TRAVELLER Digest 579

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) Direction Of Traveller In All Forms by sam thomas <sinbad@dfw.net>
  2) Re: MM on AOL by Bri <bri@teleport.com>
  3) Recent chaos by George Herbert <gherbert@crl.com>
  4) Lemmings have rights too! by htp@dove.mtx.net.au (Henry Penninkilampi)
  5) Looking for World Mapping Forms by "Stuart L. Dollar" <sdollar@goodnet.com>
  6) Re: Discarding TNE?!, & various... by PPUGLIESE@pimacc.pima.edu
  7) Traveller:From The Ashes by nimrod@dfw.net
  8) Jump Torpedoes by Phillip McGregor <aspqrz@sydney.DIALix.oz.au>
  9) Why Streamline Spaceships - it's not needed! by Phillip McGregor <aspqrz@sydney.DIALix.oz.au>
 10) Re: TRAVELLER digest 578 by t01bpa@abdn.ac.uk
 11) RE: Discarding TNE?!, & various... by That Computer Guy <darkstar@UDel.Edu>
 12) Forward the Future by Nathan & Terri Mezel <hotchip@oeonline.com>
 13) Fall of GDW by kimber@spectra.net (kimber)
 14) potential ideas by Simon.Harding@vuw.ac.nz

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

Date: Fri, 02 Feb 1996 17:59:56 -0600
From: sam thomas <sinbad@dfw.net>
To: gdw-beta@quark.qrc.com, traveller@MPGN.COM, xboat@MPGN.COM,
Cc: sinbad@dfw.net
Subject: Direction Of Traveller In All Forms
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960202235956.006a9f7c@dfw.net>

To All Sophonts,

Let us not make Marc Miller into a piece of rope to tugged toward each
individual(s) taste/opinion of what direction he should take in Traveller.
If you like/prefer a particular version/revision of Traveller, then point
out the errors that it has and try and point some positive way(s) to improve
it without suggesting going to the next version/revision. If you do not like
a particular version/revision also point the things that detract from play.
There should be enough players of that version/revision to present ways to
correct it. Let us present to Marc Miller the errors in each
version/revision of Traveller and possible solutions from different angles
(Gearhead and non Gearhead especially) that will correct the errors. That
way he can evaluate each version/revision on it's merits and what will be
needed to make it more playable to wider group of players. He just might
take all of the information that we all have gathered/created and make
atleast three different sources for backgrounds. That way "to each his own"
can occur. If needed why can't we have three different mailing list for each
area ie Classic Traveller, MegaTraveller, and Traveller New Era. In that way
we will not have so many feverant opinions being displayed with very little
value to the rest of the readers. We could also have a list for those that
just like "nitpicking" for every verison/revision. What we can try and do is
to maintain a listing of the errors/problems/nits that each version/revision
has and a list of possible solutions. All of this is because if all we do is
get embroiled into fruitless discussions over opinions then Marc Miller will
not take us seriously at all. He will then listen for the input that he
wants to hear and then go that way , ignoring anything that does not agree
with what he wants. If you want you can look deep into the archives on the
Net and on Genie and can see what happened last time when GDW made the change.

As to which verision/revision that I prefer well "The Thing Speaks for Itself"

PS Flames will evualated for techniques and originality all other will be
circular filed.

Sinbad Sam
AI Virus Black Curtain Expansion Coordinator "Come On Over To The Dark Side"
Sam Thomas
Sinbad@dfw.net

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

Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 16:31:06 -0800 (PST)
From: Bri <bri@teleport.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: MM on AOL
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960202162947.11624A-100000@julie.teleport.com>

<groan> Well that sucks. I wonder how much MM got paid for that one!<snicker>
 Why dosen't he make a listerv? It would be CHEAPER for everyone
involve... Oh wait, he's getting paid for this, nevermind.
 Too many careers? Hardly, they'res not enoufgh.
 Why not play a construciton worker? Not *everyone* is a commando, you know.

bri <bri@teleport.com>
Hail to the sun god
He sure is a fun god
Ra!  Ra!  Ra!


