TRAVELLER Digest 547

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) Re: FF&S Lite by muskrat@msn.fullfeed.com (John Kovalic)
  2) NPC:Hans Pritcher by cyhiggin@usa.pipeline.com (Dragoness)
  3) Military Structure by James Kiley <tenzil@io.com>
  4) The new rule system... by Christopher_Griffen_at_DMC-SJ3@dmcwave.com (Christopher Griffen)
  5) RE: Traveller (it's aliiiive!!!) by "David J. Golden" <goldendj@csn.net>
  6) Re: California Dreaming... by "Shalom Zaidfeld" <yu145850@YorkU.CA>
  7) Travellers Future by Lance Blyth <lrblyth@lamar.ColoState.EDU>
  8) FFS (Light, or otherwise) by merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
  9) Traveller: The Next Generation by htp@dove.mtx.net.au (Henry Penninkilampi)
 10) What to do? by herder@ix.netcom.com (Richard Herder )
 11) MM's Vision (or is that version?) by ereddoch@amaranth.com (Eris Reddoch)
 12) FF&S and Donna Barr by Bertil Jonell <d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se>
 13) Re: TRAVELLER digest 545 by aswfh@acad2.alaska.edu (William F. Hostman)
 14) Re: Yars by "V.A.G." <GREI5001@pcmail.uni-trier.de>
 15) Original Traveller by chico167@ix.netcom.com (Rodney Phillip Cesa )

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

Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 15:25:26 -0600
From: muskrat@msn.fullfeed.com (John Kovalic)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: FF&S Lite
Message-ID: <199601112125.PAA20165@fullfeed.msn.fullfeed.com>


>: AS for FF&S.  All of us will agree that it needs improvement, perhaps a
>: little simplification (I personally like it the way it is).  But it IS
>: better for detail than High Guard.
>
>The fact that it needs a little tweaking doesn't negate it as an
>excellent product.  My guess is that people must really like it for it
>to get this much wear and tear.

>I think the real solution should be to create a FFS lite that has
>everything modularized (similar to MT).  Thus, you pick parts and
>clobber them together.

Brilliant! What a great idea. I, for one, found FF&S over-complicated and
frequently confusing, but then, I dropped out of Maths when we started
doing n-dimensional Tensor Calculus.

FF&S Lite: If only it could be done.

John Kovalic



******************************************************************
"This must be Thursday. I never COULD get the hang of Thursdays"
                                                     - Arthur Dent
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
*          John Kovalic - muskrat@msn.fullfeed.com               *
*                                                                *
*                 "Wild Life": the Web comic --                  *
*       MUSKRAT CENTRAL: http://www.msn.fullfeed.com/muskrat/    *
******************************************************************






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

Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 16:35:32 -0500
From: cyhiggin@usa.pipeline.com (Dragoness)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: NPC:Hans Pritcher
Message-ID: <9601112135.AA04355@>

On Jan 11, 1996 16:05:15, 'traveller@MPGN.COM' wrote:

>Here is an NPC, well actually he was a PC, but now he is an NPC.
>I didn't say which corporation he works for. I figured I'd leave that
>up to the individual GM, also he is not tied to anyone campaign setting.
>He can be used as an advesary to the players, or as an ally.

>Hans Pritcher
>CAC977-0-8 Initiative: 5

<most details snipped>

>Who am I? The name on my ID says Hans Pritcher. The face matches mine.
>I have no memories except in my nightmares.  In them it is bitter cold
>and there is no gravity. Each one reveals more of my identity. Even
>though they terrorize me, I find myself wanting them so that I can end
>this wakeful death.  When I am awake all I know are two names and faces.
>BJ Eyzaguirre and Ammel Brodrig.  The first to deliver a message to,
>the second to kill. Of course I can't remember what the message is.

<snip>

A sort-of cyberpunk Jason Bourne! Neat!  I always liked that
character. Anyone out there besides me who read Robert Ludlum?
His plots and characters could give one some fiendish adventure
ideas...

