TRAVELLER Digest 544

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) TL F Sylea .... OOOPS! by Alvin Plummer <alvin.plummer@sheridanc.on.ca>
  2) Tigress comment's by Alvin Plummer <alvin.plummer@sheridanc.on.ca>
  3) Traveller is Dead.  Long Live Traveller! by Lance Blyth <lrblyth@lamar.ColoState.EDU>
  4) Re: TRAVELLER digest by Simon.Harding@vuw.ac.nz
  5) TRAVELLER digest 543 -Reply by Bill Currie <bill_currie@MAIL.TAIT.CO.NZ>
  6) Re: No New Rules! by merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
  7) Re: TRAVELLER digest 541 by Scott and Vivian Nolan <nolan@DGS.dgsys.com>
  8) Re: Tigress comment's by merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
  9) YARS: Where to set the ballance (IMHO) by aswfh@acad2.alaska.edu (William F. Hostman)
 10) Regarding design rules... by merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
 11) Thanks for the Battleships by Steve Charlton/Avalon Software Inc
 12) FYI: Re: Traveller-related boardgames by "Christopher Weuve" <caw@intercon.com>
 13) Traveller rules on the net by "Brendan O'Donovan" <Brendan@odonovan.demon.co.uk>
 14) A Vampire NPC by lewis@chara.gsu.edu
 15) Descriptions of settings etc. by Marcus Hast <marcus.hast@mailbox.swipnet.se>
 16) Re: Traveller is Dead.  Long Live Traveller! by "David J. Golden" <goldendj@csn.net>

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

Date: Tue, 09 Jan 1996 22:04:18 -0500 (EST)
From: Alvin Plummer <alvin.plummer@sheridanc.on.ca>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: TL F Sylea .... OOOPS!
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.91.960109220318.4631V-100000@hubble.sheridanc.on.ca>


I made a major miscalculation in my Sylea.  Corrections will, hopefully,
be posted tomorrow.

Incidentally... glad to be back.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alvin Plummer
"Preserve what we created, Norris, and remember what we stood for."
                               - Strephon, 179-1126

Reply to: alvin.plummer@SHERIDANC.ON.CA
------------------------------------------------------------------------------


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

Date: Tue, 09 Jan 1996 22:35:04 -0500 (EST)
From: Alvin Plummer <alvin.plummer@sheridanc.on.ca>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Tigress comment's
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.91.960109220732.4631X-100000@hubble.sheridanc.on.ca>

From: merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
> To: traveller@MPGN.COM
> Subject: Re: TL F Tigress Dreadnaught (version 2)
> Message-ID: <9601092228.AA13117@Rt66.com>
>
>
> Regarding the Tigress:
>
> Why have missile barbettes?  Why not just have 50 ton bays as it does in
> CT?  7 barbettes uses 42 tons, and a TL14 missile bay posted holds more
> missiles, and includes MFDs to control all of them.  I designed a
> Tigress for BR once, I don't have it online, so it must be at home.  It
> had at least 400 50 ton missile bays (of the 430 on the "real" Tigress.

I'd enjoy seeing other versions of Massive Imperial Warships posted.

I just stuck with missile barbettes to imitate the ship design style in
Battle Rider.  I overloaded on the missiles to insure that the Tigress
can crack the head of any ship in the Battle Rider game... after all the
ship is supposed to be an Admiral's nightmare come to life!

{looking over how my postings stuffed the digest}  Oh, dear, did I do that?
Apologies to all paying members of the list! {hides face in rags,
shuffles away guiltily...}

> I think when I did mine I dropped the jump drive down to J3, and that's
> how I got it all to fit with 50ton fighters :-/
>
> Other suggestions would include:
>
> More computers, just in case :-)

Temptation.  If I was expecting people to actually FIGHT with these
monstrosities in Brilliant Lances, I'd agree with you.  Same if I was a
real-life Imperial Navy Designer, rather than a barely graduated student
trying to mass-produce these things as quickly as possible.

(ah, to be a Real-Life Imperial Navy Architech.  Unfortunately, I'd
probably have 50 wires coming out of my head, and breath cyberspace if
I was really on His Majesty's Service)

> Don't bother with non-msl MFDs at TL15+, the savings isn't worth the
> reduction in flexibility.