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

Date: Fri, 02 Feb 1996 16:40:05 -0800
From: George Herbert <gherbert@crl.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Recent chaos
Message-ID: <199602030040.AA23694@mail.crl.com>


I am going to avoid getting directly involved in the which-era debate.
I would merely point out that Marc's plan to support multiple eras
and have a core rules system seems to solve everyone's dislikes of
part of one setting or another, and that thus you're all arguing
over a moot point.  8-)

Regarding 3d maps, I have done some work on them in the past.
I did a 5x5x5 subsector map at one point and done some universe
building in it, getting some interesting results.  In retrospect
I think I want to shift to 6x6x6 maps, so that you can never
jump 2 subsectors from your current one, but the general idea
works reasonably well.  You cannot try and apply this to
the existing Imperial setting and play map; it does not work.
But a new setting could go 3-D fairly easily.

-george william herbert
gherbert@crl.com

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

Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 13:36:49 +1030
From: htp@dove.mtx.net.au (Henry Penninkilampi)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Lemmings have rights too!
Message-ID: <v01530500ad3868dc98e8@[203.15.30.40]>

Susan Marie Shock...
..informed us that Marc Miller has opened a discussion area on AOL to
discuss the direction that Traveller will take.  She also implied that the
reason Marc may have done this (as opposed to participating in discussions
on the TML) is to avoid the uncivilised debate that is occurring.  She also
thinks that Marc has made up his mind on certain issues already.

Rob Miracle...
..then explained, to Susan, the difference between garbage and heated
debate, but agreed that rational discussion would be more constructive and
encouraged all to observe netiquette during discussions.  He then supported
Susan's statement that Marc has already made up his mind on certain issues
and encouraged us to start addressing more relevant questions in light of
this.

It is my opinion...
..that discussions degrade into diatribe when focus on the issues at hand
is lost.  Since the job of maintaining such a focus normally falls on a
moderator, and since the TML has no such moderator, that this should have
happen was merely a matter of time.

   Marc's reluctance to participate has not helped.  He, if anyone, could
have moved discussion along by, every-so-often, informing the list of what
decisions *had* been finalised and requesting discussion to move onto new
topics that still needed debate.

   It is a well documented developmental ploy, used by many, to decide on a
direction and *then* invite public comment which is subsequently ignored.
The developer gets his or her way, and the public *think* that they have
had input on the subject, and everyone is happy (or at least they think
they are).

   The most positive thing Marc could do is compile a list of decisions
that have already been made and make these publicly available.  He should
make it absolutely clear what is up for debate and what isn't.  If the
entire issue has already been signed, sealed, and all but delivered, then
he should do the Traveller community the courtesy of letting us know so
that we can get on with with our lives and put this issue to rest.

   If, twelve months down the track when the next reincarnation of
Traveller emerges, it is *exactly* as described in Marc's original
"directions" letter, then we will know that this entire affair (of inviting
comment) has been nothing more than a public relations stunt.  I, for one,
am sick of being treated like a lemming.

+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|               Henry Penninkilampi (htp@dove.mtx.net.au)                |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Join "EvangeList", Guy Kawasaki's (un)official Apple list-server of good|
|news about Apple, Macintosh, and third-party developers. To subscribe to|
|EvangeList, send an e-mail to: listproc@solutions.apple.com, and include|
|in the body of the message the text: Subscribe Macway <Your Name>       |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+



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

Date:          Thu, 1 Feb 1996 14:51:08 -0800
From: "Stuart L. Dollar" <sdollar@goodnet.com>
To: xboat@MPGN.COM, traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Looking for World Mapping Forms
Message-ID: <199602030554.WAA15282@goodguy.goodnet.com>

Help!!!