                        --Cynthia

--
"I can't see the end of me, my whole expanse I cannot see,
I formulate infinity, and store it deep inside of me" -- Nirvana
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Publik cey on request ----------------- cyhiggin@usa.pipeline.com
--
"I can't see the end of me, my whole expanse I cannot see,
I formulate infinity, and store it deep inside of me" -- Nirvana
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Publik cey on request ----------------- cyhiggin@usa.pipeline.com

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

Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 16:08:32 -0600 (CST)
From: James Kiley <tenzil@io.com>
To: Traveller ML <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: Military Structure
Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.91.960111160157.1833C-100000@pentagon.io.com>


So, I bought Striker II over the weekend.  It looks neat, not
horrible.  Also picked up Smash & Grab; I figure I may as well get what
TNE stuff I can, in case the next owners/developers decide to invalidate
the New Era.
In any case, there's a lot of organizational charts in Striker II
for various military outfits.  Am I wrong in thinking that GDW should
have included a key to the charts, so we could figure out which symbol
represents infantry, which armor, etc?  And perhaps what the dots mean,
and the underlines?  I'd love if someone knowledgeable could email me and
let me know what the symbols mean, or point me to a good Web site or
other free resource for this sort of thing.
Secondly, suggestions as to where I could find out what rank
officer typically commands what size unit and/or ship would also be
greatly appreciated.  This seems like a glaring omission, especially in
that it wasn't mentioned in Striker II.  Am I missing something?

jk


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

Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 15:51:42 -0800
From: Christopher_Griffen_at_DMC-SJ3@dmcwave.com (Christopher Griffen)
To: FarFuture@aol.com, traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: The new rule system...
Message-ID: <0f5a3830@MailXFER.DMCWAVE.COM>

I'd be curious to know what sort of response there's been to the idea of a new
rule system.  I'd guess that it's fairly mixed.  There are a fair number of
Traveller "dissidents" who never converted to TNE rules and probably wouldn't
mind a new rule set based on Classic Traveller.  From what I've seen, however,
more folks (at least on the TML) would like to see the TNE rules take precedence
over any other rule systems.

I'm a proponent of sticking to the TNE rule system, or at least only marginally
modifying it.  As noted by TML contributor, Cynthia Higginbotham, the rules are
based on those of T2K2 and were established to reflect a certain level of detail
that the old rule systems lacked.

I think most of us like the TNE ground and space combat rules.  They're the best
yet in the history of the game in that they aren't confusing.  If any slight is
to be made about the TNE rules, it's that the level of detail may bog down a
gaming session.  I've always thought that the NPC wound system is a cop-out at
best.  Wounds should be handled the same for both PCs and NPCs.  If that's an
issue, maybe a hybrid of old and new would work.  But at the behest of those of
us who just don't want to buy and learn the third completely new rule system in
18 years of Traveller, please don't change the system drastically from what it
is today.

Brilliant Lances was a terrific effort as well.  Any misgivings with the product
could be ironed out in a second edition.

It's my belief that the aforementioned "dissidents" cannot easily be pleased by
_any_ system when it comes right down to it.  If the new system is designed in
order to make these people happy, it's doomed to failure.  Better to cater to
the core market and find ways of drawing in both new players and returning old
players with a more steady flow of source material and if anything a _slightly_
streamlined rule set.

Other than that, I want to applaud two things:

1)  The development of multiple historical genres.  Traveller's rich history
should have been developed like this long ago.

and

2)  Multimedia approach.  As long as the focus on the core RPG isn't lost, I
don't see why eventual and conservative movement into other media wouldn't be a
good idea.  I'd love to have CD ROMs, comics, novels, etc. related to Traveller,
but never at the expense of the game itself.

--Chris

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

Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 16:47:06 -0700
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@csn.net>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: RE: Traveller (it's aliiiive!!!)
Message-ID: <199601112347.AA07911@ns-1.csn.net>

At 12:16 pm 1/11/96 -0500, you wrote:
>Priority (from my standpoint) is to get a good basic set like
>original boxed set out, then source books.  Pay less attention to
>the flash of the pages then to a reasonable content.  The original
>books are astonishingly austere, almost zen-like, compared to modern
>RPG books, but neither do they have to be the awful 'look at me I
>just got Pagemaker' look and feel of the TNE manual.

        Amen!

