Metlay.
(Yeah it was originaly his joke, but he didn't think of the song!)
Musical credit goes to Wayne Fontana and the Mindbenders
You can blame the lyrics on me... :-)

Scott Kellogg
Death to Phil Collins!  Death to Phil Collins!
(available in FULL DIMENSIONAL MONO!)

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3246
From: MacGyver <macgyver@cis.ohio-state.edu>
Subject: Re: (3233) What will DGP do?
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 91 1:54:55 EST

Hans Rancke-Madsen writes:
> What I'm really anxious to know is: Will DGP drop Megatraveller too?
> I gather thaty they are not involved in Traveller III, but will they
> retain their licence to do Megatraveller stuff? And do they want to?
> Or will they switch to that new game of theirs, AI?

	Well, DGP is putting all the plans they have on MT on hold.
They are even selling all MT manuscripts, drawings, etc they have to other
people. They do still have the license, but that's about it. 

	MTJ #3 is their last MT product, I think.

Wilson MacGyver                      | Everytime you have an idea, I get 
Internet:macgyver@cis.ohio-state.edu | grounded for a week!
=====================================| 			- Gloria
Disclaimer:All opinions are mine only|=======================================

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3247
From: rem@oz.plymouth.edu (Bob Mahoney)
Subject: Wow, fall a little behind, and...
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 91 9:54:55 EST

I've been *rather* behind in my TML reading, so I was astonished to read about
the "new and improved" initiative.

I generally agree with the "reservations" that TMLers have had, but I did get
one idea:

There's this mad scientist, see?  And he invents this special motor oil, see?
and this motor oil completely destroys any machine that uses it, see?  And the
scientist makes lots and lots, and everybody uses it, and the world is promptly
lubricated back into the stone age!

(And then we can have magic and swords.)

- -- 
                                ..
- -------------------------------m--m------------------------------------------
Bob Mahoney    Plymouth State College   Computer Services, Plymouth, NH 03264
rem@oz.plymouth.edu      Net Manager/Postmaster       bobmah@psc.plymouth.edu 

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3248
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1991 16:45:14 +1100
From: Adam Naylor <anaylor@gara.une.oz.au>
Subject: General Traveller Questions

[You can reach Edmund temporarily at anaylor@gara.une.oz.au.  He isn't a
TMLer but we can help him.  Yes, I know some of these questions are
similar to earlier ones from him -- James]

Okay I have a few general questions on character generation .....

1) The Mercenary

- - What assignments can a mercenary character be promoted on ?
The book says on all the assignments NOT listed in paratheses, however
none of them are listed in paranthses .

- - The rules assume the character joins the imperial army . Yet he would
not be able to fly grav vehicles if he came from a tech 9 planet or less .
This does not make sense . Are the rules assuming that the imperial 
government lower thier tech levels of the military depending on what world
thier garrison is on ? The americans certainly did not do this in vietnam !

- - Why cannot the character belong to the army of his homeworld ? Or why
not the security forces of a megacorp ? 

- - The referee's companion state that tech 14+ planets arm and equip thier
troops with battledress and energy weapons . Yet the only way battledress
skill is gained is if the character is a commando, or a marine on ships
troops . Why not say instead that a character from a tech 14+ world gain the
battledress skill in place of vacuum suit on the infantry MOS skill table .

- - The rebellion sourcebook states the imperial garrison numbers (average)
for member worlds . But those (on average) with a pop of 4- dont have any ? 
Does this mean the character cannot join the army ?

- - The mercenary assignments table gives basic descriptions of assignments 
Does this mean the assignments assume the following ?

Police Action : Garrison from planet is stationed on another world eg : 
US marines in vietnam .

Counter Insurgency : Worlds garrison fighting against rebellion or civil 
strife ?

Raid : A 'war' situation ?

Internal Security : ???

2) Merchants 

- - The merchant character has no access to increase his stats of Str, End,
Dex, and Int (Dex if he were not a FT) . He gains no access to Jack Of All
Trades Skill . He has no access to naval architecture . Why not do the 
following . 