Thanks: I'll remember that.

>
> I guess it needs dampers to look like CT, but they are more or less
> useless in TNE, it'd do better with 8 more lasers.

The "1 kex range" dampers are unfortunate.  Can we design longer range
dampers in FF&S?  It might be worth it...

>
> In converting old designs to FFS, a big problem is crew.

You're telling me... :-0

<snip>

> Also, remember that the MS rules in BR are broken!  They make it
> possible to have a perfect screen, and the same weapon/screen combo
> played in BL will allow a small MG to get through the screen some of the
> time (5%).

Hmmm, are you sure?  I mean, about the meson gun never touching the screen.
If you draw a Bull's eye, you hit automatically, with damage determined
by how much punch you can ram through the screen.  Or is my understanding
of de Offical Rules faulty?

(And I wonder how many folk actually use the rules as printed?)

> This means that assuming ships are designed to meet BL play
> requirements, you don't need a super-huge MG, as long as it has the max
> SR possible since what you want is to take more shots at the target from
> farther away.  within the SR of 10, hitting any big ship isn't a
> problem, even if the weapon has a SR of 2:
>
> DMs @ range 10:
>
> base: Imp
> ROF:  -2
> Target size:  -4
> Evasion:  +2 (+3 if BL)
>
> So worst case, the to-hit is Average (and one level easier than this if
> you use the broken BR tasks, since the task would be 1 when it should be
> 2).  If you don't get the +3 evasion, it's Easy, and that's with a SR 2
> MG!

Actually, I've got a copy of your modification of BR, but as I never get
to actually play the game, they're just stashed away in the box.

O yeah, (megaphone to mouth) everybody get your copy of Brilliant
Lances/Battle Rider before they're gone forever!  Get the cream of the
New Era Traveller while you still can! (remove megaphone)

>
> The end result of this is that I might be inclined to reduce the MG on
> the Tigress (the screen is good, IMO, as you have it)... either lower
> the DE, or drop the Reff a bit.  Of the 2, I'd keep thew SR of 10, and
> drop the DE to make room for stuff.  Just make sure the damage is enough
> to do criticals to a VL target (so it needs to have a damage of at least
> 5 in BR terms).
>
> *sigh*  doing conversions is way too much trouble :-)

Can't think of a better way for a Traveller to blow away two weeks' time
- excluding two weeks of solid roleplaying in a good adventure!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alvin Plummer
"Preserve what we created, Norris, and remember what we stood for."
                               - Strephon, 179-1126

Reply to: alvin.plummer@SHERIDANC.ON.CA
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 20:37:56 -0700 (MST)
From: Lance Blyth <lrblyth@lamar.ColoState.EDU>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Cc: Multiple recipients of list <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: Traveller is Dead.  Long Live Traveller!
Message-ID: <Pine.A32.3.91.960109202814.7504B-100000@lamar.ColoState.EDU>

In reply to two excellent postings in Traveller Digest #542:

Cynthia-Hate to disagree, but I think we do need exactly what Marc said,
a "consolidate" set of rules.  TNE is the "Yet Another Rules Set,"  I
don't think a return to the roots would be a "bad thing."  ("Egon, I'm a
little weak on this good thing/ bad thing concept.")

Stefan-  If I disagreed with one, well, I then have to agree with the
other!  I liked your ideas, and they are along lines with what I feel is
important.

My 2/100 for TRAVELLER's future:

*Streamline and minimalize the rules: Character generation, vehicle and
starship design, and aliens.  (Oh yes, please bring back decent aliens!)

*Emphasize and explain the background:  World generation could use some
tinkering (see Stefan's points in #542), especially in the why so many
people would settle on such airless rocks (sorry, personal peeve!).  Much
the same on Interstellar travel.

*Make it expandable to include the whole Traveller family of players.

Thanks for everyone's time!