>Included adventures should be in appendices, not stuck in the middle
>like textbook excercises.  Finally: Proofread, proofread, proofread,
>and to be on the safe side have someone else do it two or three
>times.

        Perhaps you could get a few (?) people from this list to do so, as
well as playtest everything. You might not want to just openly post draft
copies as you go -- possible copyright problems, and people using the drafts
instead of buying the final product. But I'd be willing to pay up front for
the final version in exchange for advance looks and input into that same
version. Assuming I get some free time soon, like I expect...
 ___________________________________________________________________
  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


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

Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 19:00:15 -0500
From: "Shalom Zaidfeld" <yu145850@YorkU.CA>
To: TML <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: Re: California Dreaming...
Message-ID: <199601120000.TAA87027@comoro.yorku.ca>


Alvin..  I read your message about 400 pg. Source books..  Although
it's a nice idea.. I would rather see adventures (The Traveller
adventure type) published that use this background (which would be
publish with the adventure)   Just background source books are hard
to utilize because we are all lazy! :-p  I would rather see ready
adventures that USE the background.. more useful than reading books
(source books).. something like the Star viking book.  but with full adventures.
.
not only adventure hooks.

Just some random tidbits of my opinion..

     -Shalom Zaidfeld

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Email: yu145850@yorku.ca                            |      Anthropology Major
"One day, it will happen.. one day,                 |         York University
 one day it will all make sense"   -Bj/rk, Debut    |         Toronto, Canada


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

Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 17:11:44 -0700 (MST)
From: Lance Blyth <lrblyth@lamar.ColoState.EDU>
To: Traveller <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Cc: xboat@MPGN.COM
Subject: Travellers Future
Message-ID: <Pine.A32.3.91.960111170708.72000B-100000@lamar.ColoState.EDU>

I would like to say how impressed I am with the amount of intelligent
discourse on these lists on Travellers future!

In sum, it appears that; Yes Traveller needs some tweaking, but, No We
don't need a whole new set of rules.  I suspect that is what Mr. Miller
(and I hope he is reading our mail) has in mind.

The universe is big (understatement award possibility) and Traveller can
fit all of our needs, it has for almost 20 years now and with the care
and intelligence that has been demonstrated on the lists, it will do so
for another 20!

Let's keep it up Folks!
Lance


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

Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 21:33:08 -0700 (MST)
From: merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM (traveller)
Subject: FFS (Light, or otherwise)
Message-ID: <9601120433.AA06936@Rt66.com>


Hi,

I've read the commentary with interest.  One primary point on the value
of a FFS system (as opposed to the useful-gear alternative suggested by
Marc) is that it allows separate gaming groups to produce materials that
complement each other.

Certainly within this particular group of players, this is a Good Thing
(tm).  It allows for gear-heads to make stuff for others to use, and
while there will still be some hand-waving regarding the technological
assumptions, they'll be noted in one place (FFS, in the current case).
In the case of this group, we're all over the place, so this ais a way
to share stuff.  You could fill a JTAS every month with the stuff pumped
out on this list alone.  Even if it were heavy on gear (it's easier to
design gear than a good adventure) this would be a good thing, IMHO.

Regarding FFS Light, I think that it's a good idea.  I hope that BL/BR
are part of traveller from the ownership standpoint, they're good
products, they just need some playtesting/tweeking to make sure they
don't wreak the history as it stands.

I've been using a BR ship version of FFS light for a while now to make
big ships in a fraction of the time required for a full FFS design.
Player ships *need* the detail FFS and BL provide, but naval ships get
trashed so fast it's not worth the time frequently.  It'd be easy to
make a version for pumping out simple stats for ships.  Hell, if we call
the Fire Control rating of a BR ship an analogy to the computer type on
a HG design, the BR stats could be written in a line much like old ship
profiles...

And just to keep the idea alive... some supplements can be *digital*.
What about a Traveller Spacecraft Simulator.  Play against the computer,
or over a network.  Combat, or just use it to drive around well animated
planets.  I'd make it work like a submarine simulator in that it'd have
a toggle for real or compressed time frames.  Well, I could ramble on
about this for days, so I think I'll quit while you're all awake
*yawn*.

