Subj:	TRAVELLER digest 352
Date:	95-07-19 21:49:10 EDT
From:	traveller@mpgn.com
To:	traveller@mpgn.com

From:	traveller@mpgn.com
Sender:	traveller@mpgn.com
Reply-to:	traveller@mpgn.com
To:	traveller@mpgn.com (Multiple recipients of list)
			    TRAVELLER Digest 352

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) Re: weapon damage (Td#351)
	by Derek Wildstar <wildstar@qrc.com>
  2) Re: MicroJumps
	by Bri <bri@teleport.com>
  3) Virus and Ancients
	by That Computer Guy <darkstar@chopin.udel.edu>
  4) Re: Virus and Ancients
	by Bill Currie <BILLC@teleng1.tait.co.nz>
  5) Re: weapon damage (Td#351)
	by Bill Currie <BILLC@teleng1.tait.co.nz>
  6) Re: AT-ST Walkers
	by "Brendan O'Donovan" <Brendan@odonovan.demon.co.uk>
  7) Re:Walkers
	by Hans-Christian.Prytz@ffi.no
  8) Re: Classic Trav microjumps
	by Ethan Henry <ehenry@magmacom.com>
  9) Re: Microjumps
	by bonnevil@flipper.itlabs.umn.edu (Steven Bonneville)
 10) Re: weapon damage
	by "Harold D. Hale" <hdhale@smtpwpo.dayt.tasc.com>
 11) Re: Walkers
	by "Harold D. Hale" <hdhale@smtpwpo.dayt.tasc.com>
 12) thanks for the combat info
	by rhunt@med.unc.edu (Rick Hunt)

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

Date: Tue, 18 Jul 95 22:08:56 -0400
From: Derek Wildstar <wildstar@qrc.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: weapon damage (Td#351)
Message-ID: <9507190208.AA09507@qrc.com>

rhunt@med.unc.edu (Rick Hunt) wrote:
> Almost all pistols do 1d6 damage, which means that it takes a half dozen
> maximum damage shots to the chest to hurt the average person.
> Am I missing something important?

Not particularly.  Here are some things you can do to "deadly it up"
a bit.  While (reading the rules as written) these are variants, I
(and the rest of the GDW-Beta group) heartily recommend them.  These
are "House Rules" used in all the games I referee:

1) Roll weapons damage on d10's instead of d6's.
2) Apply the "Quick Kill" rule (T:TNE pp.286) to everyone, not just NPCs.

The combination of these two rules actually makes it possible to kill
a healthy person with a pistol shot to the chest (actually makes it
pretty likely - in a large number of firefights, the combination of
these two rules makes damage of '1' to the chest about 25% fatal).

NOTE: If you're playing a combat-intensive campaign, you do NOT want to
      do this; with the two variants in effect, about the only way for
      a character to live to a ripe old age is to avoid getting shot at.

Campaigns with mercenary or other combat-intensive themes would do better
with the lower damage, or without the Quick-Kill rule - it's a lot less
realistic, but the probability of player-characters surviving a major
firefight increases dramatically.


Bruce Johnson <johnson@tonic.pharm.arizona.edu> asks:
> Forgive my ignorance, but lots of people have referred to the 'Star 
> Wars AT-ST' walker.  I remember two different ones from the 
> movies...the big four legged ones, and a much smaller, two legged 
> one.  Which are you referring to or are these what you're talking 
> about at all?

The Star Wars movies used two types of Imperial Walker:

The "AT-AT" (All-Terrain Armored Transport) was the giant four-legged
walking armored personnel carrier and fire support vehicle.  They played
a large role in the Hoth (ice planet) battle scenes from "The Empire
Strikes Back" - Luke and his snowspeeders fight with them.  

The "AT-ST" (All-Terrain Scout Transport) is the much smaller two-legged
walker that appeared _very_ briefly in "The Empire Strikes Back" (look
carefully for it during the ice planet battle scenes).  It got a MUCH
larger role in "Return of the Jedi", where it was used in the Endor (forest
moon) battle sequences.  Note that the large AT-AT walkers are seen briefly
in this movie, patrolling near the landing platform.


wildstar@quark.qrc.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Vis sit
tecum! 