I am looking for digitized versions of the CT, MT, or TNE World
Mapping Forms, preferably in GIF or JPG format.  If there is anybody
out there with a scanner or who might have these scanned already,
I would really appreciate it.  E-Mail:  sdollar@goodnet.com

Stu
**********************************************************
* "Nothing else in the world...not all the armies...is   *
*  so powerful as an idea whose time has come."          *
*  -Victor Hugo, from 'The Future of Man'                *
**********************************************************
Stuart L. Dollar                       sdollar@goodnet.com

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

Date: Sat, 03 Feb 1996 03:02:09 -0700
From: PPUGLIESE@pimacc.pima.edu
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Discarding TNE?!, & various...
Message-ID: <01I0REFHG28I95SWOZ@pimacc.pima.edu>

From:IN%"traveller@MPGN.COM"  2-FEB-1996 12:36:47.65
To:IN%"traveller@MPGN.COM"  "Multiple recipients of list"
CC:
Subj:RE: Discarding TNE?!, & various...

Date: Fri, 02 Feb 1996 13:55:15 -0500
From: That Computer Guy <darkstar@UDel.Edu>
Subject: RE: Discarding TNE?!, & various...

In Reply to Your Message of Fri, 02 Feb 1996 04: 14:00 EST
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 1996 13:54:49 -0500
From: That Computer Guy <darkstar@chopin.udel.edu>

: It's not the rules that killed TNE & it wasn't the rules that made CT.
: It was the background. How long did TNE last? <snicker> Yeah, it was
: a real winner wasn't it. Now let's look at the CT background. No com-
: parison. Traveler will stay dead unless MM get's back to the background
: that made Traveller a winner & that wasn't MT or TNE, it was CT.
=====================================================================
:  However, the attitude you're taking is no better than the one GDW
:  took.  You would prefer to displace all the TNE people because quite
:  simply, it's what you want.
: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
:
: Funny how you object to the same attitude you have when it show up
: in others. You've already demonstrated that you have no concern about
: my displacement yet you object when I show the same lack of concern
: about yours.

No, I'm not taking your attitude.  You're saying that we should do
away with TNE altogether.  I'm saying that you should try to
accomodate them.  I'm not sorry to say that our attitudes have nothing
in common.  You don't believe me.  Fine, I attribute it to the fact
that you can't stand me attacking your position.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You can attribute 'it' to whatever you want but we both know that
what really got you going was that you can't stand to see someone
stand up for CT, isn't it?
==========================

But your position is
to kill one facet of the Traveller universe.  Mine is to allow all of
them to be supported.  I'm all for CT era products, and I sure hope
that they reprint many of the originals and come out with new ones
since the dearth in my Traveller collection is from that particualr
era.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

OK. TNE can have the same support that non-TNE has been getting.
=============================================================

:  MM has already propossed the solution to this problem.  Allow multiple
:  settings at different parts of the timeline's history.  It works!
:  It's simple, it's elegent, and many other companies do it.  Alas, all
:  the CT people seem to hate this idea.  Why?  Is it because they know
:  the future?  So what, set your adventure in 1050 and your characters
:  will never see the Rebellion.  Play in the Regency in 1202 and never
:  have them leave it's borders.  Play in the future ``restored
:  Imperium'' timeline.
: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: Maybe because we can't see why Traveller should continue to drag TNE's
: dead weight behind it?

See, that's what I'm talking about.  To you it's dead weight.  To many
other players it's not.  However, you refuse to even allow the
possibility of their happiness.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

OK. They can have the same support non-TNE has been getting.
To be specific TNE moves to the end of the line.

: There's no way I can see that MM will be able fully support multiple
: timelines. The new operation will undoubtedly be on a shoestring. The
: competition is to see which gets to go first because whichever does,
: if it fails, will probably end Traveller for good. TNE has already had
: it's shot & has failed. Trying it again will only repeat that failure.
: MT ran the system down. CT was the only background that was a success.