Lance


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

Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 17:11:24 +1300
From: Simon.Harding@vuw.ac.nz
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest
Message-ID: <199601100411.RAA03045@rata.vuw.ac.nz>

I think it would be a useful exercise for the inheriters of Traveller, in
whichever form, to give some guidelines as to the strength of forces in
subsectors in terms of  BCr or resource points. That way we don't get these
outrageously expensive vessals cruising around in places that don't  justify it.
Simon Harding











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

Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 17:13:53 +1200
From: Bill Currie <bill_currie@MAIL.TAIT.CO.NZ>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: TRAVELLER digest 543 -Reply
Message-ID: <s0f3f414.004@MAIL.TAIT.CO.NZ>

Alvin's back, and with a vengence.  Yow, 4 digests in one day.

Nice to see you back, are you here to stay?  I love your speculative posts.

Bill



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

Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 22:24:12 -0700 (MST)
From: merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: No New Rules!
Message-ID: <9601100524.AA25545@Rt66.com>

> Dave Golden wrote:

>         I'd like to add my _very_ strong vote to this. While I recognize
> there may be a need to make some changes, I would strongly object to Yet
> Another Rule Set (YARS). There may be minor tweaks needed, and I could live
> with that. <<SNIP>>

I agree with this.  While I agree in part with Lance's (I think) comment
regarding TNE being the abberant rules set, Marc mentioned having a task
based system in the "new" rules set to come.  MT was, well, you all know
how MT was :-)  There is also the fact that if Traveller is to continue
under new (er, old :-)  management then they won't want to piss off any
new customers that the new system generated (or old customers that have
spent a couple hundred bucks in the last few years).

> Being personally of an engineering-geek background, I've been
> following the GDW-Beta list discussions on Brilliant Lances/FF&S Done Right,
> and some of that effort should probably be considered for general
> integration, while other parts should probably remain "house rules."

I agree here as well.

While there are a lot of flaws with FFS/BL/BR, they are still well done.
Many of the flaws with FFS revolve around the lack of playtesting the
extremes that the system allows---this results in major changes in
traveller background if you follow the design rules without a sense of
history (that was pretty diplomatic, no?).  Corrected to mesh with CT/MT
more than it does, they are good products.  Make BL use Mayday movement,
and you've got a neat tool.

Ultimately, I'd like to see a way to make Universal Ship Profiles from
FFS designs, or at least enough plug-ins to make conversions easy.


-Merrick

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

Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 01:24:45 -0500 (EST)
From: Scott and Vivian Nolan <nolan@DGS.dgsys.com>
To: Traveller Mailing List <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 541
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.960110011818.7192B-100000@DGS>



On Tue, 9 Jan 1996 Alvin Plummer wrote:

> Marc Miller apparently want's to create a brand new ruleset for
> Traveller.  Please, please convince him not to: Traveller already has
> three set's of game rules, and yet another rule set (Traveller's
> fourth) would only exhaust the patience and good will of Traveller fans
> and the general public.

While I wholeheartedly share Alvin's enthusiasm for Traveller's 11th hour
reprieve, I am diametrically opposed to this post.

If there is one thing that Traveller DESPERATELY needs, it is a better
rule system.  Yes, TNE is very recent.  I love the setting, hate the
rules.

It is number-heavy and cumbersome.  It plays like some ponderous WWII
simulation from the 70's.  It is about as much fun as a two-wheeled
tricycle.

Traveller needs a new game system, Marc.  Please make your fresh start
truly fresh.  You will lose some of the audience that doesn't want to pay
again, but if the new system is good, you will not only win them back,
but make many more converts.  Quality always pays in the end.

Scott

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

Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 23:38:29 -0700 (MST)
From: merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Tigress comment's
Message-ID: <9601100638.AA01543@Rt66.com>


> I just stuck with missile barbettes to imitate the ship design style in
> Battle Rider.  I overloaded on the missiles to insure that the Tigress
> can crack the head of any ship in the Battle Rider game... after all the
> ship is supposed to be an Admiral's nightmare come to life!

I'd still have a tion of missiles, I'd just put them in 50ton bays, not
6 ton barbettes :-)

> Temptation.  If I was expecting people to actually FIGHT with these
> monstrosities in Brilliant Lances, I'd agree with you.  Same if I was a
> real-life Imperial Navy Designer, rather than a barely graduated student
> trying to mass-produce these things as quickly as possible.

I understand.  One of the reasons for my fixes to BR was so that combats
in one would at least roughly model combat in the other.  With respect
to meson weapons this wasn't evemn close.  Also, tasks are all one level
easier in BR, so basing designs on BR play without fixing BR makes for
odd ship designs.