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

Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 19:50:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: Bri <bri@teleport.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: MicroJumps
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950718194816.24485B-100000@kelly.teleport.com>

 I don't see why you shouden't let your players microjump. But consider 
the consiquences<sp> if you did and had a mis-jump. If fuel is really 
that short, you could be in a situation where your who knows where out in 
some deserted sectore and no one knows your there. They just know your in 
a circle x parsecs big. So it would have it's use's. But it would be a 
desperation move IMO and without any sort of saftey net to catch you.

bri


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

Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 22:51:07 -0400
From: That Computer Guy <darkstar@chopin.udel.edu>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Virus and Ancients
Message-ID: <199507190251.WAA14783@chopin.udel.edu>


Okay, so I'm sitting around here twiddling my thumbs as I'm trying to
figure out what I want in the robot that I'm designing.  And then BLAM
it hits me.  What would the effects be of Virus taking over old
computers and machines that were created by the Ancients?

Virus is intelligent enough to know to rifle through the databases it's
acquired.  It also has access to many resources.  So, why haven't Virus
infested ships sought out and taken control of anything created by the
Ancients?

And while we're at it, what does everyone think that Grandfather's
opinion is on this whole Virus thing?

        --Jerry

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

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

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 15:08:48 +1100
From: Bill Currie <BILLC@teleng1.tait.co.nz>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Virus and Ancients
Message-ID: <49815E3713@teleng1.tait.co.nz>

> acquired.  It also has access to many resources.  So, why haven't Virus
> infested ships sought out and taken control of anything created by the
> Ancients?

They probably have, but any bio-being who found out didnt live to 
tell the tale, hence no documentation of the fact.

Virus would definitly search for any artifacts of the Ancients, but 
whether or not It found any is another matter.  Anyway, I thought 
most of the Ancients sites were in the Spinarward Marches and further 
spinward.
 
> And while we're at it, what does everyone think that Grandfather's
> opinion is on this whole Virus thing?

He's probably laughing at the foolishness of humans who play with 
advanced toys before reading the instruction manual. :)

Bill
+--------------+-----------------------------------+
|Bill Currie   | "Watch that first step..."        |
|Christchurch  | Jump trooper motto.               |
|New Zealand   |                                   |
+--------------+-----------------------------------+

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

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 15:28:34 +1100
From: Bill Currie <BILLC@teleng1.tait.co.nz>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: weapon damage (Td#351)
Message-ID: <49D5C056C5@teleng1.tait.co.nz>


From:          Derek Wildstar <wildstar@qrc.com>
> rhunt@med.unc.edu (Rick Hunt) wrote:
> > Almost all pistols do 1d6 damage, which means that it takes a half dozen
> > maximum damage shots to the chest to hurt the average person.
> > Am I missing something important?
> 
> Not particularly.  Here are some things you can do to "deadly it up"
> a bit.  While (reading the rules as written) these are variants, I
> (and the rest of the GDW-Beta group) heartily recommend them.  These
> are "House Rules" used in all the games I referee:
> 
> 1) Roll weapons damage on d10's instead of d6's.
> 2) Apply the "Quick Kill" rule (T:TNE pp.286) to everyone, not just NPCs.
> 

IMO, theres no need to apply rule 1 as using the "Quick Kill" rule, 
any weapon that causes 1d6 damage to the head or chest has a 17.5% 
chance of killing the victim.  If the attacker is lucky (skilled) 
enough to get double damage (exeptional (sp?) success) the chances 
for a quick kill are doubled to 35%.  To me this is reasonable as not 
eveyone dies from a head or chest wound.  As proof, in one of the 
Scientific American issues from a few years back, there was an 
article about the vision centres of the brain and how they were 
discovered.  During the Russian/Japanese(Chinese?) war, the Russian's 
were using high velocity rifles that fired small calibre bullets that 
only pierced the skull, rather than shattering it.  This caused many 
of the victims to survive head wounds and the doctors used this 
phenomenon (sp?) to locate the vision centre of the brain by 
correlating the entry and exit points of the bullet and whether or 
not the victim was blinded (the bullet passing through the vision 
center).

