TRAVELLER Digest 566

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) JTAS #2 4sale. by SANDERS JERRY <sandersj@mscd.edu>
  2) RE: Societal collapse by "Bruce Johnson" <johnson@tonic.pharm.arizona.edu>
  3) Re: Anyway, Susan... (obscure Tragically Hip reference) by Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca>
  4) Re: TRAVELLER digest 565 by t01bpa@abdn.ac.uk
  5) Re: Higher Tech in Traveller. by Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca>
  6) Re: TRAVELLER digest 565 by merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
  7) Jump Torps: Here we go again! by Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca>
  8) RE: Jump Torps: Here we go again! by That Computer Guy <darkstar@UDel.Edu>
  9) Production Time of Starships by E.Watters@Queens-Belfast.AC.UK
 10) Re: RICE papers and Tavonni by library@babylon5.dss.gov.au (DSS Library)
 11) Construction times by Bri <bri@teleport.com>
 12) RE:  Plague of Duskir, etc. by odysseus@inetnebr.com (Jeff Kazmierski)
 13) Re: Adventure seed...Majesta class megafreighters LONG by "David J. Golden" <goldendj@csn.net>
 14) Message to Marc Miller by "David J. Golden" <goldendj@csn.net>
 15) Re:  Jump times by ROWAN Iain <wm0iro@acresearch.sunderland.ac.uk>
 16) Re: TRAVELLER digest 565 by "M.A. Trickett" <mat3@leicester.ac.uk>
 17) Re: Whither 2300AD? by John Muir Macpherson <muirmac@uclink.berkeley.edu>

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

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 14:44:58 -0700 (MST)
From: SANDERS JERRY <sandersj@mscd.edu>
To: xboat@MPGN.COM
Cc: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: JTAS #2 4sale.
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.91.960124143542.21854A-100000@clem.mscd.edu>


Journal of the Traveller's Aid Society #2 for sale at a local store for $5.00

Anyone interested? If so, let me know and it is yours for cost plus
postage - let's say $7.00 total.

Paul Sanders
sandersj@mscd.edu

Several other odds and ends available, although I didn't pay particular
attention to what was being asked.

Rebellion Sourcebook

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

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 15:29:53 MST7
From: "Bruce Johnson" <johnson@tonic.pharm.arizona.edu>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: RE: Societal collapse
Message-ID: <1B53D326BA6@tonic.pharm.Arizona.EDU>



> From: Phillip McGregor <aspqrz@sydney.DIALix.oz.au>
> To: traveller@MPGN.COM, xboat@MPGN.COM
> Subject: Plague of Duskir, Vargr and Imperial Tech Backwardness
> Message-ID: <199601241400.BAA20213@sydney.DIALix.oz.au>

[SNIP] stuff deleted about tasmanian aborigines

> Look at the native populations in Mexico as an example of what happens when
> your society is destroyed by forces that you do not understand ... you see
> the victor's society as being superior to your own, and adopt it as yours.
> Hence, the adoption of catholicism by said natives and the effective
> destruction of almost all traces of the "old" society within a generation
> or so.

Well, as I live a bit closer to the culture in question, I'll feel
free to correct a few misconceptions here.

First, Catholicism was hardly 'adopted'; in central Mexico, to as
far north as the furthest extent of the Spanish conquest of
California, the norm was forced conversion to Catholicism.  All
traces of the 'old' society were actively suppressed by the
benevolent missionaries.  There was a huge written body of knowledge
that the Aztec, and the Incas had, that the priests destroyed as
'Pagan works of Satan'. That's why, today, we have only a few
pitiful scraps of written history from the Aztec Empire, compared to
the libraries that existed when Cortez first waded ashore.

Second, much of the societal breakdown still didn't occur because
of cultural shock. Most of the destruction and depopulation of the
natives in the areas of Spanish conquest were due more to slavery
than anything else...the natives resisted working for the Spanish,
and died in droves from overwork, malnutrition, and disease.
Remember, the first Spanish were not there to tame the wilderness,
but to take as much wealth as possible as quickly as possible from
the New World (the original Smash and Grab, anyone?). Colonization
efforts didn't occur until quite some time after the initial
conquests.

