TRAVELLER Digest 592

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) Re: Vargr Questions... by Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca>
  2) Re: New Abilities in Traveller. by Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca>
  3) RE: New Abilities in Traveller. by That Computer Guy <darkstar@UDel.Edu>
  4) Old History by anwfh@acad2.alaska.edu (William F. Hostman)
  5) Re: New Abilities in Traveller. by Trent Smith <TFSMITH@POMONA.EDU>
  6) Re: Infantry is NOT useless by Bri <bri@teleport.com>
  7) Re: Infantry is NOT uselsss by Bri <bri@teleport.com>
  8) Just how big is the Regency Navy and RQS by "'Jomama' Charles Pratt" <tminus@u.washington.edu>
  9) by gdw.support@genie.com
 10) Re: Infantry is NOT useless by Bri <bri@teleport.com>
 11) Man vs. Machine by John Muir Macpherson <muirmac@uclink.berkeley.edu>
 12) Re: Old History by merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
 13) MM on AOL by b.borich@genie.com
 14) Virus by Michael.Barry@FINANCE.ausgovfinance.telememo.au
 15) Timeline Branches! by ereddoch@amaranth.com (Eris Reddoch)
 16) Re: TRAVELLER digest 591 by library@babylon5.dss.gov.au (DSS Library)
 17) Re: TRAVELLER digest 590 by Andrew Madden <amadden@pcug.org.au>

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

Date: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 12:53:04 -0500 (EST)
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Vargr Questions...
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960211124143.4263A-100000@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca>

I've always played Vargr with the following rule in mind: "Nothing is
consistent, including inconsistency".  What I mean by this is that an
individual Vargr, or even a whole Vargr world, need not follow the
stereotypical chaotic behaviour pattern considered typical of them.
Humans are typically driven by the search for money and sex, but many
individual humans, and human societies, have extremely different drives
from this.  I imagine there are many Vargr societies where the whole
charisma battle thing is considered primitive and barbaric, and is
actively repressed.  There are probably dogmatic (bad pun) Vargr
communists who believe individuals of all charisma levels should be
treated equally.  The thing to remember about Vargr is that they are even
more chaotic than humans, and just look at us!  On one little planet we
have hundreds of philosophies which differ radically.  Any rules you try
to put down about Vargr are there to be broken.

Bottom line: if you want to have a Vargr who is more "Domesticated", by
all means do so.  I don't even think he/she would be particularly
unusual.  He might be considered by more "Wild" Vargr to be something of
a puritan ("You mean you're not interested in sex and money?" becomes
"You mean you're not interested in pack domination?").

That's my 0.02 Cr worth.
Charles.

<0>         "The past is as unknowable as the future..."<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: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 13:06:21 -0500 (EST)
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: New Abilities in Traveller.
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960211125745.4263B-100000@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca>

Someone suggested breaking Dex into Agility and Dex.  I agree.  I would
also like to see Con broken into Fitness and Con.  A skin-and-bones marathon
runner would have high fitness but low con.  My friend bubba would have
low fitness (he can't run a city block) but a high Con (can he ever take a
hit!).

I would also like to see abilities for alertness (perception, ability to
notice small details/ detect danger, etc.) and appearance.  Of course,
this is getting to be a lot of abilities (10), but other games have this
many.  White Wolf games have 9, and Heavy Gear has 10 (a brief plug here:
HG is a GREAT game.  If you want to see how to publish a simple RPG system
with great art and beautiful yet ergonomic layout on a shoestring budget,
check this out!).

Enough babbling!

<0>         "The past is as unknowable as the future..."<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: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 14:30:18 -0500
From: That Computer Guy <darkstar@UDel.Edu>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: RE: New Abilities in Traveller.
Message-ID: <199602111930.OAA17545@chopin.udel.edu>

In Reply to Your Message of Sun, 11 Feb 1996 13: 27:04 EST
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 14:30:17 -0500
From: That Computer Guy <darkstar@chopin.udel.edu>

: Someone suggested breaking Dex into Agility and Dex.  I agree.  I would
: also like to see Con broken into Fitness and Con.  A skin-and-bones marathon
: runner would have high fitness but low con.  My friend bubba would have
: low fitness (he can't run a city block) but a high Con (can he ever take a
: hit!).