However, maybe the damage to the head should be doubled for the 
purposed of the quick kill rule (not actual damage if the victim 
survives).
Bill
+--------------+-----------------------------------+
|Bill Currie   | "Watch that first step..."        |
|Christchurch  | Jump trooper motto.               |
|New Zealand   |                                   |
+--------------+-----------------------------------+

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

Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 18:17:36 GMT
From: "Brendan O'Donovan" <Brendan@odonovan.demon.co.uk>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: AT-ST Walkers
Message-ID: <50@odonovan.demon.co.uk>

:From the message dated Tuesday 18, July 1995:
> Forgive my ignorance, but lots of people have referred to the 'Star 
> Wars AT-ST' walker.  I remember two different ones from the 
> movies...the big four legged ones, and a much smaller, two legged 
> one.  Which are you referring to or are these what you're talking 
> about at all?
> 
The AT-ST was the two legged one (All Terrain Scout Transport, I think), and
the 
AT-AT was the bigger four legged one (All Terrain Armoured Transport). 
> 
> 
> Bruce Johnson
> Information Technology/College of Pharmacy
> The University of Arizona
> johnson@tonic.pharm.arizona.edu 
> 
> 
> As if this place HAD any opinions...
> 

-- 
Brendan


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

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 09:44:35 +0200
From: Hans-Christian.Prytz@ffi.no
To: traveller@MPGN.COM (Non Receipt Notification Requested)
Subject: Re:Walkers
Message-ID: <"428 95/07/19
09:44*/G=Hans-Christian/S=Prytz/O=ffi/PRMD=uninett/ADMD= /C=no/"@MHS>

>  "Brendan O'Donovan" <Brendan@odonovan.demon.co.uk> Writes:
> 
> If you strapped really heavy weights to the end of someones limbs their
balance 
> would be thrown off pretty badly, you'd need some major hydralics to give
robot 
> limbs a similar response to human limbs, but I suppose by TL12 that's not
such a 
> problem.
Actually in Battletech they cheated and made up a totally new technology,
which 
replaces hydraulics. This is a kind of fiber which contracts (like human
muscle) when 
electric current is applied, and it's a VERY strong contraction. 
You see, it's easy to design anything when you don't need to consider real
life 
possibilities....


Hilsen (Regards)
Hans-Christian Prytz
**************************************************
PGP public key available on request.
**************************************************
X.400 : G=Hans-Christian;S=Prytz;O=FFI;P=UNINETT;C=NO;
RFC   : Hans-Christian.Prytz@FFI.NO (hap@ffi.no)
 
Forsvarets forskningsinstitutt - FFI
Norwegian Defence Research Establishment - NDRE
Postbox 25, N-2007 Kjeller, Norway

Tlf(Phone) :+47-63 80 72 53    Telefax : +47-63 80 72 12

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

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 09:50:18 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ethan Henry <ehenry@magmacom.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Cc: xboat@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Classic Trav microjumps
Message-ID: <199507191350.JAA07882@mag1.magmacom.com>

> Note that in Classic Traveller, microjumps are part of the established
> background history, although rules for conducting them were never provided.
> Fuel consumption equal to half of a jump-1 is probably also reasonable,
> however.

OK, not that I doubt you, but where is this written?

I had always assumed that interstellar-only jumps made sense because
1) it's like a big cannon - shooting yourself a few parsecs is actually
   a lot easier than hitting something only a few million km away
2) it would be tricky to jump insystem due to all those damn gravity
   wells moving around all over the place.

But of course, canon rules. 

Ethan

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

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 13:10:57 -0500
From: bonnevil@flipper.itlabs.umn.edu (Steven Bonneville)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Microjumps
Message-ID: <199507191810.NAA01298@natasha.itlabs.umn.edu>

Derek Wildstar <wildstar@qrc.com> wrote:

>Note that in Classic Traveller, microjumps are part of the established
>background history, although rules for conducting them were never provided.
>Fuel consumption equal to half of a jump-1 is probably also reasonable,
>however.