Regards,
Merrick

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

Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 16:40:44 +1030
From: htp@dove.mtx.net.au (Henry Penninkilampi)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Traveller: The Next Generation
Message-ID: <v01530500ad1b8102df19@[203.15.30.8]>

Alvin Plummer <alvin.plummer@sheridanc.on.ca> wrote:
..
>While we're waiting for Marc Miller, Steve Jackson and Rodge Sanger to
>sort out who's doing what, here's my personal wish list for Traveller.
..
>Finally, I'd enjoy a number of slimmer, 100-150 pg. sourcebooks.  The
>range that these books could cover is huge, including aliens (one alien
>per book, please!), handbooks ("The Naval Officer's Handbook" "The
>Scout's Handbook" "The Marine's Handbook" "The Merchant's Handbook" "The
>Free Trader's Handbook" "The Noble's Handbook" comes immediately to
>mind) that cover useful information for their carrer's, varient universes
>(The Immortal Nobility, Rebellion, Virus, First Imperium, the Young
>Imperium, Ancients!, Lucan Victorious, Zhodane Forever! Conquest of the
>Marches, Return of Grandfather, etc.), and all those other sectors (Core,
>Empty Quarter, Solomani Rim, etc.)

So you want to go the way of T$R with their "Complete * Handbook" series?

>Of course, all these items should have high-grade writing, fine
>illustrations, striking, realistic oil-painting covers by A.C. Farley (who
>did such good work in _Vilani & Vargr_ and _Rebellion Sourcebook_), etc.

Oh, sorry - my mistake ;)


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Traveller: The Next Generation <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

>From all the discussion that has occurred since GDW's announcement, I think
that one thing is clear:  Everyone wants something different to happen with
Traveller, and there *isn't* a consensus on virtually anything.  (This is
not really surprising, when you think about it.)

If those that control the destiny of Traveller take it in *any* direction,
there will be people who won't be happy; and there will be people who are.
You can't please all of the people all of the time.

So what can you do?  Admit you're licked and give up?

In my opinion, well, yeah - give up trying to please all of the people all
of the time; AND LET THEM PLEASE THEMSELVES!

It's been mentioned before that the setting outweighs mechanics (or words
to that effect) and that in the time that it would take to write up
another, single set of rules, lots and *lots* of "background" material
could have been written (interpret "background" as being everything bar
rules).

Why do we play Traveller?  Is it because the rules offer the best
simulation of combat resolution (what about Phoenix Command)?  Is it
because the rules are integrated from the highest level to the lowest level
(what about GURPS)?

Or do we play because Traveller has a really *cool* setting, which has set
up an *atmosphere* that we have really enjoyed playing in?  Enjoyed, to
such an extent, that we glossed over the ommissions, the inadequacies, and
the other problems in the actal *rules* had, and got on with the task of
seeing what's out there?

I did; and I'm sure most of you did too.

It's the *atmosphere* of a system that sells, that works; not the rules.

The way to address the future, I believe, is not to abandon the present;
it's not to go back and start from scratch; it's not to ignore all of the
mistakes that have been made, and lessons learned, along the way - rather
it's to accept the reality that no-one will EVER devise a rule system that
will please everyone, and that people will ALWAYS toss out the rules they
don't like and introduce rules that they do like.

Restructure the mechanics framework so that each part of the system can be
modularised and communicate to every other part of the system via
well-defined interfaces.  (Gee, who's a programmer then?)

The Universal World Profile, Universal Personality Profile and others of
their ilk, are already in place, are already used and accepted - let's make
*these* the interfaces between system modules.

Who cares what method you use for generating a character, a vehicle, a
starship, a world, or even a sector, providing that you can quantify
everything in a standard fashion.

Who cares how you determine the victor in hand-to-hand combat, how you skim
fuel from a gas giant, how you "nuke them from orbit", how you determine
weather patterns, how you pull numbers in the Assembly, how you remove a
TED from power, providing that you draw only upon data presented in a
Universal Profile and outcomes are reflected by changes to that profile?

Everyone talks the same language and problems, if they do arise, are
isolated to a single functional module which can be easity corrected
without major ramifications on the rest of the system.