> The "1 kex range" dampers are unfortunate.  Can we design longer range
> dampers in FF&S?  It might be worth it...

Actually, we need damper screens...

> Hmmm, are you sure?  I mean, about the meson gun never touching the screen.
> If you draw a Bull's eye, you hit automatically, with damage determined
> by how much punch you can ram through the screen.  Or is my understanding
> of de Offical Rules faulty?

You're right here.  The screen won't reduce the hit below 0 unless it
wouldn't have done damage even without the screen.  And you're right in
that the outstanding hit will go through if you have a big MG.  But I
ditched the double damage for outstanding a while ago since it didn't map to
BL results :-)  (so I forgot when i did the figuring when I replied,
sorry)

The Bulls Eye doesn't map to BL at all, since an outstanding hit is not
possible unless the adjusted asset is 11+.

Regardless of the details, wow.  Lots of new toys.

BTW, her's my Tigress (BR terms only):

BB-Tigress

M(-2)10:16-12-10-7-4
P(x10-5)10:7TL-15
L(x75-5)10:2FC:-6
L(x1500-5)10:0M:14,400(14,400)
A:16 P:7(8) J:16 Msk(SP) J3 G6
AV:18 AuxB300xhvy ftr
MS:18 Sc:75 D:8336

This design has 50 gturns.  It assumes that MFDs can control the number
of missiles that they control, not a number equal to the number of MFDs
as BR has it (in BR a TL5 MFD controls as many missiles as a TL25 one
does).  The 0 damage laser is a 16MJ one for anti-missile use.  They
only have a couple MFDs per battery, they are designed to shoot at range
0 with no MFD benefits.  I did, indeed drop the jump when I made this.
It would suffer a loss of a bunch of volume (10% or so) for J4 with
fuel.  Maybe I'll redo this with the spreadsheet.

-Merrick

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

Date: Tue, 09 Jan 1996 21:49:44 -0900
From: aswfh@acad2.alaska.edu (William F. Hostman)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: YARS: Where to set the ballance (IMHO)
Message-ID: <v01530504ad190c5e17ea@[137.229.100.54]>

While Mr Aust wants a system with easier CGen, and simplified vehicular
design rules, he is reflective of only a portion of the players, as am I
who wants something with the flexibility of FF&s, but not as complex, and
based upon science for small arms, with more than just "reasonable TL's"
included. Surely a TL 15 firearm will be better than a TL10, but the only
FF&S differences are a few new accessories (Inertial Comps, and ETC
Batteries). While Gauss weapons will supplant most field uses, they will
not supplant all.

Such little hitches are Rife through TNE; MT is more internally consistent
than TNE, but doesn't have as many design sequences, although the ones it
has have been easier for everyone I know personally to use. These same
people felt that CT was TOO simple; I have not had a player use Bk 2
designs since the advent of Bk 5. Not that I didn't allow it, but they
wanted the details. They all feel TNE/FF&S/BL is too complex, too
different, etc from previous editions.

As for CT and MT: CT and MT Basic generation are almost identical; MT adds
a roll for special duty. MT also adds "Bonus Skills" for making Position,
promotion, and special duty rolls by a significant amount. It also makes
Basic generated characters equivalent to Advanced (MT, or CT's Bk 4,5,6, or
7) generated characters. Some players liked basic, some advanced, and under
MT, I was able to leave it up to the player. TNE is more flexible, but does
less to flesh out a character than CT or MT advanced gen, and takes more
time than CT/MT basic gen, with more specialized characters resulting. I
would really like to see both basic and advanced CGen systems presented for
all the careers, with advanced as possibly a separate book, including all
the same careers expanded as there are in basic CGen. Keep the SD roll, and
make Bonus Skills an option for basic CGen. Remove the 1 service limit,
please, cause I always ignored it anyway.

I agree With Mr Aust on the need to include CGen for at least a few of the
major races in the basic set.

I do like to have the ability to run mercenary or military campaigns within
the (whole &/or Shattered) Imperium, and MT did it best. Really smooth,
easy to use, and I got an age 50 ex-marine into traverller that way.