Thirdly, take a good close look at the Catholic religion as
practiced by most of the natives of Mexico...it's called the
Catholic Church, but the European Church doesn't have brujos,
witches, healers, Days of the Dead, or any number of native
traditions that have continued quite strongly to this day.  As
elsewhere in the Caribbean, the religions and traditions of
the natives, and later, the imported African slaves, were absorbed
into an amalgam of beliefs. In some cases Catholicism is (and remains
to this day) merely a thin facade over the old beliefs.  Read about
Santeria, sometime.

What does this have to do with the Vilani conquest?  The native
traditions of Mexican indians and the Caribbean slaves survived
because they were flexible, able to take on a new appearance without
changing their fundamental core. Indeed, if you study the traditions
and folklore of these areas, you find that this is almost a universal
theme: Things aren't always what they appear, men can take on the
skins of animals, and vice versa, that what is important is whatever
is outside of appearance.

The rigid Vilani culture (which by this time had ceased experimental
science, or any new thinking, for over a thousand years) may not
have been able to absorb the new paradigms that the Terrans, with
their vigorous science, upward mobility, and questioning natures,
represented.

I could see the Vilani sticking to their battle plans long after it
was clear that the Terrans had found the holes in them, sticking to
their rigid chain of command, long after it was shattered, sticking
to their culture, until it, too, rather than bend or adapt, shattered
as well.



Bruce Johnson
Information Technology/College of Pharmacy
The University of Arizona
johnson@tonic.pharm.arizona.edu


As if this place HAD any opinions...

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

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 17:59:41 -0500 (EST)
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Anyway, Susan... (obscure Tragically Hip reference)
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960124175213.2751A-100000@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca>


In Trav Digest 565, Susan M. Shock writes:

<<<<<<<<<<<<
>  I would actually agree with this. I've been playing around with the MT system
> lately, and with the exception of the vehicle design system ( which I'm still
> struggling to understand) it is pretty OK. There's no question that what hurt
> MT was the very poor editing which resulted in all that errata. I also
> think, frankly, that the $30 price tag back in 1987 didn't help either. My
> comments were directed at those who pine for CLASSIC Traveller. However,
> there are still a few holdouts from CT even in MegaTraveller that I'd like
> to see gone in the
> new edition: NO survival rolls of ANY kind, and characters having more skills.
> Other than that, I could be happy with an MT-style system; but call it
> something else!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Wow, an agreement on this list?  So quickly?  How is this possible? :-)
Seriously, Susan, I agree with all your analyses and suggestions.
MegaTraveller was kind of a dippy name, and I hope the next generation
has better marketing savvy behind it.

Charles.


<0>         "The mind is stranger than it can imagine."<0>
<0> Charles Collin (charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca), <0>
<0> Psychology Department, McGill University.  <0>
<0> 1205 Dr. Penfield, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, H3A 1B1.  <0>



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

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 23:32:00 +0000 (GMT)
From: t01bpa@abdn.ac.uk
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 565
Message-ID: <S9601242332.AA20904@sysc.abdn.ac.uk>


All i want to know is how they got the values for rate, MV and base length
in the first place (so intermediate ship tonnage can be worked out)


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

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 18:34:09 -0500 (EST)
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Higher Tech in Traveller.
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960124175950.2751B-100000@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca>

Hi Armand.

> I just resumed reading this mailing list from almost 2 years ago, so =
> forgive me if I'm missing something, but it seems like everyone is =
> discussing another rules revision for Traveller.  It feels like I just =
> bought TNE!  Not again!

Sorry, but it's true, and it looks like it's going to be a return to
something vaguely MegaTraveller-like.  BTW, FYI GDW is DOA.

> For me, small arms combat in TNE (or MT) is a major pain to referee.  =
> Even a session of Battle Rider or Brilliant Lances is tedious because =
> there are so many steps to perform and each one requires some searching. =
>  Wargamers, I assume, are used to this (no offense intended of course), =
> and GDW makes lots of wargames, but the players I know who are used to =
> AD&D quickly lose their patience.

Well, I don't know about MT being tedious, though I suppose it could be
somewhat streamlined.  But I agree with you in general:  A quick and
simple combat system is a must.