Replace Carousing (gained with a roll of 2 on the life table) with Physical 
Replace Blade Combat (gained with a roll of 2 on the shipboard table) with
hand combat . 
Replace + 1 Edu (Life : 5) with Mental
Replace CCarousing (Life : 6) with the skill branch which allows you too
choose from Leader, JOT, Instruction, and Carousing (Sorry dont have my 
book here) .

3) Naval Characters

- - When can naval characters get promoted ? 

4) Marines

- - Do marines function at the tech level thier base is stationed on or 
at tech 14/15 ?

5) Other Races 

- - What differences are thier between humanti, Aslan, Vargr etc when making
up a character, and what bonuses do thier races gain ? (Please dont say
none cause thats pretty shallow !!) 

6) Scouts

- - What justification is there in giving a member of the tech branch a
scout ship ?

- - Do high ranking IISS members gain a bonus mustering out ?

7) Can brownie points be spent on mustering out rolls ? I say yes cause
it allows hopless characters (such as those who have an Int:2) build up
stats (depending on the roll), but this can be abused eg a rank E2 merchant
getting a vessel ? 

8) Can brownie points be spent 'At any time' . eg a character gained a 
level 3 heavy weapons skill (by rolling a 4 on the command table) . But at the
ebd of the characters generation he wants to have leader skill so he spends a
brownie point to upgrade it to leader ? 

9) Can you spend a brownie point to gain a special mission and recieve a 
brownie point for it ?

10) Do scouts gain a brownie point for training/special/war missions . Do
merchants gain it for having bonuses ?

Thats about all I can think of . I have access to the errata published
already but they dont cover the thinks I wanted to know . 

Please If you have any comment, no matter how small please tell me 

Edmund





A

A
A


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3249
Date:     Thu, 5 Dec 91 11:22:59 EST
From: Robert S. Dean  <rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  Re:  (3232) Seeker products

Hans Rancke writes:
>
> Does anybody know anything about two products from Seeker that
> I've seen advertised in 'Megatraveller Journal' #2: _Lords of
> Thunder_ and _Consumer's Guide_? Are they out? Are they any
> good?

I'm pretty sure that these products are not yet available...I've been keeping
a fairly close watch on distributor lists for them.

Rob Dean


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3250
Date:     Thu, 5 Dec 91 11:26:45 EST
From: Robert S. Dean  <rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  Re:  (3233) What will DGP do?

Hans Ranck asks:

> What I'm really anxious to know is: Will DGP drop Megatraveller too?
> I gather thaty they are not involved in Traveller III, but will they
> retain their licence to do Megatraveller stuff? And do they want to?
> Or will they switch to that new game of theirs, AI?

DGP is definitely dropping support of MegaTraveller, according to the latest
on GEnie.  I should go back and post the note from a few days ago, in which 
they state _That they are looking for a buyer for their files_.  Dropping
it, and then throwing out the pieces it seems.  All DGP efforts will be
devoted to A.I.  )-:  I just got my copy of Cats and Rats last night.  What
a loss...I was especially saddened to see a projected Vol. 5 for minor
races advertised.

Rob Dean



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

Archive-Message-Number: 3251
Subject: Re: General Traveller Questions 
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 91 08:34:14 PST
From: James T Perkins <jamesp@metolius.WR>


Edmund,

A lot of your questions are indicative of the proofreading in
MegaTraveller.  MT was written by Traveller experts for Traveller
experts, and was never really shaken out.  So, as a self-appointed
Traveller expert, I usually observe these little inconsistencies and
decide what *I* would do with them.  I'll shoot from the hip without my
sources today.  To wit...

Adam Naylor <anaylor@gara.une.oz.au> writes:
> - The rules assume the character joins the imperial army.  Yet he would
> not be able to fly grav vehicles if he came from a tech 9 planet or less.

I figure anyone in an interstellar organization can learn skills at the
Average Stellar tech level or higher.

> - Why cannot the character belong to the army of his homeworld?  Or why
> not the security forces of a megacorp?

Because this is a fine detail not included in the rules.  Feel free to
take a few liberties to set this up on your own, based on the Imp. Army
character generation.

> - The rebellion sourcebook states the imperial garrison numbers (average)
> for member worlds.  But those (on average) with a pop of 4- dont have any?
> Does this mean the character cannot join the army?