Hmm.  I can think of two reasons why this may not work.  First, it
definitely breaks any type of compatibility between old and new
characters (at least CT/MT and TNE characters were only a point off).
Also, I think that adding more attributes would just make the
mechanics more cumbersome.

A better solution might be to create a lists of advantages and
disadvantages.  Yes, this smacks of a GURPSism and I'm sorry.  But
looking at an old issue of TTC (number 2 or 3), there is a system for
having such things.  Simple things like some extra dough, to some
extra noteriety to just being clumsy.

This will allow effects like this to be achieved on a per character
basis, but yet doesn't add any more complexity to the rules  Some
things like task resolution should be simple.  Generic DEX and CON
allow this, while breaking it down will just allow leeway for the
players to bicker that they should be able to use the other similar
skill.

: I would also like to see abilities for alertness (perception, ability to
: notice small details/ detect danger, etc.) and appearance.  Of course,
: this is getting to be a lot of abilities (10), but other games have this
: many.  White Wolf games have 9, and Heavy Gear has 10 (a brief plug here:
: HG is a GREAT game.  If you want to see how to publish a simple RPG system
: with great art and beautiful yet ergonomic layout on a shoestring budget,
: check this out!).

With WW's point/dot system this is almost workable.  Also, I think
their system is a little unyieldy.  As for simple, complete,
beautiful, ergonomic, shoestring RPG, I highly recommend people take a
look at BTRC's CORPS 2nd ed.  It's even got 4-color printing.

       --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: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 12:32:21 -0900
From: anwfh@acad2.alaska.edu (William F. Hostman)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Old History
Message-ID: <v01530500ad440e1a7fed@[137.229.100.65]>

>Date: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 00:12:19 -0500
>From: Nathan & Terri Mezel <hotchip@oeonline.com>
>To: "'Traveller Mail List'" <traveller@MPGN.COM>
>Message-ID: <01BAF87B.8A8BE600@oe217.oeonline.com>
>
>> I also think, frankly, that the $30 price tag back in 1987
>> didn't help either.
>
>Yes, but all three books were available separately (something today's =
>games no longer do).  The Spinward Marches map was available directly =
>from GDW for three bucks.

Funny, but all prices had gone up at about the same time as MT; AD&D was
$45 to get into (19.95 for PH, 24.95 for DMG). So I didn't feel any sticker
shock. I was glad it was ONLY $30!!!

>Another bother for MT was that the task system left little difference in =
>attributes. In MT your PC attribute was essentially ether 1, 2, or 3.  =
>The way TNE slaves your skill level to your attribute is a great rule. =
>This should not be changed.

I don't like the "Skill slaved to attribute", and today's most successful
games DON'T slave skills to attributes: Vampire/Werewolf/Mage/Faerie/Wraith
don't,  Battletech/Mechwarrior II slaves skills to figured characteristics
derived from stats.

I think of MT's solution as excellent, but it could be improved. I
preferred to use division by four, as this made the occasional alien 16
stat really special. Many people I know ran using division by 3. So it
limits skill equivalencies; that is a GOOD THING, not a bad thing. I have
players pulling off unskilled jump navigation, 1000 AU comm Tight-beams,
etc under TNE rules. Under MT, they don't have the chance.

It boils down to a realism question: is raw talent enough to allow people
to fly starships and plot jumpcourses without the computer? If you think
so, then TNE is better for you; otherwise, MT is the better task system.
2300's task system was fairly close to MT, and based upon an attribute
range of 1-20.


-Wil

William F. Hostman

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



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

Date: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 13:51:38 -0800 (PST)
From: Trent Smith <TFSMITH@POMONA.EDU>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: New Abilities in Traveller.
Message-ID: <01I137THSRU08WX2UZ@POMONA.EDU>

     I'm against breaking down the basic UPP stats into sub-stats for a couple
of reasons.  First, because it unnecessarily screws up compatability with past
products (for this reason I also didn't like the TNE Charisma stat).  Secondly,
if we really want to, we could break everything down and have 3 dozen stats-
like Dangerous Journeys, but we don't need to.  If you want your Traveller
character to be a skin-and-bones marathon runner, roleplay him as one; likewise
with any of the other situations.  The UPP stats should just serve as a very
loose guideline to the character's Endurance, or Dexterity, or whatever as
measured against some arbitrary Imperium-wide standard.  Don't be a slave to
the numbers and don't demand a specific rule-fix for every situation- that's
what makes cumbersome, unplayable game systems.  Just use some imagination and
creativity and you'll find you can do a lot!