> Could this be why TNE or Traveller in general is having trouble selling? =

It isn't having trouble selling any more! :-) (sorry, graveyard humor)

> While I'm griping, I'd like to say that there are two things about =
> Traveller that I find mildly regrettable.  The first is the fact that a =
> jump takes a week of game time.  I assume this is a holdover from the =
> Imperium wargame or whatever, but it gets tiring trying to explain what =
> the characters do for a week every time they jump.  It seems to waste a =
> lot of game time, and  it's not flashy or impressive like warp drive or =
> hyperspace.  It's not heroic.

I used to have problems with this, but then I came up with one of those
"lesser known aspects of space travel" which I like to call "jump
projects".  Essentially the player decides that his character is
practicing some skill or rigging up a new ship security system or whatever
and you resolve it with a roll at the end of each jump.  Most of these
projects take more than one week, so they cover several jumps and are
assumed to be abandonned temporarily on planetfall. At the end of several
months, the character has a new skill (or product, etc.) and his time in
jump space has been explained.  There is no need to roleplay all 150 hours
of a jump, any more than one roleplays all 24 hours of wilderness travel
in D&D.

It can also help to give characters 1D3 levels of "hobby" skills, which
must be devoted to "useless" pursuits (i.e., no sneaking in gun combat
because you like to go down to the range as a hobby).  The character thus
spends its time in J-space doing some sculpting or reading up on the
latest strategies for grav-ball.


> My next gripe is that Traveller, the game of the Far Future, posits high =
> technology to be something that seems very low tech.  Long Nights =
> notwithstanding, does the technology of tech level 15 really fit what =
> you imagine technology will be like in the 56th century?  I imagine that =
> TL 15-like technology will be available (in some of the fields at least) =
> in the next 200 years.  I want logically thought out, believeable hard =
> SF science, but I want to be awed and impressed with high technology.  I =
> think new players do too.  I may be biased, being a Trek fan, but =
> sometimes I think it would be more interesting to have a campaign set =
> before the Ancient's Final War.  That would be great SF to me.  =
> Traveller sometimes feels like Top Secret (the old out of print TSR =
> overly-detailed spy game) in space.

Interesting, the pre-AFW idea is one of the backgrounds Marc Miller has
proposed for the new Traveller.  How prophetic!  I have to say, though,
that in general I disagree with the idea of making Traveller more high
tech.  High tech, carried to extremes, makes for poor roleplaying.
Chaosium put out a beautiful RPG based on Larry Niven's "Ringworld".  It
was a great game except for one thing: the characters' technology made
them too bloody powerful.  They had indestructible space ship hulls,
autodocs that could bring them back from anything short of incineration
(and there were ways to survive that too!), teleporters, and pocket-sizes
weapons capable of wiping out small cities!  I'm not exagerating, in fact
I'm just scratching the surface!  The game designers said they had to tone
down some of the tech from LN's background to make the game playable.  In
my opinion they failed. LN himself said he stopped writing about this
future history because he couldn't think of exciting situations to put
such powerful characters in.  Star Trek has some of the same problems.
You have no doubt noticed how the TV shows always have to come up with
some cludgy reason why the transporters don't work (damn those tetrion
emmisions! :-).  I haven't played the RPG, but I wonder if this isn't a
problem there as well?

Another problem with super-tech games is that they limit the problem
solving aspect of roleplaying.  Because the technology is so "out there",
players can't bring their real-world knowledge to bear.

People seem to assume that the rate of technological increase will
continue as it is.  There is no reason to believe this.  There could
quite possibly be a slow down in development is sociocultural factors
dictate.  So the level of tech in Traveller is not implausible.
Actually, there's been quite a big thread on just this sort of thing on
one of the lists lately (was it Xboat?  I can't remember...).

> Please don't flame me too hard, I'm still a newbie.

Sorry if the above sounds critical, it is not meant in that spirit.

Have a better one! (obscure Blade Runner reference).
Charles.

<0>         "The mind is stranger than it can imagine."<0>
<0> Charles Collin (charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca), <0>
<0> Psychology Department, McGill University.  <0>
<0> 1205 Dr. Penfield, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, H3A 1B1.  <0>



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

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 17:27:34 -0700 (MST)
From: merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 565
Message-ID: <9601250027.AA14360@Rt66.com>

Hi,

> All i want to know is how they got the values for rate, MV and base length
> in the first place (so intermediate ship tonnage can be worked out)

Well, they assume that the ship/craft is a spherical shell.