Population indicates the civilian RESIDENTS of a planet, not military or
transient population.  So, a system with a resident population of 16
people could still support a garrison of a few thousand troops.  It's
just that there won't be a lot of movies or shopping for the troops to
induldge in, off-duty.

> - The mercenary assignments table gives basic descriptions of assignments
> Does this mean the assignments assume the following?

> Police Action : Garrison from planet is stationed on another world eg :
> US marines in vietnam.

> Counter Insurgency : Worlds garrison fighting against rebellion or civil
> strife?

> Raid : A 'war' situation?

Sound good to me.

> Internal Security :???

Military Police?

> - The merchant character has no access to increase his stats of Str, End,
> Dex, and Int (Dex if he were not a FT).  He gains no access to Jack Of All
> Trades Skill.  He has no access to naval architecture.  Why not do the
> following. [replace skills on tables]

Sounds good to me.

> - When can naval characters get promoted?

Enlisted - up to once/year, officers - up to once/term.

> - Do marines function at the tech level thier base is stationed on or
> at tech 14/15?

I go with the latter.

> - What differences are thier between humanti, Aslan, Vargr etc when making
> up a character, and what bonuses do thier races gain?  (Please dont say
> none cause thats pretty shallow!!  )

Refer to the ethnic sourcebooks for the races.  Vargr, for instance, do
not even have a Social attribute - they have a related attribute instead
that indicates their relative influence in Vargr society.  I think there
are some additional adjustments.

> - Do high ranking IISS members gain a bonus mustering out?

I don't think so.

> 7) Can brownie points be spent on mustering out rolls?

I haven't used them for this, but I could be wrong...

> 8) Can brownie points be spent 'At any time'. [retroactive skill changes]

I don't use it this way.  I feel it needs to be applied at the time the
roll is made.

> 9) Can you spend a brownie point to gain a special mission and recieve a
> brownie point for it?

I would probably allow this.

> 10) Do scouts gain a brownie point for training/special/war missions.  Do
> merchants gain it for having bonuses?

Dunno.

James
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Traveller Mailing List Administrator	     James T Perkins @ Tektronix, Inc
traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com	     Beaverton, Oregon, USA
    "How many ancients can dance on the head of a pin?" - Scott Kellogg

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3252
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Starship sex
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 91 17:35:18 MET

> From: "J.A.F.O." <BSU646@vaxa.bangor.ac.uk>

> 4) The starship crew lifestyle is worth thinking about, hardly ever on your
> homeworld... in lose quarters with the same crew for often years, the kind
> of starship-starport subculture that could spring up. One of my party
> see's the universe as a procession of bars where the drinks and licensing
> laws are all that change. The kind of bond a small ship crew can form esp.
> a warship like a t-type, gazelle or fiery and the fact that the trav'
> universe is apparantly an equal opportunities employer meaning sex ratios
> are roughly equal.

I'm running a naval campaign in which the players are officers and crew
on an Imperial warship. When I started I thought a bit about what rules
the Navy would have about shipboard interpersonal relationships. What I
came up with was 'Rule 37':

        "The formation of close emotional bonds detrimental to the
        discipline and efficiency of the ship is punished by..."

This puts the burden squarely on the ship's captain. If he says something
is allowed, then it is allowed. If he forbids anything, then it's forbidden.
The catch is that if anything _does_ go wrong, then it's his responsibility
too. Note that the rule includes, but is not limited to, sexual relations.
I also decided that over the years several rules of thumb had been arrived at:

        1) Relationships between people directly above and below
           each other in the chain of command is problematical.

        2) Relationships between people with too disparate rank
           is problematical.

        3) Relationships between people with approximately the
           same length of service is less problematical (So an
           officer and a CPO would probably be OK, as long as
           they weren't in the same line of command).

I've never had occasion to use this though. The thoughts of my players
dosen't seem to run that way. They're more interested in blasting pirates
and getting promoted!


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
                -    "You don't know wood from canvas,
                and you evidently don't want to learn.
                Well, I'll teach you!"
                        - Captain Bligh

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3253
Date:         Thu, 05 Dec 91 11:02:49 CST
From: Joe Heck <CSPECJH@UMCVMB.missouri.edu>
Subject:      GDW and upcoming releases...

