From owner-traveller@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM  Sun Dec 15 02:31:44 1996
Return-Path: owner-traveller@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM
Received: from phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (Phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM [206.66.87.5]) by emin11.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id CAA29712; Sun, 15 Dec 1996 02:31:37 -0500
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (8.7.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id CAA10817; Sun, 15 Dec 1996 02:31:20 -0500
Received: by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (bulk_mailer v1.5); Sun, 15 Dec 1996 02:30:41 -0500
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM (8.7.3/8.6.9) id CAA10746 for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sun, 15 Dec 1996 02:30:40 -0500
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1996 02:30:40 -0500
Message-Id: <199612150730.CAA10746@phaser.Showcase.MPGN.COM>
From: owner-traveller-digest@mpgn.com (Traveller-digest)
To: traveller-digest@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM
Subject: Traveller-digest V1996 #756
Reply-To: traveller@mpgn.com
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@mpgn.com


Traveller-digest      Sunday, December 15 1996      Volume 1996 : Number 756



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Strength of Aslans and Domain (and now Vargr)
Re: Joe's List 
Re: Traveller-digest V1996 #753
Re: Starship Personalities
Re: I've changed my mind...
Igniting gas giants...
Useful Criticism (long) (was Re: Starships)
RE: Ship Design Formulas
Re: [T96#748] Wierd Place Names
My .02cr worth
Re: Joe's List
Re: Foss art, etc. (longish)
Re: I'm not anti-Foss...I'm pro-Choice :-)
Re: TRAVELLER NAVIGATOR NOW FREE
Re: Useful Criticism (long) (was Re: Starships)

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

Date: Sat, 14 Dec 1996 17:11:22 -0800 (PST)
From: Wes Payne <n9548326@cc.wwu.edu>
Subject: Re: Strength of Aslans and Domain (and now Vargr)

Thus spake Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>:
 
> Wes Payne writes:

> ><nitpick>

[Hans says:  The Corridor reserve fleet should've been enough to hold off 
 the Vargr]
 
> >But they weren't, hence Corridor Sector's new, Vargr name:  The Devoured 
> >Sector.
> ></nitpick>
> 
> Wes, my point is that going by the rules and the background information the
> reserve forces of Corridor is more than enough to hold it against the Vargr,
> any historical information to the contrary notwithstanding. I know that we
> are told that the Vargr overran Corridor, but they shouldn't have been able
> to. Even with ALL jump capable ships removed in 1117 (plausible, given what
> we've been told about Lucan) and even if Deneb and Vland didn't move in a
> few fleets to take up the slack (implausible, given the number of ships 
> that ought to be enough to protect against the Vargr), there are a half
> dozen high-population worlds that have so massive planetary defense forces
> that the Vargr have no chance whatsoever of capturing them (Mikesh has the
[snip]

According to the 'story,' Deneb and Vland had their own fish to fry, and 
were unable (or unwilling, perhaps, in Vland's case) to commit sufficient 
forces in time to prevent the closing of Corridor.

One resource you keep using, which I lack, is Trillion Credit Squadron.  
I have no inkling of the assumptions used therein regarding the defense 
forces that a given world can afford.  I can only offer statements as 
"seems like" and "probable" as weak refutations of the arguments you've 
put forward regarding the defense forces of some of the high population, 
high tech worlds in Corridor Sector.  I have some TNE resources which 
detail the amount of personnel and economic output a given world (or 
nation) can commit to their military, but they're not handy.
 
> Pointing out that the background history says otherwise is redundant. I know
> what the official story is. Trouble is, it dosen't make sense. Tell me, would 
> you have defended a story about the Vargr developing superpowers instead? 
> That actually makes roughly as much sense as the official story. Hey, if it 
> was psionic superpowers it would make _more_ sense! Yeah, that's it, Corridor 
> was overrun by a pack of psionic supervargr!!

Given the chaotic nature of Vargr society I, too, have some trouble with 
this scenario.  What further galled me were some of the larger ship 
designs provided in MT material.  It's difficult for me to imagine enough 
Vargr collaborating long enough to construct a TL-14 20,000-ton cruiser, 
much less crew one.

However, on the question of Vargr 'superpowers,' the relevant MT 
resources which describe the Corridor invasion mention just these 
entities.  Apparently, the perceived weakness on the part of Imperial 
forces, combined with the unifying effect (however transient) of the 
Oekhsos tirades and the emergence of several powerful Vargr leaders led 
to a coalition of Vargr nations and corsair bands that was able to take 
Corridor.  Some incompetence and poor leadership on the Imperial side 
also made this feat possible, according to the 'official' history.  Of 
course, with Corridor taken, this coalition was already beginning to 
erode, with clear divisions emerging on the issue of dividing the spoils.