Trent Smith


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

Date: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 14:18:52 -0800 (PST)
From: Bri <bri@teleport.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Infantry is NOT useless
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960211141046.26445A-100000@linda.teleport.com>

Merrick wrote(manual quote cuz I'm to lazy to kill the rest of the digest)

>5MCr is a bunch of money :-)
 Compare that to the cost of intensive training eliete troops(that's what
it's skill levels are at) and equipping them. IMO, you'd break even.
 Compare that to the cost of the Norris grav-tank, wich it _equals_ if
not surpasses as a weapons system(No joke! If this thing gets the first
shot, 200pen on the Norris while the norris can only do a 150ish). 2 of
these would take out a Norris no question, while only costing half as
much(and the range is only slightley less. These are faster, also)

>Also, what about combat Ops in areas that aren't free fire zones?  How
>does it tell a local from a target?  BTW, it's a robot, not a drone
>since it can function on its own, right?
 Ya, I just called it a drone cuz I like the way it sounds better :)
 They would have insignia recognition programs and whatnot.

>I'd think that for many uses you're right, robots would be used, but
>grunts still have uses in complicated situations.  The Zhos use robots
>as I recall.  Maybe only in non-Zho space so the killing locals bit
>doesn't matter.
 Note, they have a 300KM meson commo. This would be used to refer to a
human "platoon commander" when they get involved in these grey areas.
 Or if this is during the New Era, just use a friendly virus strain.

>That sucker is nasty, though.  The fuel is 12 g-hours?  Its usefullness
>without refueling will be scaled to planet size then, but still...
 24g-turns is limited interplanitary movement. And even not, it'd be
_wicked_ for intercepting orbiting ships(ha, think of 5 of these taking
on a MCr100ish patrol cruiser... No contest for the cruiser if it
remained in orbit)

>This is a nitpick on FFS, not your critter, but HEPlaR should have a
>huge sig IMO.  At the very least we're talking as much of a sig as any
>big engine.  My grunts will have fire and forget heat seekers :-)  And
>maybe some left around the perimeter as mines.
 They better be big heat seekers, as all the ones listed in the RCEG are
anti-aircraft/no armour vehicles.
 Yes, these do have weeknesses, but I had to make certin trade-offs
between speed, cost, and protection.

>I wonder what the cost of killing your drone would be, combined with
>training the soldier...
 If you follow the military doctrin presented in the RFEG and the RCVG,
at least MCr10 :P

bri <bri@teleport.com>
Whenever I hear the sparrow chirping, watch the woodpecker chirp,
catch a chirping trout, or listen to the sad howl of the chirp
rat, I think: Oh boy! I'm going insane again. -Jack Handy


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

Date: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 14:21:35 -0800 (PST)
From: Bri <bri@teleport.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Infantry is NOT uselsss
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960211142002.26445B-100000@linda.teleport.com>

--(Jo mamma wrote)
Why not plop Friend-or-Foe device in it.  Let it interogate it's target
with a request for a passcode (pretty damn complex one).  Granted, that's
not the tightest of security measures, but these things are supposed to
work WITH flesh-and-blood troops, so there would probably be a human
component in any situation that not everything is a target.
--
 No, not the way I planned it.
 I'm gonna design a TL-15 tank(unmanned)(did anyone ever respond to that
tank design 'contest' I posted.. don't think so). The only use of humans
in this outfit would be a support, and as commanders(as in, if the
robot/drone was confused as to weather or not to fire, it would ask a human)


bri <bri@teleport.com>
Whenever I hear the sparrow chirping, watch the woodpecker chirp,
catch a chirping trout, or listen to the sad howl of the chirp
rat, I think: Oh boy! I'm going insane again. -Jack Handy