Why not?  CT was the only background that was a success with you.
Many people like all of them.  Many people like the Rebellion.  Making
a sourcebook for each era isn't going to weaken anything.  Instead of
providing something for everyone, you would rather provide something
for yourself.  And you said I was the same as you?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Money is the reason. Where is all the money for all this simultaneous
support going to come from? Somethings going going to have to go first
& somethings going to have to come last. In light of it's dismal perfor-
mance I believe TNE should come last. I also fully expect that TNE will
never get to the head of the line due to the same financial constraints.
If the initial products fail then I think Traveller will be dead for
good. If they succeed then there will be pressure to build on that success.
In other words, whichever goes first will be what Traveller will become.
Now, since you don't seem to subscribe to this then I assume you won't
mind putting your money where your mouth is, so to speak, & put TNE at
the end of the list & then we'll see how much TNE stuff gets produced.

: Well all I can say is that we're just acting the same way you are.
: We are interested in products that fulfill our desires & not interested
: in those that don't. Perhaps you should stop indulging your own TNE
: habit before you criticize my CT one?
: It's time to give the CT background a shot at saving Traveller.
: And (as you've already stated to me) you can always just make up your
: own timeline.

No, we're not acting in the same way.  What you're proposing leaves
many Traveller players out in the cold.  If you're asking for products
that fulfill desires then you will need to cater to everyone.
Granted, some timelines may deserve more products than others.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You claim that non-TNE folks won't be left out in the cold but putting
TNE first is the same thing in my book, so I don't see any difference.
It's like saying' "You can have whatever is left over but since there
isn't anything leftover, well, too bad!".
=========================================

Also, let's get something straight real quick Phil.  I'm not bashing
your indulgence of CT.  What I am bashing is your attitude that says
to do away with everything but.  You assume that because I said your's
is a very poor, limited, and self-indulgent attitude that I am all-for
TNE and nothing else.  Take the blinders off and see what I'm really
saying please!

Just so you don't misconstrue me again, here goes:  Support all
aspects of Traveller!  Period.

And just so you know, I prefer to play in the Rebellion!

       --Jerry
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Fine, then let's put it to the test. Put CT first, then MT, then TNE
& let's see how much support each gets.

Phil


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

Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 05:13:37 -0600 (CST)
From: nimrod@dfw.net
To: traveller@MPGN.COM, xboat@MPGN.COM
Cc: FarFuture@aol.com
Subject: Traveller:From The Ashes
Message-ID: <199602031113.FAA20016@dfw.dfw.net>

I have been a fan of Traveller since its original incarnation as CT.  I
really began actively playing when MT came out.  I stopped playing when TNE
came out for several reasons: 1)I did not like GDW's house rules (from what
I heard, these are owned by Frank Chadwick anyway); 2)I did not like the
fact that other than pulling a Rip Van Winkle, you could not integrate a
current campaign into the new system; 3)I have a very intense dislike for
the "Virus"; 4)To me it looked like the only reason that GDW rewrote the
system was to cut MM out of any royalties.  Now that MM has regained control
of Traveller, I am again looking forward to playing Traveller after a 4 year
hiatus.

The arguing going on on these two lists seems pointless to me in light of
what MM has stated that he plans to do.  He has plans to publish support for
several different eras of known space history, thus covering past eras, CT
era, MT era, TNE era and (future?) eras.  He also has stated that he is
going to use updated CT rules (hopefully including the task system).

What we need to do on these lists is not to argue over which system is
better, but to give ideas that can be used by MM to make the new rules
better than any of the preceding rules sets.  As someone else on the list
stated (I can't remember who), we had better work together to give MM
constructive ideas before they are published, or else we again are going to
be rebuilding the rules after they are already published.

Jimmy Simpson
Lurker below

P.S. One suggestion to MM: as the rules are designed, publish them to the
internet for beta testing.  With all these fans out here, any bugs in the
system will be worked out within a matter of days.  Personally, even if I
got copies of the rules this way, I would still buy the rules as they come
out because: 1)I hate having my rules books in binders and unindexed; and 2)
most importantly, I will buy them to support my favorite game.