For instance, one of the later CT products notes that microjumps were
commonly used in the Solar System by the Terrans for travel to the far
gas giants and Pluto, before the Barnard expedition mounted by the USSF. 
Jump-1 isn't good enough to get to the next star system from Earth in
just one jump. 

We always have played that any fractional jump distance requires as much 
fuel as jumping the next largest integer distance.  So an in-system microjump
would require as much fuel as a jump-1.  This seemed consistent to our 
group with the way, say, jump-2 would work.  Heck, it really doesn't matter 
that much as long as you pick one or the other and stick with it. 

  Steve Bonneville
  <bonn0015@gold.tc.umn.edu>
 

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

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 17:29:05 -0400
From: "Harold D. Hale" <hdhale@smtpwpo.dayt.tasc.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: weapon damage
Message-ID: <s00d40fa.012@smtpwpo.dayt.tasc.com>

Rick Hunt writes:

>I am a new Traveller TNE GM and I was helping my new players pick
>equipment.  When we got to weapons, it started looking like none of
>them were very good, except heavy weapons.  Almost all pistols do
>1d6 damage, which means that it takes a half dozen maximum damage
>shots to the chest to hurt the average person.  At least that is the way
>that my inexperienced self reads it.  Am I missing something important?

   Well Fire, Fusion and Steel for one (so that you can design a better
pistol), the Coalition Equipment Guide (which contains better pistols) for
another, and a more careful examination of the damage rules....

   Rulewise, there is the following to consider from the TNE Manual:

1) Blunt Trauma (page 285) - This can add up fast.

2) Quick Kill (page 286) - Makes that tiny little .38 more deadly than you
thought.

3) Knockdown (page 288) - Puts a character temporarily out of action.

4) Stun (page 288) - A stunned character is as good as a dead
character, and will soon be a KIA unless his buddies can rescue him.

5) The 40 point limit - once a NPC takes 40 points of damage, he/she
is done for the day, whether that damage was inflicted by pistols, or
by a HEAP flechette shotgun round at close range.

But if you aren't happy with those answers....

Aurora Model 35 Gauss Pistol
Designation: P-35
Weapon Type: Gauss Pistol
Tech Level: 12

Weapon Stats
Loaded Weapon Weight: 2.55 kg
Empty Weight: 2.5 kg
Length: 41.11 cm
Weapon Price: 681 Cr
Special Features: Gyroscopic Compensator

Ammunition Stats
Ammo Size: 5.5 mm
Ammo Price (per box of 20): 1 Cr (Gauss Dart)
Magazine Type: Grip
Magazine Size: 20 rounds
Magazine Price: 3 Cr

Combat Stats
Bulk: 2
Single Shot Recoil: 1
Burst Recoil (per burst): 3
Rate of Fire: 5
Damage: 4 (Gauss Dart)
Penetration: 1-2-Nil
Close Range: 28 meters   

Description: The P-35 is carried by many Terran Republic Marines as
a backup to their primary firearm in combat, and is the official sidearm
of all Marine officers.  Developed during the Civil War Era, only one
kind of ammunition was ever made for it, as no other type was deemed
necessary.  Technically a machine pistol, it is prized for its knockdown
power and low recoil.  Once uncommon outside of military service,
it is becoming increasing popular with mercenary groups.  


--Harold




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

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 17:59:29 -0400
From: "Harold D. Hale" <hdhale@smtpwpo.dayt.tasc.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Walkers
Message-ID: <s00d4810.014@smtpwpo.dayt.tasc.com>

Brendan O'Donovan writes regarding walkers:

>More legs would mean that you had more contact with the ground, so
>more  friction, so you can go faster (it'd be more stable too). The less
>you make the  thing weigh, the more ground contact you need,

<snip>

   True.  Particularly in light of your analysis.  With the rules as written,
two walkers, one with two legs and running upright, moves at the
exact same speed as one with four legs, six legs, or even eight legs.
Is this accurate?  Your answer seems to indicate otherwise.