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

Date: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 14:25:03 -0800 (PST)
From: "'Jomama' Charles Pratt" <tminus@u.washington.edu>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Just how big is the Regency Navy and RQS
Message-ID: <Pine.A32.3.91j.960211141729.121386B-100000@homer22.u.washington.
edu>


Here's a question, and I don't know if it comes up in any of the New Era
sourcebooks---I didn't see it directly states in the Regency Sourcebook:
How big is the Regency's standing Naval and Quarantine fleets.  Given the
Regency "reserveist" military attitude, I wouldn't think that their
standing force would be too large (enough to cover all the quarantine
districts--but not huge).  The feeling I get from the Regency Sourcebook
is that these fleets patrol for Virus intrusions, pinpoint them, and then
call out the heavy hitters to deal with it.  This would explain how the
Virus managed to penetrate deep into Regency territory a couple of times,
but was defeated efficiently (excluding Trin).  The RQS could possibly
use something like the United States Naval tactics in the Pacific in
WWII--a relatively small force that appears big by moving around quickly
and appearing to be everywhere.  Still, I would find it interesting to
know the exact extent of the Naval/RQS forces, and the size of the
reserves held in the Regecy NavInacShipFacs.  Anyone have any ideas about
how to extrapolate the size from any of the information they have?

-----

 "Life is a disease of matter." --- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
         Charles Pratt tminus@u.washington.edu -- when in doubt, sail.
    "MORDE MANUBRIUM MEUM."


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

Date: Sun, 11 Feb 96 22:22:00 UTC 0000
From: gdw.support@genie.com
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Message-ID: <199602112218.AA123787117@relay1.geis.com>

 Charles Collin:
 > I have a few questions regarding recent posts concerning Marc
 > Miller on AOL and the release of the latest Traveller rules.  I've read
 > estimates that it will be released late this summer or late this
 > year.  Are these simply speculations, or has MM said something regarding
 > this?

 As far as I know, it was someone's speculation. Marc has not
 mentioned any formal schedule to me, and I assume I would be one of
 the first to know.

         Loren Wiseman

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

Date: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 14:36:47 -0800 (PST)
From: Bri <bri@teleport.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Infantry is NOT useless
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960211143413.26445C-100000@linda.teleport.com>

 BTW: I forgot to mention, at a extreem range battle, the drones would be
able to damage the Norris's while they could only wreck the paint on the
robots. Hence, in a typicial fighter-type grav-tank engagement, one of
these robot/drones(did I call 'em Sprites? I forget) would be able to
take out a any number of Norris's attacking as long as it was able to
maintain it's distance.
 And while this has no turret for the gun, it dosen't need one since it
is a disc and for all intents and purposes is it's own turret(they'red be
no movement restrictions)

bri <bri@teleport.com>
Whenever I hear the sparrow chirping, watch the woodpecker chirp,
catch a chirping trout, or listen to the sad howl of the chirp
rat, I think: Oh boy! I'm going insane again. -Jack Handy


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

Date: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 14:43:07 -0800 (PST)
From: John Muir Macpherson <muirmac@uclink.berkeley.edu>
To: Traveller Mailing List <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: Man vs. Machine
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9602111434.B26548-0100000@uclink.berkeley.edu>

I believe we had a thread like this a few months ago when someone
posted an RQS fighter with a robot pilot.  The discussion may have moved
over to the Beta list, I don't recall, but in any case, the conclusion at
that time was that the prices given in Vampires for highly-skilled,
highly-intelligent robot brains were way too low.  At the prices given
there is little reason for a whole lot of functions, military or
otherwise, not to be taken over by robots.  Robot infantry, robot
spacecraft, robot factories, etc.  In fact, that may have been GDWs
intention since Peacemaker Virus strains make AI almost free.
Anyone want to lay bets that the "Black Curtain" is a machine
civilization?  Since we are unlikely to get much further support for TNE,
there may be no way to resolve that bet, but for those interested in what
such a civilization might look like, check out Gregory Benford's
"Galactic Core" series (e.g. Tides of Light), or perhaps more
appropriately, Fred Saberhagen's "Berserker Wars" series.