Vol. = 4 Pi r^3
       -
       3

I don't have it in front of me, but I belive they standardized on a hull
thickness of 1cm.  The MVMs on the next page are just guidline numbers
for the various shapes, you could just as well actually calculate the
volume of an arbitrary shell if you know the geometry.

So for the basic case to get the MV (of the various tonnages as spheres)
just make a sphere that has the desired volume (thus getting the
diameter (the L in the table)).  Then make a sphere with a radius 1cm
smaller and subtract its volume from the bigger one.  This should be the
MV (or at least directly related to the MV by a constant).

Regards (is this what you were looking for?),
Merrick

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

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 20:12:00 -0500 (EST)
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca>
To: Xboat Mailing List <xboat@MPGN.COM>,
Subject: Jump Torps: Here we go again!
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960124195948.3299B-100000@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca>

Hi All. In the last digest Phil McGregor wrote:

>>>>>>>>>>>
There is a perfectly good explanation as to how JDrive missiles (2 tons
displacement) can be made to work. The *real* limiting factor was the
minimum size of the Fusion power plants (esp see MTrav, where they're
humongous!) - but there's no *need* for the Fusion power plants to be on
board the vessel with the JDrive! We know (from a variety of sources, inc.
the "Starship Operator's Manual") that the majority of the space allocated
for the JDrive is *not* for the actual drive, but for the extremely high
capacity output fusion reactors to provide the power needed in less than
the handful of hours that the zuchai crystal/energy capacitors can hold
the energy before decaying. The solution? Easy! Use the mother ship's JDrive
generators and dump the power into capacitors (see the Black Globe rules
in CTrav and MTrav, as well as in FF&S) on the missile and then launch it.
The actual *active* portion of the missile is probably less than 10% of the
actual generator volume ... even the mother ship's computers can be used
to dump in a course tape.
>>>>>>>>>

There was quite a long thread on this a while ago (I think it was on
xboat).  At that time, people came to the conclusion that the main problem
with jump torps was that they mess with the Traveller background.  For
instance, they make the whole x-boat network pointless.  Also, what you're
describing essentially amounts to a jump gate.  Why could one not expand
your idea to a ship?  There would be no particular need for ships with
their own jump drives. It would be more economical (in "civilized" areas
at least) to rent a little time hooked up to the local up-port's
powerplant.  Not that this wouldn't be a neat sort of background, but it
doesn't fit in with the canonical Traveller history.  The 100 ton limit is
supposed to be some kind of physical limitation, I think, and is designed
to make the Imperium have communication patterns analogous to those of the
roman empire (i.e., communication is only as fast as transportation).
Does anyone know of any canonical sources explaining the reason behind
the 100 ton limit?

Charles.


<0>         "The mind is stranger than it can imagine."<0>
<0> Charles Collin (charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca), <0>
<0> Psychology Department, McGill University.  <0>
<0> 1205 Dr. Penfield, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, H3A 1B1.  <0>




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

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 21:27:03 -0500
From: That Computer Guy <darkstar@UDel.Edu>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM, xboat@MPGN.COM
Subject: RE: Jump Torps: Here we go again!
Message-ID: <199601250227.VAA23712@chopin.udel.edu>

In Reply to Your Message of Wed, 24 Jan 1996 20: 11:41 EST
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 21:27:03 -0500
From: That Computer Guy <darkstar@chopin.udel.edu>

: Hi All. In the last digest Phil McGregor wrote:
:
[stuff deleted]
:
: There was quite a long thread on this a while ago (I think it was on
: xboat).  At that time, people came to the conclusion that the main problem
: with jump torps was that they mess with the Traveller background.  For
: instance, they make the whole x-boat network pointless.  Also, what you're
: describing essentially amounts to a jump gate.  Why could one not expand
: your idea to a ship?  There would be no particular need for ships with
: their own jump drives. It would be more economical (in "civilized" areas
: at least) to rent a little time hooked up to the local up-port's
: powerplant.  Not that this wouldn't be a neat sort of background, but it
: doesn't fit in with the canonical Traveller history.  The 100 ton limit is
: supposed to be some kind of physical limitation, I think, and is designed
: to make the Imperium have communication patterns analogous to those of the
: roman empire (i.e., communication is only as fast as transportation).
: Does anyone know of any canonical sources explaining the reason behind
: the 100 ton limit?