A friendly voice at GDW told me this morning that the name of the new
Traveller package would be called Traveller: The New Era, and that it was
due to be released sometime about next november. According to whomever (I
never asked a name), the game was still in the writers hands and there
wasn't much telling what was going to come out of it since Editing was
being real secretive. She did mention that some folios and advertisements
would start being released around Feb '92....

Just an update... No promises as to the reliability of this info...

Joe

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Joe Heck
(314) 882-2131

InterNet: CSPECJH@umcvmb.missouri.edu
BitNet:   CSPECJH@UMCVMB
cc:Mail:  MUCCGW.CSPECJH@SSGATE.MISSOURI.EDU

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3254
Date:     Thu, 5 Dec 91 13:25:46 EST
From: Robert S. Dean  <rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  Re:  (3244) GEnie: MegaTrav design flaws

Scott Kellogg writes:
> Subject: (3244) GEnie:  MegaTrav design flaws
> 
> The TDR folks had an idea which makes sense:  Have the
> chassis damage points of a vehicle be related to the weight of
> the chassis.  Thus a heavily armored chassis would be able to
> take more low penetration damage than a light one of the same
> size.  (The example was one of school bus vs. main battle tank)
> But I don't know much about it.  {Rob can you give us a run down
> on it?}

But of course...I'll append the appropriate sections of "TDR Vehicle
Design V1.1" below.  The basic idea is, as Scott says, that the current
damage point system is easy, but strange.  An M-1 tank is smaller
than a school bus, therefore it is easier to destroy in MT, where damage
points are equal to hull volume in kl divided by 6.  When I made up the
rule suggestion below, I arbitrarily decided that 1 ton of weight should
be exchanged for 1 kl in the old system...probably because the default
weight of any object in MT is 1ton/kl.  This would have the effect of making
a heavier object harder to destroy than a light object of the same volume.
The reason that the numbers below use /1.5 and * 1.7 instead 
of /15 and /6 is an errata which said that damage values
should be multiplied by ten for use in personal combat (by which they meant
everything except the High Guard derived starship combat system).  You'll
see that /1.5 = /15 *10 and *1.7 = /6 * 10 (rounded off).

COACC is a terrible offender in this regard, and I recommended using a weight
based approach to aircraft damage (cribbed from Striker, where else?) at
the same time.



        TDR VEHICLE DESIGN SYSTEM
        VERSION 1.1  
        20 DECEMBER 1990
        ROB DEAN
        
        ***************************************************************
        Remarks will be delineated with rows of asterisks at the 
        beginning and end.
        ***************************************************************
        
        DESIGN EVALUATION
        
        This section can be retained as is, with the following excep-
        tions.  
        
        Damage:  Calculate based on weight, not volume.  Also figure in 
        the factor of ten for personal combat rules to allow more differ-
        entiation of vehicles at lower sizes.  So new hull values become 
        Weight/1.5 (inoperative) and Weight*1.7 (Destroyed).  Values for 
        power plant and locomotion are figured as before, on a percentage 
        of the weight rather than the volume.
        


Well, that's all there was to it...

Rob Dean



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

Archive-Message-Number: 3255
From: richard@agora.rain.COM (Richard Johnson)
Subject: Neo-Traveller
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 91 10:53:23 PST

Thanks Bertil for the eye-opener on the T2K task system.  I could
easily get behind something close to this if it had slightly more
resolution.  That is: everyday=85% (of die used), routine=75%,
normal=50%, difficult=25%, formidable=15%  (success percentages)
or something like this.

Here's the reasoning:  I, as a GM, want to know, by looking at the
roll, just how badly mangled the task was.  This can affect the
outcome.  "Oh no Fred! The reactor is starting to run away! -
Fred's player rolls a (whatever) and *almost* shuts it down. -
Okay, it's going out of control and you now have ten minutes to
get yer party as far upwind as they can manage."  Rather than 
letting his slip of the control knob destroy the party utterly.

Otherwise, GDW might just be right in using dice with more sides.
As much as I like the simple 2D6 profile, more resolution would be
really nice.  Especially in the Trade and Commerce Rules.