If those that control the destiny of Traveller can create a framework into
which all past, present, and future rules sub-sets can be plugged, then the
primary bone of contention can be removed - people can play with whatever
sub-sets they are most comfortable with, and can play at whatever level of
detail is most appropriate (they can have a simple combat module but a
complex trading module, if that's what they want).  Once they have found a
combination of rules sub-sets that they are happy with, then they can get
on with enjoying the game itself, revelling in the *atmosphere* of a game
where the designers spend more time on background material, on sourcebooks,
on style, on flavour, than they do correcting mistakes in tables and design
sequences.

*) Create a framework.

*) Let the players come up with their own house-rules (they will anyway)
but provide a set of "interface guidelines" so that their house-rules can
be fully functional within the framework.

*) Allow all house-rules (sub-sets) to be freely distributed.  ("I'll just
connect to ftp://traveller.com/rules/modules and download PersonalCombat2,
Trading14, and VehicleDesign6 and we'll be on our way!")

*) Survey the Traveller community and based on the information gained from
"The Grand Survey" build a library of resource material covering what is
most popular, be it "Inside the Black Curtain", "Astrogator's Guide to the
Disapora Sector (Part 2)", "Traveller: The Trading Card Game", "The Long
Night", "The Civil War", or whatever.  The Grand Survey could be set up as
a web form, as well as a paper version distributed along with products, or
a file on a CD.

As far as the actual background to be used, let the players choose their own!

Rather than tying rules with setting, write all source materiel as a purely
informational resource only.  Let it read like a story, with no references
(or as little as possible) to mechanics at all.  FA$A did a great job with
their "House Books" for BattleTech - such a good job that playing
BattleTech is still fun (and if you want to know how NOT to design a combat
system, start with BT).

*) Divorce "setting" from "system", "background" from "mechanics".  That
way even novels become a resource, rather than being merely a reference.

*) Take pointers from Hollywood, who have, on occasion, written two (or
more) different conclusions to follow on from the first half of a
season-end cliff-hanger.  That way, the approach to a branch in the
timeline (did a rebellion happen or didn't it; did virus happen or didn't
it) would be covered in a single volume, with all details presented, but
the outcome unresolved.  In the last few pages, you can speculate on where
the story may go from there, to get people thinking, then discussing, then
providing feedback.  If you have statistically significant amounts of
people favouring a certain path, go with that one.  If it's pretty much a
tie, then you either officially branch the timeline (and provide a
sourcebook for each branch) or introduce a "heretofore unknown" element to
polarise opinion.  Ideally, the pre-branch volume would set things up so
that the event, once it happens (or not), will provide two (or more)
radically different outcomes - sufficiently different so that a "heretofore
unknown" element wouldn't need to be introduced.  In short - set up the
cliff-hanger and then let public reaction determine which way to go (and go
both, if that is what the public want).

*) Repeat The Grand Survey each year (or other appropriate period) to keep
tabs on the level of interest displayed in each branch in the timeline.
Once interest dwindles, cease further investment in that branch and
concentrate on those that are more popular (this is the only way to make
the whole approach economically viable).  But don't just cease and desist -
so that "the flame burns on" allow others to pick up where you left off
(after an appropriate cooling-off period) by passing support of the branch
to either another company, to an organisation of enthusiasts, or to the
public domain ("After December 31, 1999, you are hereby permitted to draw
apon all source material produced for the "Virus" branch of the traveller
timeline for your own purposes, be they personal, commercial or
otherwise.")  Of course, all branches include the "trunk" to which they
were attached, but the *action* is happening with the new branches (that
is, the publisher's income is being derived from new products being
released for active branches, rather than for "dead" branches, or the
"trunk" itself, so passing support on shouldn't affect income to any
appreciable extent).

Synopsis:

If the mechanics of Traveller are made and kept modular, people will be
able to configure their playing environment to suit them without having to
bend or break existing rules.  This is good for playability.

If interfaces between modules are well designed, players will be able to
design their own functional modules and make them available for all and
sundry to use.  This is good for flexibility.

If branches in the timeline take a direction desired by a majority of
players, then player support for the branch will not suffer.  This is good
for the future.

If support for branches is based on the results of regular surveys then
investment of resources can be directed to areas of return.  This is good
for the publisher.