Well, I think we're missing some arguments as to why a jump torpedo
may be feasible.  First, while it may work, it isn't exaclty a
guaranteed method.  More than likely, the jump torpedo will have some
sort of computer, a jump drive and jump fuel on it. Now, the same
computer that must do the final jump calculations must also store the
data to be sent.  Granted, could start the calculations on the firing
ship or dump to the torpedo from tape, but the computer on board the
torp is the one that is going to have to actually engage the j-drive.
Now, this is an action that is usually safely handled by your
well-trained engineer, so it almost always goes well.  Leave that hard
work up to just a computer.  Already you can assume that there's a
good chance of failure/misjump.

Automated yes, but definitely the best of solutions.  This allows the
j-torp to exist as an emergency messenger service for military ships,
yet because of the randomness of it proves that sometimes it is
important to have people behind the controls.

       --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: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 02:35:29 +0000
From: E.Watters@Queens-Belfast.AC.UK
To: traveller@mpgn.com
Subject: Production Time of Starships
Message-ID: <0099CE56.41518060.1@v2.qub.ac.uk>

Phillip McGregor <aspqrz@sydney.DIALix.oz.au> sent:

>As for how realistic these times are, consider, as I said, the 747. Weighs
>around 170 tons. Production time, when geared up? Around a couple or more a
>*day*. Do they test each plane off the production line to destruction
>before they hand it over to the customer? No. I don't know how much testing
>it goes through before deliver, a week? Sure, you *might* argue that
>Starships are somehow more complex than a 747 ... and you may be right, at
>that. However, the problem here is that the quality control and testing
>regimes of the shipyards producing them are *also* much more complex. So,
>at worst, they have kept pace and the damn thing requires a week or two of
>testing, may a couple of Jumps ... certainly no more than a month or so.

Yes, a 747 might appear off the end of the production line each day. But that
747 took a year or more to produce. If a Traveller Starship manufacturer had a
big enough orderbook, one starship would be 'dropping' off the production
line a day, but each one would still take a fair fraction of a year to
produce.

Eamon Watters.

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

Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 14:10:47 -0600
From: library@babylon5.dss.gov.au (DSS Library)
To: lay@cod.nosc.mil (Richard Lay)
Cc: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: RICE papers and Tavonni
Message-ID: <199601260009.OAA15008@babylon5.dss.gov.au>

Dear Folks -

Richard Lay asked:
>        You've written other RICE papers before other than Tavonni, right?
>Could I get copies of some of these?  Is there a place I can download them?
>How about other RICE papers that have appeared on the list?  I've just now
>realized what a valuable resourse these are.  Thanks for your help.

Sorry, this is my first RICE Paper. The idea originated, AFAIK, with Jeff
Zeitlin (sp?-sorry!) and I don't think that the "A Staple Diet" reference
is mine either (but "G-Hound") as all MINE!!). Many other people have written
RICE papers, and these can be found by looking thru old digests (although wasn't
someone going to put them on a Web page or two?)

I hope that someone is interested enough to have a look at the Tavonni paper
and point out if I made any glaring errors (Alvin, Jeff, are you there?)
BTW, sorry about how that Amipro document came thru (as rubbish!) - I'll try
to re-send it in clear.

Pls note that "Bj=F6rn=F6ya Island" should read as "Byornoya Island", with
both "o"'s having two little dots above them. Could someone from Norway
or Denmark confirm that this is the correct name for Bear Island? BTW, Andrew
Madden told me that the Net only sends 7-bit ASCII, and that the character
"o" with two dots is an 8-bit ANSI character - hence, the corruption occurred
in transmission. Doh!

If people get keen and like Tavonni, I may post some of the behind-the-scenes
background notes. For example, what better name for a Traveller than Heyerdahl?

- Hyphen
(David Jaques-Watson)


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

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 20:36:44 -0800 (PST)
From: Bri <bri@teleport.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Construction times
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960124203457.25607F-100000@linda.teleport.com>

 someone mendioned how we were turning out Liberty ships by the thousands
in WWII. I'd just like to add some thoughts.
 Liberty ships were cheap, disposible freighters, they were in no way
"ship of the line" quality.
 They were incredibley simple, something wich a 56th century warship is
the exact opposite of. Just look at how long it takes to build a modern
submarine.
 They wern't tested for seaworthieness, wich would be a major thing in
space-craft, 'specialley warships. And the minimum time for testing the
j-drive is a week.