>>    But how would you incorporate that fact into the design rules?  My
>> suggestion would be that transmissions, etc. could be smaller and
>> lighter on a contra grav equipped walker.
> 
>I'd go with this, but there would be a point of compromise between
>structural  weight savings with contra grav, and the larger
>transmission you would need to  maintain enough friction to go fast.
>You could probably save 10-30% on  transmission weight for a contra
>grav walker. 

   Could the following chart then be said to be more or less correct?

Walker Transmission

TL          Vol             Cr
8            8                10,000
9            2                  2,500
10          0.4                  625
12          0.067              156
14          0.0096              39

Vol : Volume (in cubic meters) of a walker vehicle transmission per
MW of power

Cr: Price per cubic meters of installed transmission

Mass: (In tonnes) equals Volume

   Should the cut off be TL 12, or could you say that there is further
development at TL 14?  Is the rate of decrease in volume required
too high?

>The AT-ST wasn't just a scout walker though, it was a terror weapon,
>and as such  you'd want the people you are trying to scare to notice
>you. After all, an Ewok  in a forest clearing doesn't do too well against
>an AT-ST even if it does see  it.

   That would have been par for the course for the GALACTIC EMPIRE.
If you noticed, it appeared that the Ewoks were planning on striking
at the Imperial garrison, Rebel Alliance or no Rebel Alliance, given the
large number of booby-traps and catapaults they had constructed.

   In Traveller terms, no one is as all-powerful as the GALACTIC
EMPIRE,  except maybe the Regency...then again they aren't an evil
empire...or are they?


Bruce Johnson asks:

>Forgive my ignorance, but lots of people have referred to the 'Star
> Wars AT-ST' walker.  I remember two different ones from the 
>movies...the big four legged ones, and a much smaller, two legged 
>one.  Which are you referring to or are these what you're talking  about
>at all?

   The AT-ST is also known as the 'scout walker'.  It has two legs and
I believe a crew of two (with the possibility of one passenger--or at
least there was room for Chewbacca to sit behind the Ewoks for a
few moments after they took a walker over).

   The big four legged variety had a powerful main armament and could
carry troops (though how they disembarked is not shown).  They had
thick top and side armor, but were extremely vulnerable on their
undersides--Luke was able to disable and destroy one of the big ones
with a shaped charge.  Actually the big ones would probably last about
30 seconds on a Striker II battlefield, given the lethality of high tech
CPR and missile rounds.


--Harold



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

Date: Wed, 19 Jul 95 19:22:52 EDT
From: rhunt@med.unc.edu (Rick Hunt)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: thanks for the combat info
Message-ID: <9507192322.AA07290@obids.med.unc.edu>


I would like to thank all of the people who helped me out with the combat
info.  I was about to switch systems because I had this image of PCs
casually walking through firefights.  I wanted to make sure that my
players didn't always shoot first and think later.

Rick


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

End of TRAVELLER Digest 352
***************************


----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
From traveller@mpgn.com Wed Jul 19 21:48:11 1995
Received: from Ambassador.MPGN.COM by mail03.mail.aol.com with ESMTP
	(1.37.109.16/16.2) id AA012704891; Wed, 19 Jul 1995 21:48:11 -0400
Return-Path: <traveller@mpgn.com>
Received: from  (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by Ambassador.MPGN.COM (8.6.9/8.6.9)
with SMTP id VAA16638; Wed, 19 Jul 1995 21:40:36 -0400
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 1995 21:40:36 -0400
Message-Id: <199507200140.VAA16638@Ambassador.MPGN.COM>
Errors-To: traveller-request@mpgn.com
Reply-To: traveller@mpgn.com
Originator: traveller@mpgn.com
Sender: traveller@mpgn.com
Precedence: bulk
From: traveller@mpgn.com
To: Multiple recipients of list <traveller@mpgn.com>
Subject: TRAVELLER digest 352
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Traveller Mailing List