--Muir

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

Date: Sun, 11 Feb 1996 16:03:48 -0700 (MST)
From: merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Old History
Message-ID: <9602112303.AA23934@Rt66.com>


> I think of MT's solution as excellent, but it could be improved. I
> preferred to use division by four, as this made the occasional alien 16
> stat really special. Many people I know ran using division by 3. So it
> limits skill equivalencies; that is a GOOD THING, not a bad thing. I have
> players pulling off unskilled jump navigation, 1000 AU comm Tight-beams,
> etc under TNE rules. Under MT, they don't have the chance.

Hmmm.  Using jump navigation as an example, why shouldn't it be
possible?  As I see it it would be as hard as moving a cursor to the
desired destination on the holo-starmap, and letting the computer work
:-)  I think the automated nature of a lot of tasks is glossed over to a
large extent.

I doubt that the guy doing the 1000AU tightbeam is eyeballing the maser,
as well.  For anything that needs a computer to actually perform the
task, sure, why not let anybody have a crack at it?  Anybody with no
skill level in computers must be able to use them just to read mail, do
their banking, etc. at the point in history we're talking about.  I also
can't think of a reason that they'd purposely make an interface so
arcane that somebody could plug along and figure it out.  Of course the
jump made might not have the subtlety of a "good" jump... maybe you
jumped to a less than optimum ditance from the destination world based
on the initial conditions (there's the skill, IMHO), but it's still a
jump.

>It boils down to a realism question: is raw talent enough to allow people
> to fly starships and plot jumpcourses without the computer? If you think
> so, then TNE is better for you; otherwise, MT is the better task system.
> 2300's task system was fairly close to MT, and based upon an attribute
> range of 1-20.

Of course I would argue that some of these things aren't possible,
period, without a computer.  I don't think the Jdrive has analog levers
on it for when the computer is down---you are either using the computer,
or you can't try til you fix it (IMO).

"Piloting" a ship/craft without a computer is also a non-issue, IMHO.
The only non-computer control I can imagine would be some rigged up way to
turn the drives on and off.  Maybe the vernier thrusters might just be
fly-by-wire with no computer input (or have that capability as a backup)
---but a fusion PP with _no_ functioning computer?  I'd assume that all
such sub-systems have imbedded computers and that they all have at least
some normal kind of interface (why not?).

Now something like _building_ a Jdrive, that's a different story :-)

I can see your point at extremes, though... could someone who never even
saw a computer before attempt jump using TNE?  I guess that those kinda
things need to be handled case by case (first tasks to figure out how to
turn it on... then to figure out how to make it work a little, etc..  In
effect, teaching yourself a skill level.).

-Merrick


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

Date: Mon, 12 Feb 96 02:23:00 UTC 0000
From: b.borich@genie.com
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: MM on AOL
Message-ID: <199602120221.AA064571707@relay1.geis.com>

    <I feel, that we CAN go back and although TNE is not BAD (I find the
background kind-of-interesting), i also fell, that the CT and MT
background is much more so! All backgrounds have their advantages and
disadvantages, but i think TNE is more limiting in what you can
actually DO, in game terms!> Nope you can't go back (or you can, but its
back further than you think).
    CT background was okay for me (none, just the two maps and rumours of
the FFW). But eventually got overextended and much of the fun got lost when
space got filled. Leviathan was my favorite adventure book in this era.
    MT dumped in loads of background, but gave (or was about to) the potential
to have fun with the Zhodani CORE expeditions.
    TNE was for me a return to what the early CT was for me a chance to go
exploring and trading into the unknown. Of course ARSES got sort of lost
in combat situations a little much..... But the potential was more than I've
seen from the universe in a while.


     <FF&S could (for example) easily support a conversion back to CT/MT
"thruster plate" M-drives.> Yes, a definite most. I believe in reactionless
drives for I have seen :)
    And please give me FF&S #2 and FF&S lite.

    And for the next rules edition, I think I'll use my own adaptation of
another system......

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

Date: Mon, 12 Feb 1996 14:11:56 +1000
From: Michael.Barry@FINANCE.ausgovfinance.telememo.au
To: traveller@MPGN.COM (Non Receipt Notification Requested)
Subject: Virus
Message-ID: <551114120296*/G=Michael/S=Barry/O=FINANCE/PRMD=AUSGOVFINANCE/ADMD=T
ELEMEMO/C=AU/@MHS>


     I would like to recommend Pat Cadigan's book "Synners" to anybody who is
     interested in the effects of a virus getting loose on a planetary cyber
     type network. The book features a 'friendly hippie' AI virus named "Doctor
     Fish" as well as the badass mutha worldwrecker virus; and anybody that
     hates the super-hacker culture that has built up within cyberpunk fiction
     will enjoy the twist in "Synners" that has the computer virus getting
     inside wireheads' skulls and munching them up big time. The origin of the
     killer virus is very innovative and entirely consistent with the setting
     and technology.