Bri <bri@teleport.com>


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

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 22:58:27 -0500
From: odysseus@inetnebr.com (Jeff Kazmierski)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: RE:  Plague of Duskir, etc.
Message-ID: <199601250501.XAA19188@falcon.inetnebr.com>

>  As for a disease surviving for years, viral spores can hang about in
>severe environments for a long time.  Thousands of years, I don't know,
>but a bioengineered weapon that's the product of tech 30+ (Grandfather to
>kids: "...and STAY dead!") seems okay to me.

Actually, such things have happened before.  Remember the "mummy's curse"
that afflicted archaeologists who unearthed Egyptian tombs in the 19th
century?  Seems it was a little bacterial spore that had been hanging about
the corpses since the time of the Pharaohs, and the poor Brits had no
immunity to it.  No TL-30+ bioweapon, no high tech anything.

odysseus@inetnebr.com

                +
                -\        "Real men don't ask for directions."
                | |      /
                | |       _
       _        | |      /@
        \ ______|/______/
_________\ @@@@@@@@@@@@/_________odysseus@inetnebr.com



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

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 22:49:22 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@csn.net>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Adventure seed...Majesta class megafreighters LONG
Message-ID: <1.5.4b11.32.19960125044922.0069d668@lynx.csn.net>

At 04:31 pm 1/24/96 -0500, you wrote:
>Alvin's posting of the Majesta class specs and history sparked an
>idea in my head...

        I hope you don't mind my taking the liberty of posting your
adventure on my Web page ...
 ___________________________________________________________________
  Dave Golden                              PGP Public Key available
  goldendj@whip.com
  http://www2.csn.net/~goldendj/index.html -- Last updated 24 Jan 96

 "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, 25 Jan 1996 00:42:41 -0600
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@csn.net>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Message to Marc Miller
Message-ID: <1.5.4b11.32.19960125064241.006edd44@lynx.csn.net>

        I've sent another message to Marc Miller about my personal feelings
on "Whither Traveller." I was going to copy it to the list, but it seems
things have quieted down here a bit along that front -- I don't want to
throw gasoline on possibly still smoldering embers, so instead I've posted
it on my Web Page. If you're interested, check it out, and give me AND Mr.
Miller your comments ...

        I also wanted to make the (possibly biased) observation that people
seem to be somewhat evenly distributed between the "Return to MT/CT" and the
"Tweak TNE" rules camps. I think the TNE folks have a slight edge,
especially since the return camp seems to also have a division among itself
of "Update" and "Force the heretics to return to the One True Faith" ...
Anybody been keeping closer track?

        Oh, yeah, that message to Mr. Miller -- I wound up breaking it into
three messages, it got so long:

        "Whither Traveller" -
http://www2.csn.net/~goldendj/traveller/T4Letter.html
        "Products Wanted" -
http://www2.csn.net/~goldendj/traveller/Products.html
        "FF&S Lite Ideas" -
http://www2.csn.net/~goldendj/traveller/DesignNotes.html

        Well, I start shifts up again tomorrow, so it's back into semi-lurk
mode for me.
 ___________________________________________________________________
  Dave Golden                              PGP Public Key available
  goldendj@whip.com
  http://www2.csn.net/~goldendj/index.html -- Last updated 24 Jan 96

 "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, 25 Jan 96 10:32:00 PST
From: ROWAN Iain <wm0iro@acresearch.sunderland.ac.uk>
To: tml <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: Re:  Jump times
Message-ID: <3107EA44@missgate2.sunderland.ac.uk>



>Armand Suarez <suarez@on.rim.or.jp> wrote:

>While I'm griping, I'd like to say that there are two things about =
>Traveller that I find mildly regrettable.  The first is the fact that a =
>jump takes a week of game time.  I assume this is a holdover from the =
>Imperium wargame or whatever, but it gets tiring trying to explain what =
>the characters do for a week every time they jump.  It seems to waste a =
>lot of game time, and  it's not flashy or impressive like warp drive or =
>hyperspace.  It's not heroic

It may not be heroic but the one week jump time is, I believe, essential
to the entire make-up of the Traveller universe.  Fine, if you are running
a variant campaign set outside the Imperium - you can do what you like
and still maintain the integrity of your campaign universe.  If you are
trying to keep to a broadly faithful version of the GDW Imperium, then
the canon jump times are essential.  Without them the whole integrity
of the setting falls apart.  In my view the whole structure of the canon
universe is dependent upon communications being limited to the speed
of travel, and that speed of travel being sloooowwwww.