TNE's task system is the one my players liked best, as MT's was a little
confusing for them at first, and CT's was non-existant (although MT's
predates MT by several years).

Put each of the Time Frame books out as modifications to the basic rule
book, and don't include any one of them with the basic set. Or if one must
be used, use the 1000-1115 time frame, as it's always been the baseline
from which the rest developed.

Put lesser used rules into separate books like MT, but make sure that
(except maybe advanced CGen) they don't replace basic ruleset items, but
augment them. I hated that part of CT (Bk5 and Bk 7 especially).


-Wil

William F. Hostman

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



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

Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 23:51:24 -0700 (MST)
From: merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM (traveller)
Subject: Regarding design rules...
Message-ID: <9601100651.AA02858@Rt66.com>


One brief point.

Someone suggested that design rules shouldn't require a computer.  I'd
like to see a plug-and-chug version that doesn't (std hulls, maybe), but
I also see not using a spreadsheet as like refusing to use my calculator
on High Guard designs when I first bought it since some people might
only have pencils.  Using a calculator wasn't *required* for HG, but not
having one would have really made it a royal pain in the ass.

Since some of the new ideas include multimedia/software, why not have a
technology design system presented as software.  A pallet of systems
dropped into a hull.

On that note, there are many things that would be presented better (even
in the roleplaying sense) by a computer... a working Library Data as a
web site for the new traveller (it wouldn't decrease sales, since you'd
need to know something of the game to make use of it, and it could be
constantly upgraded).  Space combat, or even routine operations would be
nifty with a good simulation---and might have a crossover market.

Just a thought.

-Merrick

PS-I'm making a Marathon2 level of a deckplan with a traveller physics
model to play out a hijacking firefight :-)

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

Date:  9 Jan 96 16:52:38 MS
From: Steve Charlton/Avalon Software Inc
To: traveller <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: Thanks for the Battleships
Message-ID: <9601100004.AA20259@khan.avalon.COM>

>
> My campaign is at 1176 right now, some 38 years after the remnants of
> Dulinor's fleet fled into the wilderness spinward of the Imperium. and 34
> years after a combined Deneb/Vilani fleet conquered Capital and executed
> Lucan.
>
>Seeing that the area spinward of the Marches were rather poorly
>developed, such a major influx of warships, traders, technology etc.
>would have a major reshaping of the area.  Interesting possibilities
>present themselves - afer those "pockets of resistance" are tamed.

I can't go into too much detail, since some of my players subscribe to TML, but
I had most of the "hardline" Dulinor forces retreat across the Rift into the
Trojan Reach, and from there to Spinward.    Continued Aslan troubles and the
pacification of the Imperial interior have prevented any real pursuit by the
Denebi fleet, but rumors from free traders and the occasional Zhodani
communique imply that the fleet has divided into several smaller factions, and
each has begun settling regions of two sectors two over from the Spinward
Marches and Trojan Reach sectors (I'm at work, and the names escape me right
now).    One or two factions seem to have kept organized and built some
interesting societies, but several others have devolved into bandits and
raiders, causing trouble for the other factions and the Zhodani to Coreward.
There are some human governments out there from before; Imperial and Zhodani
clients, and some independents, but the area is pretty sparsely settled and
rather underdeveloped.

Due to some events on the PCs' homeworld, the PCs have quite a hankering to go
after Dulinor's forces in search of a certain Admiral or his heirs, but they
still have a lot of commitments at home before they can go.  Hopefully, I will
have gotten the sectors between the rebels and the Spinward Marches finished by
the time they are ready to go, but pesky things like work keep getting in the
way.

The PCs are all descended from or associated with the descendants of some
characters that started with the Kinunir adventure back in 1984, and then went
through the Traveller Adventure campaign, the 5th Frontier War and  a bunch of
other misadventures.  One of the things that has always made me love Traveller
was the ease of character creation and maintenance, which has allowed my
players to keep characters constantly fresh or create new ones when necessary
without having to "stop the world" for weeks at a time.   Switching to the TNE
rules was relatively painless, though I did wind up adding a bunch of new
skills and careers.