P.P.S. See if you can get the Andrew and William Kieth back where they
belong, writing for Traveller (along with their other books).



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

Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 23:23:31 +1100 (EST)
From: Phillip McGregor <aspqrz@sydney.DIALix.oz.au>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM, xboat@MPGN.COM
Subject: Jump Torpedoes
Message-ID: <199602031223.XAA09468@sydney.DIALix.oz.au>

As a matter of interest, you might like to check out FF&S for what might be
considered the "final" word ... on page #42, in the section on Jump Drives,
the *only* limitation for JDrives now is provided in *Important Note* at the
bottom of the first column -

"The smallest Jump Drive possible, at any Tech Level, is 2 cubic meters in
volume."

Hmm, that's only slightly larger than a 2 ton Jump Torp requiires for J6!

So, it seems that even GDW agrees that Jump Missiles *are* possible ... which
means all those that oppose them as "non-canon" or because they allegedly
invalidate the XBoat system should, perhaps, reconsider their arguments?

It seems that they are *not* non-canon. It therefore seems that some of the
excellent suggestions as to why they *haven't* replaced the XBoat system that
have been presented here are obviously more correct than their opponents!

Phil McGregor

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

Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 23:43:02 +1100 (EST)
From: Phillip McGregor <aspqrz@sydney.DIALix.oz.au>
To: xboat@MPGN.COM, traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Why Streamline Spaceships - it's not needed!
Message-ID: <199602031243.XAA12150@sydney.DIALix.oz.au>

Just an idea that came to me recently - why is there a requirement for space-
ships to be streamlined in all versions of Traveller if they wish to make a
planetary landing on a world with an atmosphere?

Or, to be more accurate, as seems to be the case in all versions of Traveller
*except* TNE.

What am I getting at here? Well, consider this, in CTrav and MTrav, Maneuver
Drives are basically reactionless thrusters and Contragravity lifters. They
enable spacecraft to reach fairly decent speeds in atmosphere, if they are
streamlined. But why should this be the case? From what we know of these
drives, they have no "stall speed" (none is mentioned anywhere) ... no minimum
speed at which they have to move the craft or it will fall out of the sky.
Ergo, even if the craft is shaped like a (large) housebrick, then the only
limitation on its ability to maneuver in atmosphere should be the maximum
speed it can achieve before it starts taking friction/heat damage. In other
words, if you *had* a spacecraft the shape of a housebrick, then why can't
you simply de-orbit at, say, 100 mph? So it takes an hour to land, so what?

Obviously, no-one from the design team ever considered the implications of the
matter! Even the argument that the unstreamlined vessels do not have the
internal bracing to withstand the gravity of a world they land on obviously
cannot hold water, as they are capable of withstanding at least 1G moves with
whatever they use for MDrives!

And if you look at CG Lifters (FF&S page #75), then you'd note that the
description there even notes that CG lifters allow a craft to simply "float"!
This means that even Gas-Giant refuelling is possible to completely unstream-
lined vessels. They simply waft down into the upper reaches of the atmosphere
and pump fuel aboard (rather than make a high-speed skimmer type pass through
the atmosphere)!

Isn't it wonderful how you can break the rules apart when they give too much
detail!

Why isn't/hasn't it been done? One possibility is that it may require some
higher than normal degree of piloting skill ... unlikely, as any decent
computer should be able to handle something that simple. Worse, on most
civilised worlds they would presumably even have some sort of ground based
assistance for controlling the approach of such vehicles.

So, no longer need civilian craft be streamlined to land on a planet!

I'm sure this will cause various people to spit chips and rant that it isn't
Traveller "canon" or that it shouldn't be allowed because it's not what GDW
meant. For the former, sorry, it *is* canon, whether you like it or not! For
the latter, sure, I'll even agree that it isn't what GDW meant, but so what?
It's what the damn fool rules and explanations of same *allow*!