     "Synners" is a very nicely written book, a good source of ideas for the
     pro-Virus timeline faction and a damn sight better than most of the SF that
     gets published these days.

     PS I am not interested in joining in the bile war between CT/MT and TNE
     enthusiasts. Good luck guys - IMHO you should note down each other's
     addresses and flame as 'consenting adults in private' &-]

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

Date: Sun, 11 Feb 96 23:14:23 CST
From: ereddoch@amaranth.com (Eris Reddoch)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Timeline Branches!
Message-ID: <199602120604.AAA11899@mailhub.amaranth.com>


>>>Why not have CTrav and MTrav era settings now republished as part of a *new
>timeline* for all those long- term players who were totally pissed off by the
>bad joke that was Virus? Have an alternative ending for the Rebellion ... and
>let the players work their way through it, don't just jump 70 or 80 years into
>the future!<<

>Bad idea.  You're looking at this more from the perspective of a TNE hater,
>which apparently you are.  Though theoretically this pleases both sides, what
>you'd end up with is the anti-Virus, anti-TNEers, slowly trying to burn the
>bridges to the New Era stuff so that eventually the canon becomes this vision 
of
>playing out the next 70-80 years.

Disagree!  It's a *good* idea.  Canon!  Canon!  I'm sick of all
this emphasis on "the one true way."

>Traveller should have _one_ timeline, not several.  At least the official
>version.  Otherwise, you risk fragmenting and ruining one of the game's best
>features:  it's rich historical background.

Or it's solidified, stagnant background...it just depends on how
you look at it.  I don't *hate* TNE.  I don't even hate the
concept of Virus..I can see running some interesting campaigns
along this timeline.  What I *hate* is "the one true way!"  Open
ended, flexible and nimble that's the way to grow the game.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, the way to handle this
is to institutionalize *several* timelines and let them develop
into their futures independently.  Pick major turning point
events, the assassination attempt on Strephon comes to mind, and
send the future down more than one track:  he dies, he lives,
there is a rebellion, there isn't (whatever).  If some of the
branches become popular, feed them with sourcebooks, adventures,
etc.  If some don't then let them die off.

The rules should be general and open ended.  The timeline
material should be flexible and open ended.

That's my opinion...for today.



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

Date: Mon, 12 Feb 1996 17:38:19 -0600
From: library@babylon5.dss.gov.au (DSS Library)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 591
Message-ID: <199602130335.RAA01055@babylon5.dss.gov.au>

To digest list:

Dear Folks -

Sorry about the delay on some of these replies - I'm way behind, wading thru the
"whither Traveller" material... %-)

1.STARPORT REFERENCES

Here is my reference list of all starport-related sources, listed in order of
publication:

a."Port Facilities", S.L.A. McIntyre, _White Dwarf_ #22, Games Workshop,
London, UK, 1980, p 23.

b."Champa Interstellar Starport", Loren K. Wiseman, _JTAS_ #3 (assumed),
GDW, Bloomington, IL, USA, date unknown (c. 1980), pp 6-12.

c._Fifty Starbases_, Judges Guild, Judges Guild Incorporated, Decatur, IL,
USA, 1981.

d."The Port Authority Handbook: Arrival In-System", J. Andrew Keith and
William Keith, _High Passage_ #3, FASA, Chicago, IL, USA, 1982, pp 19-21.

e."The Port Authority Handbook: Interdicted Worlds", J. Andrew Keith and
William H. Keith, _High Passage_ #4, FASA, Chicago, IL, USA, 1982,
pp 28-30.

f."In Transit: Orbital Tug", J. Andrew Keith, _High Passage_ #4,
FASA, Chicago, IL, USA, 1982, pp 44-47.