** What're the goal and status with Trade and Commerce? **
I'm especially interested in this part of the new design, and offer
any and all info and assistance I can give.


Finally -- Virus...
Yecch.  It's not that it's such a repugnant idea (although it is 
to me).  It's that it's totally unneccessary.  The fall has come.
It is probably irreversible.

Unless you are using this as a way to introduce a superior computer
technology that doesnt take 10 tons of volume for a ship...  I'd
support that in the drop of a pin.

Keep struggling.  
- -- 
Richard Johnson     richard@agora.rain.com
"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from
 mediocre minds."    Albert Einstein

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3256
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 91 11:23:56 EST
From: bgillesp@lonestar.Prime.COM (Brian Gillespie)
Subject: Re: The Twilight 2K system.

I just finished reading Greg's post about the TW2k system and since I have
been actively playing it since it came out I figured I'd clarify a few items
and put my own comments in.

If you aren't interested in the Twilight:2000 system you should skip this
message.

Overall I like the game very much because it does a good job dealing with
the activity most likely to kill a character, combat.  Of the remaining
activities, in any good game, 90% can be resolved by the GM without the need
to consult any rules.  And let's face it, a good GM is what makes or breaks
a game.

My first requirement for a rule system is playability.  Realism, however
cannot just be thrown out the window, the game has to basically 'feel' right.

That said, a few things about the Greg's post that could use a little
clarification.

To hit determination: there are two types of shot: "quick" or "aimed"
aimed shots make the task one level easier.  All shots are considered
quick unless the character uses the preceeding phase to aim.

Example: given a character with skill 7 in a weapon. Roll 1d10, a 10 is always
a miss, a 1 is always a hit.

Shot type	Range
		Close	Medium	Long	Etc.
Aimed		14	7	3		(round to nearest & .5 = 0)
Quick		 7	3	2

Recoil:
All weapons have 1 or 2 recoil values.  1 for single shot(SS) recoil and
another for recoil when firing a burst, if the weapon is capable.
You take the total number of shots fired in a round times the individual
recoil value to get a total recoil.  If the total recoil is greater than the
characters strength, you subtract the difference from the to hit die roll.
Example: recoil of M16A2 SS is 3. Fire 3 shots for total recoil =9. Character
strength of 7 results in a -2 on all to hit rolls in round.

Damage: In the first edition of TW2k weapon damage used to drop off with
range.  In the second edition they just left the number constant. I like
it, much more playable.

Auto weapons fire: Weapons capable of automatic weapons fire have a Rate Of
Fire(ROF) value: standard values are: 10, 5 & 3.  Ignoring recoil for the
moment, this is the number of d6's you roll at close range. Each '6' that 
comes up means 1 hit on target.  Half of all remaining dice rolled are rolled
again if there are any other targets adjacent to primary target, again '6's
hit.  Modifiers: each range band reduces the number of d6's rolled by: 3,2,1
respectively, minimum of 1; total recoil greater than strength reduces number
of dice by difference, 1/6th hit chance stays same.


Problems with the system:
A supplement, Infantry Weapons of the World(IWW), is available and fixes some
of the weapon statistics problems and introduces some of it's own.

IWW finally makes pistols deadly, previous damage numbers were so low that
  no character would use one.
IWW adds the "instant kill rule". Simply put characters can now die from
  smaller arms with just one shot.
IWW`s problems: It gives the formulas used to calculate damage and recoil
  values and then goes on to use numbers that don't fit the formulas given.
  Inconsistent damage numbers: ie M16A1 does 2 dice damage while M16A2 does 3.

Some skills should have an initial level based on the characters attributes.
The worst situation we've run into is the thrown weapon skill when using a
grenade.  Basic military skill give you a level 1 in the skill.  According to
a strict interpretation of the rules, throwing a grenade successfully, ie
threw a window 10 feet away requires a roll of 1 on a d10.  This means that
90% of the time the grenade hits the wall and doesn't go through the window.
PC's stopped using grenades for a while since standing 10 feet from one was
not healthy.

Shotguns: uhhh, "interesting", nuff said.

Anyone who wishes to discuss the TW:2000 system is encouraged to email me.