Phil McGregor

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

Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 15:25:00 +0000 (GMT)
From: t01bpa@abdn.ac.uk
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 578
Message-ID: <S9602031525.AA16309@sysc.abdn.ac.uk>


IMHO i think that the virus is the best thing to have occured.
OK so all your old characters can't be played anymore and you are
*restricted* to lower TL ships, items and weaponry.
However there is now a challenge to upgrade your ships, make money
and make your reputation.
Before its
" Oh we'll just drop by XXX and pick up a few MFD's etc.."

Now, a good referee can turn the rack on the group for a long time.
The main moan seems to be that all the advantures seem to be combat orientated.
Well- design some other scenarios your self.
There no longer is a law governing the whole of known space.
But I would like to see some other *sectors* of space now and again.

Recap
IMHO I enjoy the virus idea.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"We're Star vikings"
"Er, it's a guild ship Dr. Conrad"
"Oh."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---



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

Date: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 11:01:50 -0500
From: That Computer Guy <darkstar@UDel.Edu>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: RE: Discarding TNE?!, & various...
Message-ID: <199602031601.LAA26114@chopin.udel.edu>

In Reply to Your Message of Sat, 03 Feb 1996 05: 02:58 EST
Date: Sat, 03 Feb 1996 11:01:50 -0500
From: That Computer Guy <darkstar@chopin.udel.edu>

: You can attribute 'it' to whatever you want but we both know that
: what really got you going was that you can't stand to see someone
: stand up for CT, isn't it?

Oh yes, you're oh so right.  What's got me going is the fact that
you're supporting one of my favorite games of all times and not your
argument of reverse-discrimination.

: OK. TNE can have the same support that non-TNE has been getting.

Uhm, are you talking about the support that non-TNE has been getting
from me or from GDW.  I am not GDW.  Do not attribute their inability
to listen to what their customers want to me.  I was one of the first
people to blast GDW for releasing TNE and refusing to support any
other period.  I faulted them for not allow submissions to Challenge
for anything but TNE.  And I most assuredly told them off when they
decided to release all of those RCES products and sit on the Regency
stuff!

: OK. They can have the same support non-TNE has been getting.
: To be specific TNE moves to the end of the line.

Once again, please realize that I'm not GDW.

: Money is the reason. Where is all the money for all this simultaneous
: support going to come from? Somethings going going to have to go first
: & somethings going to have to come last. In light of it's dismal perfor-
: mance I believe TNE should come last. I also fully expect that TNE will
: never get to the head of the line due to the same financial constraints.
: If the initial products fail then I think Traveller will be dead for
: good. If they succeed then there will be pressure to build on that success.
: In other words, whichever goes first will be what Traveller will become.
: Now, since you don't seem to subscribe to this then I assume you won't
: mind putting your money where your mouth is, so to speak, & put TNE at
: the end of the list & then we'll see how much TNE stuff gets produced.

Hmm.  I don't think that TNE will head the line either.  But this is a
completely different argument then what you first presented.  The best
solution would be for MM to release three sourcebooks, one for each
era, and then concentrate resources on the era that sells the best.
Speaking of which, what are you going to do if an era other than CT is
the big seller and CT has to be put on the back burner.

Just so you know, this would be good business practice (tm).
Something that if GDW (with whom I have no affiliation whatsoever)
did, would not only still be producing Traveller products, but
Traveller products we want to see.

: You claim that non-TNE folks won't be left out in the cold but putting
: TNE first is the same thing in my book, so I don't see any difference.
: It's like saying' "You can have whatever is left over but since there
: isn't anything leftover, well, too bad!".

I NEVER said that TNE should come first.  You said that CT should be
the only version of Traveller supported and everyone else should suck
the pipe.  I said that this position is no better than what GDW did
and that all the timelines should get some form of support.  Uhm, I
never mentioned which particular timeline should come first or what
era should get the most support or anything like that.