If you lose the long jump then I think you'd have to kiss goodbye to the
feudal nature of the Imperium (no need for it), kiss goodbye to the
frontiers feel of somewhere like the Spinward Marches (why would it
feel like a frontier if it is only days away from Core?) and so on.  Your
PCs
causing havoc in some backwater?  No problem, the news will get out fast
and you'll find some hulking battleship jumping in system within a couple
of days.  All the military strategies currently accepted would be out the
window - if fleets can cross sectors in days it adds a whole new feel
to the way naval strategy would be composed.

As for what the characters could do during jump, well, it could be anything
from overhauling all the avionics to watching vids and bickering
amongst themselves to playing cards for ridiculous stakes ('OK, I raise
you...this ship!') to dressing up in drag and putting on their own revue
to practising unarmed combat to researching library data about where
they are going/what they are looking for to studying to improve some
of their intellectual or hobby skills to fitness training to knitting some
fetching new jumpers to overhauling their fusion rifles to reading the
latest bestsellers ('I was Strephon's Double') to having sex in 0G to
painting the corridors on the ship to fixing that thing that goes wrong
every jump...there must be hundreds of things that the PCs could do.
BUT most of them will be mundane.  Do you always need to tell the
players what to do during jump?  You could just tell them they are in
jump space, they do the usual things, then they arrive - do you need
to give a day by day account?  And anyway, should you be telling
the players what the characters do during jump?  Shouldn't they be
telling you?

Traveller is just a frame work for your own imagination, and I'm not saying
that in your own campaign you shouldn't do whatever you like - the rules
and principles aren't gospel if you don;t want them to be - but if you wish
to stay within an already existing milieu then I suggest you have to think
very carefully before altering fundamental game mechanics which
directly influence why the setting is what it is.  Of course, I wish
somebody
had told GDW that.....

Cheers

Iain.........................................iain.rowan@sunderland.ac.uk

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

Date:          Thu, 25 Jan 1996 14:21:13 +0100 (BST)
From: "M.A. Trickett" <mat3@leicester.ac.uk>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 565
Message-ID: <26BEBF96627@daisy.le.ac.uk>

Armand says:

>>> My next gripe is that Traveller, the game of the Far Future, posits high =
technology to be something that seems very low tech.  Long Nights =
notwithstanding, does the technology of tech level 15 really fit what =
you imagine technology will be like in the 56th century?  I imagine that =
TL 15-like technology will be available (in some of the fields at least) =
in the next 200 years.  I want logically thought out, believeable hard =
SF science, but I want to be awed and impressed with high technology.  I =
think new players do too.  I may be biased, being a Trek fan, but =
sometimes I think it would be more interesting to have a campaign set =
before the Ancient's Final War.  That would be great SF to me.  =
Traveller sometimes feels like Top Secret (the old out of print TSR =
overly-detailed spy game) in space. <<<

I can remember someone mentioning that the production of TNE was to
grasp "new" players and, it was said, then at the expense of some
(die hard?) CT/MT players.  The problem with a lot of people that I
talked to about TNE is that they thought that it wasn't "hi-tech"
enough, and the same thing goes with MT.  They looked to programs
like Star Trek and thought, "aw, come on... where's the warp drive?"

Traveller is one of the best sci-fi games that I know of, and this
problem with technology is what seems to have - at least in the
opinions of some of the people I talked to - put it down in their
estimation.  Maybe this should be dealt with as well as
considerations of the system that MM is will come up with (or which
system he uses as a basis).