Brian

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

Archive-Message-Number: 3257
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 91 17:28:09 CST
From: surman@zulu.lgs.lsu.edu (Michael A. Surman)
Subject: GEnie: Traveller Revision

Here's some of my thoughts on what needs revision in Traveller.
 
- - Dice: using 2d6 is an interesting concept from wargaming. It works
  ok but I prefer the percentile method (d100). It allows for all 
  sorts of adjustments better than 2d6.

- - Character generation: incomplete. The generation system needs to 
  be refined. College is one of my biggest complaints. Four years and
  all a character gets is MAYBE an EDU +1! This leads to my second
  complaint, skills. Classic Traveller, the way I see it, was designed
  with roleplaying as the main point in the game. The few skills that
  are there just add a little variety. It was up to the GM to resolve
  character actions and it worked. Then other RPG's were developed and
  brought with them skills buy the bucketfull (e.g. Rolemaster). Now
  MegaTraveller came out but didn't know which way to go. So you get
  a task system, a few more skills and still trying to merge old concepts
  with the new but it doesn't work very well. If you're going to add 
  skills then add skills. Granted the example cited above goes overboard
  but it helps shape the character. So when a character goes to college 
  at least something is learned. And the same goes for graduate school 
  (which isn't in the system now, anyway). How are Ph.D.'s created? Not 
  very easily by MT! In Classic Traveller a skill of 1 actually meant 
  something, 2 was very good and 3 was outstanding (it also conferred
  a medical degree to doctor characters). In MT skills of 4,5, 6, etc
  are common. And still using the 2d6 system!

  Character generation is one of the high points to the game. The 2nd
  MT computer game is great for developing characters. Now all that's
  needed is to include other races and there career choices as well. 

  If there is going to be an advanced generation method then include 
  the other career types, not just the basic 4. 

  Most non-military careers start with a college education.
  
  What about skills from high school! Wasn't anything learned, tech
  skills, academic skills. Might be pushing it but characters are not
  run of the mill. 

  Drop Education and Social Standing as characteristics. They are 
  conditions not attributes (as an aside, I use 13 attributes to
  describe characters in my games, 6 physical and 7 mental). So, add
  other characteristics that describe a character not something that
  is influenced by outside sources. Or, better yet, develop a class of
  secondary characteristics (actually conditions) that are used to
  expand the generation process.

- - Task systems are needed in any game that allows for a character to
  do any type of research or analysis. I have yet to find one that I
  really like. The MT task system is as good as any I have seen so far.

- - Combat. Again I have yet to find one I really like. In MT why have
  a skill for a weapon if you make a task out of using it.

- - Equipment design. Having an all encompassing system is nice but very
  unwieldly and looses some of its flavor. Split design into separate
  areas: computers, robots, starships, ground/air/water vehicles, weapons,
  etc. Current designs follow their own rules that sometimes don't make
  sense. Energy use being one of them, other aspects of physics too.

- - Pat answers such as "It's best for the game." or "Because that's the
  way it is." show poor salesmanship. Rational explanations get better
  converts.

- - Traveller Universe. One area that I find troublesome is economics. In
  In a universe that has limited communications how does credit work?
  Or electronic funds transfers? Seems like an easy way to counterfeit.
  Better explanations on existing aspects of the universe need to be
  done. This is a general statement that needs to be stressed. Everyday
  workings are not very well described and need to be improved. 

- - Modules collating existing published information. I would love to
  see a complete compilation of the Traveller News Service that appears
  in Challenge. The same goes for equipment. Background information on
  people, planets, systems, etc.  A 3-Ring binder format would work 
  very well.

- - Get a real editor. Not to be sarcastic but proofing has been poor.

Mike Surman
surman@zulu.lgs.lsu.edu


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

Archive-Message-Number: 3258
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 91 19:09:10 EST
From: Mike.Metlay@ORGAN.MUSIC.CS.CMU.EDU
Subject: Vargr kinda love

Actually, the sickest thing about that song is that a recorded version
of it actually exists-- I received it on a demo tape by a band called
"Scott Kellogg and The Loonees," which also featured original tunes
like "Monsters from the Id," "Surfable Haircut" and "Nine O'Clock Banana."
Scary stuff; the missus became an instant fan. |->

metlay


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

End of TML Bundle
*****************