: Fine, then let's put it to the test. Put CT first, then MT, then TNE
: & let's see how much support each gets.

No, let's put them all out at the same time and see which one sells
the best and then put the most support into that.  If for no other
reason than to cheese you off. 8)

       --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: Sat, 3 Feb 1996 12:11:04 -0500
From: Nathan & Terri Mezel <hotchip@oeonline.com>
To: "'Traveller Mail List'" <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: Forward the Future
Message-ID: <01BAF230.B5B06BE0@oe144.oeonline.com>

I have played Traveller through all three editions and now I may have to =
endure another set of rule changes.  This I can live with, but changing =
the campaign history would be  a gross wrong-doing. I think everyone on =
this list would agree that it is Travellers' detailed history that  =
makes it so special.  IMO it is on par with the future histories in  =
stories by  Niven and Asimov. To arbitrarily change it would be against =
what has brought the game such a following.  It is an easy way out for a =
writer to go back and say "That never happened" and more challenging to =
pick up were the game was left off and continue with the story. =20

What has happened has happened and the current RC/Regency/Virus =
storyline at least deserves to be included in the official history. The =
new Traveller storyline must evolve from the current story.  However =
many timeline sourcebooks there turn out to be, the most heavily =
supported campaign should lead Traveller into the future.  Changing =
history is for Solomani politicos and manipulative Hivers. =20

TNE suffered from Chadwick and Co. releasing too much rules-intensive, =
and expensive  supplements that did little to add to the campaign =
background. For all it's faults the era of Megatraveller had a lot of =
campaign material (DGP!). The scenarios that were released for the RC =
were always military commando missions straight out of T20K.  My =
apologies to Mr. Chadwick, but he  is too much a boardgamer to be 50% in =
charge of Traveller.  The new kid, D. Nilsen, had some great ideas (and =
I for one would like to see him contribute to the new Traveller) but he =
kept his RC in their little corner of the universe for too long and only =
toward the end did it get interesting.

Vampire Fleets, the RSB,  and the Guilded Lilly adventure are what we =
needed three years ago, not Battle Rider! A good story was developing =
here, but it was obviously to late.  They never realized that Traveller =
was about traveling and now the seas were dry.

So my recommendation is that we of the TML work on settling the current =
storyline and charting the course for the new future history of =
Traveller.  =20

The first sourcebook should be a huge affair the size of the rules =
themselves.  This Campaign Sourcebook should be a playable reference =
work that outlines the events of the next generation or two of Traveller =
history.  It should answer the questions of the Empress Wave and Project =
Longbow.  We should learn of the Black Curtain and it's Virus =
stronghold.  Resolve the RC/ Solee conflict and perhaps most =
importantly, exploit the differences of  RC and Regency expansionism in =
their respective quests to reclaim space (a RC /Solomani alliance!  The =
Regency and renewed Vilani Cooperative!).  Those differing attitudes and =
dogma set the  stage for the next generation of campaign adventures.  =
The last part of the sourcebook should establish the tone of the new =
campaign written in the CT style of interstellar scale, political =
factions, psycohistorical plans gone wrong, the works!

It would be great to see some of the people from this list work =
TOGETHER at setting the future of our favorite game instead of this =
debate (attitudes really)  between the "should we go back" or "should we =
just stay here" camps.  Those of this list should want to expand the =
scope of Traveller in order to bring it new life and new players (a =
Starter Traveller should be made available again).  Remember, this new =
Traveler must succeed or it will surely never return as the premier =
Sci-Fi RPG.