g."Offices and Facilities: Merchant Facilities", J. Andrew Keith,
_High Passage_ #4, FASA, Chicago, IL, USA, 1982, pp 50-52.

h."The Port Authority Handbook: Inward Clearance", J. Andrew Keith,
_Far Traveller_ #1, FASA Corporation, Chicago, IL, USA, 1982, pp 4-6.

i."The Port Authority Handbook: Communications", J. Andrew Keith,
_Far Traveller_ #2, FASA Corporation, Chicago, IL, USA, 1983, pp 5-7.

j."Skyport Authority", John M. Ford, _JTAS_ # 19 with errata in
_JTAS_ #21, GDW, Bloomington, IL, USA, 1983, pp 37-42 (p 2-3 of #21)

k."From Port To Jump-Point", Leroy Guatney, _JTAS_ #22,
GDW, Bloomington, IL, USA, 1985, pp 24-30.

l."Hercules Space Tugs", John Faylo, _Challenge_ #40,
GDW, Bloomington, IL, USA, 1989, pp 31-32.

m."Planetfall", J. Andrew Keith, _Far & Away_ Vol. 1 #1,
Pacific Rim Publishing Co, Oakland, CA, USA, 1990, pp 8-19.

n."The Compleat Starport", J. Andrew Keith, _Far & Away_ Vol. 1 #1,
Pacific Rim Publishing Co, Oakland, CA, USA, 1990, pp 20-25.

o.I have also put together some basic notes on extraterritoriality and
how it would work in the trade protectorate which is the Imperium.

p.I also did some very basic research on the cost of modern-day building
materials such as reinforced concrete, and converted the prices to
Imperial Credits (class-A 'port, TL 15).

(just call me a fanatic ;-)

Naturally, other sources are _Book 3: Worlds and Adventures_, _Book 6: Scouts_,
_Fifth Frontier War_ boxed game (for fuel requirements), _MT Referee's Manual_,
and _World Builder's Handbook_ (or _Grand Survey_).

Out of the above list, the "top five" are: c, n, m, j & k. Please note that for
a full treatment of starports, ALL of the above articles have something to
contribute.

2.RULES VS BACKGROUND

Although it makes some sense to divorce rules from the background (eg. GDW's
"House Rules" or GURPS, useable in multiple genres), you may be interested
to know Marc Miller's POV back in 1981 (MM), when interviewed by Craig
Johnson (CJ):

"(partway thru interview) MM: You have to remember that from 1972 until 1977,
I designed one science fiction game and 20 historical games...

"CJ: It seems as though you prefer politically oriented games.

"MM: I think that one of the problems is that a tactical level game, especially
in science fiction, means very little. It's just random rules put together to
make something happen. _Mayday_ gains from that. If there were no Traveller_,
_Mayday_ would not be a very popular game. But, because there is a _Traveller_,
_Mayday_ means a lot when you actually look at what the counters are, and what
it means and how its played. The rules continue to deal with the same things
_Traveller_ does. _Warpwar_, for example, or any other small tactical games (I
think _Vector 3_ from SPI) really have no greater history around them that
helps you understand what the game is.

"CJ: It appears that they feel like making up a game, but instead of using real
vehicles, they just make them up.

"MM: I think you hit it right on the nose there. Anybody can put together a
bunch
of rules on how to do something. The problem is, can he put together a bunch of
rules that mean something in a greater context? _Vector 3_, for example, doesn't
do that. But _Warpwar_ seems to have so much more potential, but it's not there.
It hasn't been done is the basic problem.
There is an important concept in game design. I think the fact that I designed
20 historical games, and had to make them fit what history said, means that
_Traveller_ and all other science fiction games I've designed are done in that
same approach. Not, "here's a rule; what does it mean?" but, "Here is a much
greater idea of what the future is going to be like. What rules do I need to
fit that?" I have to write rules to fit the future history rather than make up
the history after the game is designed. many designers fall into that problem."

All text taken from "Marc Miller Interview", Craig Johnson, _High Passage_#2,
High Passage, Chicago, IL, USA, 1981, p 40.