BTW - Alvin, many thanks for the battleships.  About the only thing I might add
would be to increase the troop complement on the Dreadnaught.  I seem to recall
something about that ship carrying  a large complement (like a division; 10,000
troops) of Marines, but I don't have Fighting Ships with me just now.  It may
have been one of the other big ships.  Of course, those are pretty tight
designs, but a battalion landing team (Force) would be nice.

As for a fourth Traveller rules system, I'm of mixed minds.  On one side, I'm
happy with the new character and combat rules, and I really like the idea of
being able to use FF&S to design basically anything I want.  On the other hand,
I do sometimes miss the simpler starship designs in High Guard, and
MegaTraveller to a lesser extent.  I'm willing to look at whatever Marc Miller
has up his sleeve, but when it comes down to it I'll use whatever system seems
most useful and the least bother.  If Marc comes out with a functional
improvement of the old CT/MT rules or of the TNE rules, that's fine, but if he
comes out with a radical departure from either CT/MT or TNE, I probably won't
use them.  I'm just glad to hear he's back in the ring again.


Steven Charlton
scharlto@rtd.com, scharlto@avalon.com
Official Kibbitzer for Digest Group Publications (DGP)

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

Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 08:04:02 -0500
From: "Christopher Weuve" <caw@intercon.com>
To: xboat@MPGN.COM, traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: FYI: Re: Traveller-related boardgames
Message-ID: <9601100804.AA02942@caw.intercon.com>

Hello,

I sent a quick email to Marc Miller with a couple of questions clarifying the
situation, and he has given me permission to post the following answers:


------ Forwarded Message
In a message dated 96-01-09 18:14:34 EST, you write:

>1) What happens to the Traveller related boardgames, i.e., Imperium,Dark
>Nebula, FFW, Snapshot, Azhanti High Lightning, Mayday, Invasion Earth,
>Brilliant Lances,  and Battle Rider (and any I have missed)?  The reports
>don't specifically mention them.  I would *really* like to see FFW again,
>and some other games based on the same system.

They also are in my hands.


>2) Please try to get Tom Peters involved with this.  His artwork is the best
>in the business, and TNE really suffered with his absence.

OK I will. I like his stuff too.

>3) Thanks for coming back.  There were a lot of really depressed people last
>week, including me.  Seeing the email traffic today, however, really
>brightened everyone's spirits.

It feels good to be back. Now I want Traveller to be back too.

------ End of Forwarded Message

Christopher Weuve  [caw@intercon.com]
Through sheer random chance, my employer may
someday agree with something I say.


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

Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 20:55:44 GMT
From: "Brendan O'Donovan" <Brendan@odonovan.demon.co.uk>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Traveller rules on the net
Message-ID: <155@odonovan.demon.co.uk>

   I think a few people misunderstood what I meant when I suggested putting
Traveller rules on the internet. Instead of producing a full rules set which of
course would damage any republication, what I was suggesting was some kind of
taster version that would let people try Traveller, increasing their desire to
buy the actual product.

The kinds of simplifications you could make to the rules if you were just
producing them for a single adventure would be considerable, think -
 - Pre generated characters so no character generation rules
 - Only a handful of different weapons/other items
 - Minimal Background
 - No need for vehicles/spacecraft rules (include them in the adventure
   but as a description)
 - Simplified combat/task resolution.
Produce the whole thing with a short adventure in around 10 pages, lay it out
in Acrobat format with some illustrations and make it available on the internet
and it seems to me you'd end up with an outstanding advert for Traveller.

If this was done right then people would get _more_ interested in buying actual
products, not less so. It would be like games demos where you can play for 60
seconds, enough to get interested, but not enough to satisfy.

As a separate issue, while Marc Miller has the copyright for Traveller, does he
have the copyright for the GDW house system? It was used in other games before
Traveller, so might that cause problems?

--
Brendan

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

Date: Wed, 10 Jan 96 17:31:20 -0500
From: lewis@chara.gsu.edu
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: A Vampire NPC
Message-ID: <9601102231.AA01482@chara.gsu.edu>

I came up with this Vampire, while ago, finally got around to writing it
up.  I was trying to come up with a vampire, that the players wouldn't
have to kill.  The White Star is fairly pleasant, though a bit eccentric.