  I hope to see a lot of names like Miller, Nilsen, Keith, Fugate, =
Thomas, Mc Inness, Gannon, as well as the names of some people from this =
list on the inside covers of new Traveller products. =20

Nathan Mezel



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

Date: Sat, 03 Feb 1996 17:24:57 -0500
From: kimber@spectra.net (kimber)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Fall of GDW
Message-ID: <199602032225.WAA03556@spectra.net>

Hi Folks
        I am writing in reply to a couple of statements made on here. First
let me begin by explaining that I have been playing Traveller from the
beginning. I dont have all the judges guild stuff but have just about
everything else put out for traveller. I also was up till recently a game
store owner.
        TNE was not the cause of the fall of GDW. While it did not sell as
well as some games that tends to be the trend. See games go into trends
there was the cyberpunk trend then the tragicaly hip vampire trend.
Unfortunately for traveller it didn't hit a sci-fi trend. This coupled with
the coming of the magic craze it took many dollars that might have went to
traveller and gobbled them up. This was a double edged sword since many
distributors wanted to fill their warehouse with cards. At Origins Frank
Chadwick told a bunch of us that cards were one of the real problems they
were having. I think GDWs problems were a little more than just a those who
were displeased with TNE.
        Now for a look at the cold hearted reality. What ever MM does with
Traveller it probably wont look like any of the three editions of Traveller.
The reasons are economics and rights. First if MM produces something that
looks like the earlier versions many wont buy it because people will already
have it. So he will have to present something new that all sides will grow
to like. The irghts to Traveller went to MM what about TW2000 or Dark
Conspiracy all are based on house rules of GDW. Whoever owns them could make
knock offs of traveller products.
        My suggestion to MM if he still bothers listening to this fighting
is this list. First a basic rules book that only covers the game mechanics.
Make it smaller more digestable. In this book change the game mechanics. It
wont be that hard I have a couple of different versions of game mechanics,
I'm sure MM will come up with one. Second step is redo FF&S do it in three
books instead of one. Currently there are so many errata that it makes it
hard. I would also try to make this more comprehesive. Third start pumping
out era source books. Give  each time period its own book that way everyone
can play in a time period they enjoy most. Lastly pump out support material,
like aliens, equipment and software. One problem GDW had was it was slow
getting stuff out.
        Anyway it's my humble opinion and not ment to put anyone down.

                                        Leigh O'Neil
                                        kimber@spectra.net

"Schalli Free" -statement found on every tuna can in the RC
--
Registered ICC User
check out http://www.usefulware.com/icc.html



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

Date: Sun, 4 Feb 1996 12:33:35 +1300
From: Simon.Harding@vuw.ac.nz
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: potential ideas
Message-ID: <199602032333.MAA02155@rata.vuw.ac.nz>

There has been a lot of talk about the Virus bringing down the appeal of
Traveller. I personally like the idea of the virus and gives the game an
added dimension for referees to work with.
I am reminded of an article that was in OMNI magazine some years ago in
which a geneticist discribed his theory that the human form was just the
latest vehicle for the carriage and survival of DNA (the source coding of
life). He believed that while humanity would continue to evolve, and each
step of that evolution would be encoded, humanity would also pass on its DNA
coding to self-replicating intelligent machines more adapted to survival in
harsh environments. The source coding for these intelligent machines would
then become an addition to DNA. These machines would then have become a new
carrier of the source coding of life (DNA) in its electromagnetic form.
Frightening.   Elaborate on this a little, by supposing that the next stage
in the evolution allows for the transmission of the source coding into other
machines and hence the expansion the carrier body, and one has the Virus of
TNE.  Frightening more.

Another thing I am interested in getting feedback on is synthesised Psionic
attacks. Its seems to me that if a certain technology (I can't recall which
level) makes available Psionic Sheilded Helmets then surely the
understanding of the physical nature of Psionic attacks was sufficient for
them to be synthetically reproduced. Can anyone tell me whether or not there
exists such a thing as a "Psionic Disruptor" or such like in Traveller to date.


Simon Harding
Administrative Assistant
Graduate Students Office

"A mans errors are his portals of discovery" - James Joyce

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

End of TRAVELLER Digest 579
***************************