--MARK

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

Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 08:59:57 -0800 (PST)
From: John Muir Macpherson <muirmac@uclink.berkeley.edu>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Whither 2300AD?
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9601240857.C6298-0100000@uclink.berkeley.edu>


Eric Ackerman (eackerma@vt.edu) said:
> Please excuse any duplication of this cross-posted message.
<snip>
>
> So here's your chance to sound off about 2300AD: likes, dislikes, what you'd
> change, what you'd keep, you'd like to see, what new products, design
> philosophy (e.g., more detail vs less detail, etc), why you play it/don't
> play it, good/bad experiences with the game, you name it! Also include your
> primary interest in the game: as player, gamemaster, collector (or any
> combination of the above). All responses will be forwarded to the interested
> organization.
>
> I would prefer if you posted any response(s) to the list in order to
> interest anyone who may have missed the original message. In any case, I'll
> be looking forward to hearing from everyone soon.
>
> Eric Ackermann
> Special Collections/University Libraries
> Virginia Tech
> eackerma@vt.edu
>
> ------------------------------

I had a love/hate relationship with 2300AD

LOVE
--------
The 2300AD background was perhaps the best ever.  I liked the
smaller scale because it allowed each world to be more fully developed
and kept the players from feeling too overwhelmed.  I liked the fact that
it was not too far in the future.  The hard SF tech environment was much
appreciated. My least favorite things about Trav always were gravitics,
psionics, and the like.  I liked the fact that in 2300AD you needed
special interface craft, catapults, and beanstalks to get into orbit and
couldn't just take off in your air raft.
StarCruiser had a lot of potential but the sensor rules needed
tweaking so that the "hide-and-seek-with-bazookas" flavor could come
through.  The design system was simple and I enjoyued the stealth
possibilities.
I like the politcal/economic environment more than any other RPG,
but that's not saying much.  The setting was 19th century colonialism
transplanted to the stars, and it worked pretty well.  I don't think
it would actually look like that, but it made a good gaming environment.
The Colonial Atlas was beautiful.  I go back and read it just for fun.
Having more than one colony per world provided lots of interesting
opportunities for adventures.

HATE
---------
The _rules_.  Swap out the 2300AD game system and replace it with
something like the TNE house rules.  I'd love to be able to use all of
the FF&S designs I have for 2300.  Combat was weird.  Healing either took
no time or a lot of time.  character gen could be alot more detailed.
The Kafers.  As a collector, I thought the Kafer Sourcebook was
great.  As a GM, I came to hate the Kafer.  All you could do to them was
kill them.  The Zhodane made great villains, as did the Klingons,
Romulans, the evil Imperials in Star Wars, all because there wwere
possibilities for intrigue and scheming and the kind of "we'll meet
agian" rivalries which players love.  The kafers were stupid killing
machines.  In Mission to Arctutus there's actually an inteligent Kafer
who likes Sartre, but the players are not allowed to interact with him
except in combat.  Playing in the Kafer war was too much like Twilight
2000.  Every Kafer convoy got to look alike after a while.  Sometimes it was
fun.  Blockade running was exciting, but that got old eventualy too.
The cyberpunk BS.  Not that there shouldn't be cybernetics,
genetic engineering, or computer networks.  But there should not by that
smug cynicism of cyberpunk.  The "Rotten to the Core " Adventure was
terrible and a cliche.  Street gangs with samurai swords?  Exotic
nightclub singers?  Evil corporate plot?  Give me a break.

SUGGESTIONS
--------------
What 2300AD should have stuck with was the "Troubleshooter" type
adventure.  Things Nyotekendu sourcebook with players on a giant asteroid
mining facility with a mad-man loose on board.  The "Beanstalk" adventure
was a pretty good idea too but was of low quality.  Probably the best
2300 adventure was the one printed in Challenge, "Backdoor."  Not all
advenutes can be on such a grand scale, but this one had a fantastic
backdrop and not too much combat.  Not that I don't like combat, it can
be very exciting, but too much of it gets monotonous.
When I wanted inspirations for 2300AD adventures I read fiction
about late 19th, early 20th century colonies in Africa, or banana
republics in Latin America.  Frontier adventures in the American arm were
good too and I actually got some good ideas from old "Bonanza" episodes.
Check out "Half the Day is Night" by Maureen F. McHugh has
seafloor banana republics, corporate intrigue, and some well-place
violence. Its a little too slow for an adventure, but it is a
well-realized, hard SF setting, with a good mix of plot elements, just
like 2300 could be.
Like most GDW games, 2300AD hass a great background and wonderful
opportunites for intriguing adventures which explore and take advantage
of it -- then they made it a wargame.  Whoever these folks are who are
thinking of reviving the game, I hope they can make it go without turning
into a hack-n-slash wargame or an oh-so-cynical cyberpunk game.

--Muir





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

End of TRAVELLER Digest 566
***************************