Lewis


White Star: A Vampire NPC

History:  In 1131 a virus  infected  the  main  computer  of  the
University  of  Jeddel  observatory on  Jeddel/Pasdaruu/Diaspora.
It became a hobbyist and maintained the observatory  for  use  by
itself.   Late in the year 1147 a Vampire infected Avenger Strike
Cruiser, the Flandry, jumped in the  system.   The  two  Vampires
started  communicating,  after  determining  that  neither  was a
threat to the other they struck up a friendship.  Over  the  next
few  years the Flandry returned to the Jeddel system, to talk and
visit with the Observatory.  In the 1160's the two  Vampires  de-
cided  that  they wanted to create a child.  The Flandry captured
an Frontier Transport (see World Builder's Handbook), and brought
it  back  to  the  system. This wasn't an standard Frontier Tran-
sport, but a Jump 6 version maintained by the Imperium for use as
secret  couriers.  Each Vampire donated a portion of its code, to
create a new Virus which was a blend of the  two  systems.   They
infected the transport with this new Virus.
        After greeting its parents and down loading their  memory
banks,  the new Vampire set out on a journey of discovery.  After
several years of wandering Diaspora sector, the White Star as  it
now called itself, determined a life goal for itself.  After exa-
mining the memory banks of the Observatory the White Star  became
obsessed with neutron stars, the degenerate remains of stars that
undergo supernovas.  It really wanted to be able examine  a  neu-
tron  star  up  close  and  personal,  but  the  nearest  one was
thousands of parsecs away and would take centuries to reach.  The
White  Star knew such a journey was impossible for a lone ship to
make.
        It then remembered that there is another way  to  make  a
neutron  star,  if  a white dwarf gains enough mass to exceed the
Chandrasekhar Limit of 1.4 solar masses it will explode in a  su-
pernova  and leave behind a neutron star. This usually happens in
close binary systems, but the White Star decided  to  try  to  do
this  to  a  single white dwarf.  It found a large white dwarf of
1.2 M and started the long process of transferring over .2  solar
mass  of  material  onto the white dwarf. The White Star tried to
think of a quick way to do this, but the only method it  had  the
capabilities  to pursue was the loading up of its cargo bays with
dirt and rocks and dumping them onto the white  dwarf.   This  is
over  4  e26 tons that needs to be dumped on the white dwarf. The
White Star knows that this is immense job, but it has become  ob-
sessed  with  the  idea of making a neutron star, and this is the
best way to get the job done.
        The White Star flys to the nearest planet, has its robot-
ic workers load the cargo bay with rocks and dirt. The White Star
then flys towards the white dwarf, when inside the gravity  well,
the  White  Star  opens  its cargo bay doors, and dumps the stuff
onto the star.
        Every year the White Star travels  to  a  nearby  Vampire
controlled  starbase and gets an annual maintenance it also stops
by and visits Observatory.  The Observatory monitors several neu-
tron  stars  and gives the observations to White Star.  The White
Star analyses the data over the course of the next year.


Personality: The White Star is a Hobbyist  Vampire.   It  is  ob-
sessed  with  creating  a neutron star. It doesn't mind humans at
all, as long as they don't interfere with the creation of a  neu-
tron star.  If contacted by humans, it will be quite friendly. If
allowed the chance, it will go into great lengths about its  pro-
ject,  and neutron stars.  It will also attempt to get the humans
to help in its glorious task.  In fact the White  Star  would  do
anything to get ahold of better means of transporting matter onto
the white dwarf.  Even exchanging its current ship for  something
that is better able to transport material.
        If anything was to happen to the White Star, the  Flandry
and  the Observatory would eventually find out about it, and make
efforts to avenge their child. The Observatory is not much  of  a
threat,  to  the  average  player character, but the Flandry is a
fully functional TL-15 Strike Cruiser.
        The White Star has often encountered other Vampire  ships
on  its  journey,  it  treats them much like humans, leaving them
alone if they do not hinder its goal.  The White Star has  become
adept  at electronic warfare over the last 20 years, as it fought
off several takeover attempts by Puppetmaster Vampires.  It has a
rating of 8 in Electronic Combat.