3.PLAGUE OF DUSKIR

(please note I am only up to #570; these points _may_ have already been made)

Phil's point that the "Vilani should have known about the possibility of disease
due to the effect on the Droyne" is misplaced - it was the _Zhodani_ who had
Droyne on their homeworld, and it was these Droyne who were wiped out by the
Ancient's  old biowarfare. The biology of Vland was so different from the
Vilani they needed special food preparation just to eat! Presumably, Vland's
bacteria had a similar problem the other way.

Also, the bit about the Solomani Hypothesis: they _did_ do onsite research.
Sure, it was "first proposed by Magis Sergei haut-Devroe (64 to 141)", but when
Terra became part of the Third Imperium (588) "a small historical research
mission verified much of haut-Devroe's work" (_MT Encyclopedia_, p 38).

Also, although the Vilani were at TL 11 i.t.o. jump drive, they had _not_
reached it in weapons tech (yet another reason to adopt DGP's tech breakdown
as official rules :-). The Sabmiqys article states that the Terrans
developed the starship-mounted meson gun. When Vilani ships began to explode
internally "the Vilani were horrified". It was just like the old legends about
the Gashukubi ("Certain Death") system - now known as Sabmiqys. The meson gun
became a terror weapon, and "did much to break the Vilani will to fight"
("The Sabmiqys", Joe Fugate, _Challenge_ #28, GDW, Bloomington, IL, USA, 1987,
p 31).

4.      LEVEL OF DETAIL

I am puzzled at the return of this thread. In the digest's I'm currently up to
(approx #570), most people have agreed that an "FF&S Lite" would be a good idea.
In fact, I have not (yet) read a negative view to this idea. Surely this is the
solution - if you want "Lite" detail, use the plug-and-play rules; if you want
gritty, in-depth, calculator-intensive detail, use the full thing.

I think that a compromise should end the flogging of _this_ dead horse, at
least.

- Hyphen
(David Jaques-Watson)
Library
Dept. of Social Security
Box 7788
Canberra Mail Centre ACT 2610


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

Date: Mon, 12 Feb 1996 18:08:44 +1100
From: Andrew Madden <amadden@pcug.org.au>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 590
Message-ID: <199602120708.SAA24889@pcug.org.au>

At 13:02 10/02/96 -0500, you wrote:
>
>Well...the gored oxen seem to have mostly crawled away to die, so we
>can get back to posting real stuff...
>
>This is my first weapon design with FFS, so bear with me.
>
>Background:
>
>I wanted to figure out something like the gun the alien used in
>the first Predator movie. From appearances it's some sort of energy
[SNIP]
>
>FFS describes armor similar to the armor in Predator as appearing at
>TL-15; my guess is that by TL-16 it will be improved to the point
>described in the film.   {known as 'mimetic' - APM}
>
[SNIP]
>
>The predator was designed for hunting in the arboreal forests of
>Tyuar, an aslan-owned garden world, maintained as a safari reserve by
>the A'Aiehkel clan.  Tyuar is earth-like world with a southern continent
that is a
>gigantic forest.  These forests make the Amazon Rainforest look like
>a sparse alpine meadow...there are four very distinct ecosystems in
>the forest.  Of interset to the Aslan is the mid arboreal system.
>This is the part of the forest, high enough in the forest to get
>continual sunlight, but below the tree tops, and is as close to a
>three-d environment one can get to on dry land.  Most  the large anmals
>that live in this zone are brachiating quadrupeds, along with
>some hexapods.
>
>One of the latter is a fast, vicious predator, called the IyaTakh.
>The IyaTackh is probably the top predator of the Tyuar forests. The
>IyaTackh is a solitary predator, whose closest mammalian analog on Earth would
>be the leopard.
>
You wouldn't have read Midworld by Alan Dean Foster, would you? It's one of
my favourites, before he went commercial (Spellsinger...Yekh!) Had to do
with a 750 metre high rainforest, seven levels of arboreal terror, starting
at the 'upper hell' and descending to the 'lower, or true hell'.

Would make an interesting adventure... Especially for the rescuers! Heh Heh
Heh...

A P Madden
__________________________________________________________
Kambah Computer Services                     Andrew Madden
PO Box 1304                            amadden@pcug.org.au
Tuggeranong, ACT 2900                  Ph:  +61 6 231 5177
Australia                              Fax: +61 6 231 5576


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

End of TRAVELLER Digest 592
***************************