Final Words:

Let's keep in mind the lessons we have learned:

1) All rules are broken, but some are more broken than others.

2) The atmosphere makes a game, the rules break it.

Divorce the rules from the setting.  Provide a framework which essentially
describes the interface between rules and the setting.  Let the players
design their own rules which the plug into the framework to interact with
the setting.  Concentrate on developing the settings that are the most
popular.  Ask for feedback before branching the timeline with a critical
event.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> End <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<


Henry.



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

Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 22:49:25 -0800
From: herder@ix.netcom.com (Richard Herder )
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: What to do?
Message-ID: <199601120649.WAA23085@ix10.ix.netcom.com>

        Well, I've been following this list a for a while.  I've never
played Traveller before but it looked interesting so I went and bought
a copy of Deluxe TNE and a few supplements.  I was even able to find an
old copy of Megatraveller from a friend who was willing to loan it to
me.  So I was all ready to begin a campaign when this GDW mess started.
I'm not sure what to do... I would begin anyway, but I would rather see
what will happen with the game first.  On the other hand, it may be
months or years before Traveller ends up being published by someone
else.  Any suggestions?

Also:
I know about the Ancients, but I have seen references to
Primordials/sparklers.  What are these?  Does anybody have info?


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

Date: Fri, 12 Jan 96 01:18:19 CST
From: ereddoch@amaranth.com (Eris Reddoch)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: MM's Vision (or is that version?)
Message-ID: <199601120845.CAA00342@mailhub.amaranth.com>


>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.

Alvin, I don't think that's quite right.  I think Marc wants to go
back to Traveller Classic with some updates and additions (like a
task system).  To be frank, it sounded a good bit like MT to me.
Clearly what it *won't* be is TNE.

>A) Should we consider federating the traveller list into One Happy Family
>again?

I don't think so.  TNE still isn't CT or MT.  There are going to
be lots of people that continue to use the TNE system..and
material in their games.  There might come a time when "xboat"
becomes "traveller" and "traveller" becomes the "tne" list.  Or
if you're right there might end up being 3 lists! <g>

>B) Please, please DON'T publish the Traveller rules on the net!  This may
>drastically weaken Marc Miller's copywrite, and endanger the
>return/rebirth of Traveller!

Is someone seriously considering doing this?  It would be a
pretty blatent copywrite violation if they did.  Tell me where
someone is doing this, so I can visit their site and personally
castigate them! <g>





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

Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 12:14:09 +0100 (MET)
From: Bertil Jonell <d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: FF&S and Donna Barr
Message-ID: <199601121114.MAA05365@gorow.dtek.chalmers.se>

> Think about it, everyone (especially
> Bertil, Merrick, and Alvin) push that thing to it's limits and beyond.

  I admit to having designed a hovercraft for Milleniums End with it,
and a TL8 warbot battalion:) and to have used it to reverse engineer
real world aircrafts in order to make a (more) realistic aircraft damage
system for Dark Conspiracy.

> I know personally, I even have to augment a design or two with stuff
> from 3G^3.  However, I know that even with it's shortcomings, we still
> all love it.  Why?  Simply it is the best product ever created.

  Vehicle design is good, spaceship design is good, airship/aircrafts/
rotary-wing craft design is (are?) good, as is large energy weapons,
sensors (but I think the Ladar TL's should be lowered by 1, compared to
the other sensors), etc etc.
  For small arms (well, anything below nukes) I use 3G^3, and for tac
missiles I use real world ISP and delta-v, and 3G^3 guidance and warhead
and put it in a tiny FF&S hypersonic airframe:)

> I think the real solution should be to create a FFS lite that has
> everything modularized (similar to MT).  Thus, you pick parts and
> clobber them together.

  That could fit in a basic book. After all, The Traveller Book did
Spacesip Design in a 2page spread.

> : My biggest problem with Cgen in TNE is the hard and fast 4 year term.  Ther
> : eis never any variation, and characters lose some of their individuality.
>
> Uhm, the 4 year term has been a Traveller standard since the
> beginning.  The only way to get out of it and have a two year term was
> by failing your survival roll.