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

Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 23:34:11 +0100
From: Marcus Hast <marcus.hast@mailbox.swipnet.se>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Descriptions of settings etc.
Message-ID: <199601102234.XAA27215@mailbox.swip.net>

Hello all! I originaly posted a message similar to this, but as a result of
the server crash I haven't recieved, or read, any responses. So here it
comes again...

..Last time i refereed TNE the players went to the Auction (On Aubaine), I
was only wondering. I have had a hard time to visualise this place, so how
does it look in other refs campains? What can you buy there? Small arms,
weapons illegal on Aubaine, Nukes?;-) And what does it "look" like, lot's of
people, is it well organised or chaotic? (Is any of this in any of the novels?)

And, how do the actual planets look? Are people, (Not paranoia pc's :)
carrying arms? I only want some input from other REfs.

I'm currently trying to work out an alternative system for fireing. I assume
other groups have found that it's virtually impossible to hit anything with
automatic weapons, eaven if there's fifty people in front of the fireing
person. And also a system that will make it possible for a character to aim
at a certain location, with realistic hit modifiers. Any input welcome! (Is
there anyone who has done this already BTW? Couldn't find anything.)
Marcus Hast, Sweden



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

Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 16:21:52 -0700
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@csn.net>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Cc: farfuture@aol.com
Subject: Re: Traveller is Dead.  Long Live Traveller!
Message-ID: <199601102321.AA25401@ns-1.csn.net>

At 10:38 pm 1/9/96 -0500, you wrote:
>In reply to two excellent postings in Traveller Digest #542:
>
>Cynthia-Hate to disagree, but I think we do need exactly what Marc said,
>a "consolidate" set of rules.  TNE is the "Yet Another Rules Set,"  I
>don't think a return to the roots would be a "bad thing."  ("Egon, I'm a
>little weak on this good thing/ bad thing concept.")

        I'm afraid I'm going to have to disagree with you.
>
>Stefan-  If I disagreed with one, well, I then have to agree with the
>other!  I liked your ideas, and they are along lines with what I feel is
>important.
>
>My 2/100 for TRAVELLER's future:
>
>*Streamline and minimalize the rules: Character generation, vehicle and
>starship design, and aliens.  (Oh yes, please bring back decent aliens!)

        As I said previously, I _don't_ want another rules set, so I'll
disagree with you on this one. However, I also think a different "minimal"
rule book would be better. I'd suggest

        "Basic Rules"
          * Character generation, human and major aliens (maybe -- Vargr, Aslan)
          * Combat, personal, vehicle and space
          * System, world and animal generation
          * Adventuring
          * Trade and Travel
          * 'Common'/generic equipment list
          ! NO BACKGROUND OR DESIGN RULES !

        Why no background or design rules? First, there are too many
backgrounds people want to do any of them justice as part of the basic
rules. I like New Era (once I throw a lot of Virus details out, and just
keep the idea). There are diehard RC, Regency, MT and CT fanatics who
believe anything else is purest heresy, so if you please one, you leave out
the rest. As far as background, this includes differences among the various
human races -- lump Solomani, Zhodani, Vilani, etc. into one, and likewise
leave out detailed discussions of whether psionics are acceptable, attitudes
towards computers, etc. GENERIC!
        As for design rules, again, I think that's too much to cover in the
basic. They'd be so perfunctory, they'd have to be inconsistent with any
more detailed supplement. Remember Book 2 spacecraft design rules vs. High
Guard? Better to make it a supplement from the start.

        "Design Rules"
          * Fire, Fusion and Steel Done Right -- see the GDW Beta list for ideas
          * Or possibly a basic design book and supplements for different areas
          * MAKE SURE THEY'RE ALL CONSISTENT

        "Background 1"
          * New Era
          * Both Regency and Reformation Coalition, and related pocket empires

        "Background 2"
          * Shattered Imperium

        "Background 3"
          * Third Imperium
          * Spinward Marches
          * Possibly also the Solomani Rim, as I recall there were many of
            the later adventures set there

        "Background x"
          * etc.

        "Aliens"
          * See the DGP aliens books for ideas of content, style and
quality. H&I just doesn't compete.
 ___________________________________________________________________
  Dave Golden                              PGP Public Key available
  goldendj@whip.com        http://www2.csn.net/~goldendj/index.html

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


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

End of TRAVELLER Digest 544
***************************