  The Mercenary/Merchant Prince/Scouts system (including extensions in
Challenge for cops & scientists etc, and the add ons that was made in
Mega Traveller) had you rolling for every year.

> 8) Jerry Alexandratos                %  "Nothing inhabits my    (8

-bertil- "what's that on the passive sonar? two humans iceskating, sir!"

PS: I'd like to see Donna Barr do the illos for any new basic traveller
    rule book:)
--
"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."

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

Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 02:27:03 -0900
From: aswfh@acad2.alaska.edu (William F. Hostman)
To: traveller <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 545
Message-ID: <v01530500ad1bf210606b@[137.229.100.53]>

> - How do two term characters get things like Pistol 14 and streetwise 12 (in
>addition to other skills)

They are the sum of the level of skill and the attribute to which the skill
is tied.

> - Is there a way to translate these new skill systems to the CT system
>(either
>direction)

Using common sense! ;-)

Actually, simplest way is to subtract the controlling attribute from the
asset (that target nuber from the examples above), to get the TNE level
(different from asset, as attribute effects aren't included), and divide by
2 (for CT) or 1.5 (For MT)

> - Where can I find descriptions of all the new skills I see (eg. History,
>Language, etc.)

TNE Rulebook. The controlling attributes anc complete skill list apeared in
the TNE Referee's Screen, as well.

> - What ever happened to the rule: Skills <= Int + Edu?

No involved in TNE. Dropped completely. Many GM's of my accquaintance (many
of them my former players) and I usually double the limit for MT games.

> - I am opposed to investing yet more time and money into the game and then
>have to change all I have    developed through CT not to mention my PCs.

Survival Margin gives conversion into TNE Stats for MT characters; CT
Characters will cross over using it, but tend to be lesser skilled. Don't
bother yet; Marc Miller's revising again, and the new version should at
least maintain some character continuity (based upon his previous
statements). The switch to MT was easier, as you just brought the character
straight across if he'd hit his Ed limit, or rolled special duty checks for
each term if not. It also added an experience system.

> - What is a Fusion Drive and how does it relate to CT.

the manuver drive is now a HEPlaR, or High Energy PLAsma Recombustion,
system, that needs hydrogen fuel as reaction mass. TNE Dropped the Thruster
Plates of CT/MT.

> - What is a G-turn?

30 minutes of 1G; either a measure of accumulated vector, vector change, or
fuel. In vectors, it is roughly 20000 kmh, or 1 10000km BL hex per 30
minute BL turn.

> - Whatever happened to Model a/b with x storage and y programs?

Dropped during MT ruleset. MT retained the Models; TNE/FF&S goes to a TL
and St or Fb or Flt (Standard, FIB, or Flight) models for each TL. Flight
computers are for vehicles only, not for starcraft.

-Wil

William F. Hostman

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



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

Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 14:45:57 MET
From: "V.A.G." <GREI5001@pcmail.uni-trier.de>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Yars
Message-ID: <877D63C20AE@pcmail.uni-trier.de>


->  To all who would say this, I just have one thing to point out.
-> In the time that it would create to make another rules set as
-> comprehensive as FF&S and T:NE, you could create _ALOT_ of background,
-> and background always won over rules.
->  Just look at White Wolf and their WOD series.
 Amen!!!
We do not need another system of rules! Just go back to cT or MT
Rules, tell everybody to buy those for the rules, or reprint them in
a neat, comprehensive, easy to use manual, but please (Marc, if you
are reading this..) focus on the background! It would be best (Imho)
to publish 3-4 background settings and a coulpe of adventures for
each. The less focus is put on rules, the more can be put on the real
stuff!
VAG
--------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------
-Don't hold me up: I am just barely ahead of insanity!!!!


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

Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 07:26:02 -0800
From: chico167@ix.netcom.com (Rodney Phillip Cesa )
To: Traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Original Traveller
Message-ID: <199601121526.HAA28725@ix8.ix.netcom.com>

Hello,

The group I game with plays the original Traveller (1st generation) and
we have most of the material published.  I would like to know if you
could supply me with info on areas to find more material to add to our
gaming via the Internet.

Thanks

chico167@ix.netcom.com



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

End of TRAVELLER Digest 547
***************************