The 'official history,' which you dismiss in favor of TCS, makes no 
mention of any of "Trillion Credit Squadron"'s assumptions, oddly enough.

Psionic Supervargr?  Perhaps you mean the Roth Thokken?  Of course, 
they're sorta diminutive, kinda like Brain Chihuahuas or something...

- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wes Payne, known to you as:  n9548326@cc.wwu.edu
Western Washington University -- Bellingham, WA -- The Great Northwet!  
"What is FUN?  Why is it usually colored BRIGHT PINK, and where does
 it go when JESSE HELMS comes around?" 
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Sat, 14 Dec 1996 19:06:26 -0800
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Joe's List 

At 04:51 PM 12/14/96 -0800, Rich wrote:
>Joseph E. Walsh wrote:
>> 
>> Am I the only one who liked Liz Danforth's work?
>
>Hell no! I was pleased to see her work shop up on M*&^c cards . . . ;)

Liz is a great artist.. and she's joined at the hip with Mike Stackpole, who
has written the backstory for BattleTech for almost 15 years now.  If you
haven't read the "Warrior" Trilogy, find it now.  You will *never* be able
to attend a wedding reception wiyhout grinning your head off again.

Be nice if he wrote some Traveller stuff....

>Okay, you can now get out those napalm-hoses.

Nah, just use a pool of whipped cream.. too thick to swim in, and you can
drown in it.


+----------------------------------------------+
| Douglas E. Berry          dberry@hooked.net  |
|     Professional Driver - Traveller Guru     |
|        http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/        |
|**********************************************|
| "Life's a journey, not a destination."       |
|                                   -Aerosmith |
+----------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Sat, 14 Dec 1996 22:25:43 -0500
From: Marska3@aol.com
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1996 #753

I HAVE TOLD YOU AT LEAST 20 TIMES!!!!!

UNSUBSCRIBE - TRAVELLER
UNSUBSCRIBE - TRAVELLER DIGEST

NOW........STOP !!!!!

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

Date: Sat, 14 Dec 1996 19:53:49 -0800
From: "Peter J. Miller" <PeterMiller@youngmerlin.com>
Subject: Re: Starship Personalities

Well, I don't have the Starships book yet, so I can't comment on that
directly.  However, I do find that except for a rare product, in most RPGs I
can write the descriptions and such for NPCs better than the product itself.

Perhaps this is due the fact that the average RPGer has bought more
products, and played more of the certain game than the designers of the
product.  For example, take the Starships product.  Is Don Perrin as much of
a Traveller fanatic as some of us on the list?  I don't think so (sorry, for
the assumption if it's wrong).  A lot fo the people on this list have,
literally *every* Traveller product in existence, so the stuff created by
them is almost bound to be good!

_______________________________Peter John Miller
"I'll sit around and stay a little longer...if they don't want me, I'll stay
at home and watch them" - Jays manager Cito Gaston on his future with the
team (12/12/96)
- ------------------------------------------------
Traveller, Prime Directive, AD&D, and the home of the Imperium Games FAQ!
       http://www.dragonfire.net/~pm/
Graphics Design and the _Lowest Prices on the Web_
       http://www.youngmerlin.com/	

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

Date: Sat, 14 Dec 1996 22:59:27 -0500
From: "Harold D. Hale" <hdhale@siscom.net>
Subject: Re: I've changed my mind...

Thad Coons writes:

>Research in electronic analogues of neural networks was being done on Terra
>at about TL-7. By TL-8, successful robots which duplicated the walking and
>jumping motions of insects and spiders had been developed. These were
>initially only curiosities. Specialized military vehicles based on these
>designs were in use about TL-9, but their use declined as grav technology
>was perfected.
>
>Encyclopedia Imperica: Solomani (History of the)

   I recall reading somewhere that back in the early 70s the US Army was
seriously looking at a six-legged utility transport vehicle.  I think
the program was dropped because of the maintenance issues involved.

   I'll post my combat walker design for FF&S within the next few days.

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1996 00:09:02 -0500
From: rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca (Roderick Darroch Elliott)
Subject: Igniting gas giants...

        Thad Coons wrote:

>
>Separation of the hydrogen from all the other stuff is the problem.
>You shouldn't worry about igniting the hydrogen: In a gas giant, you can
>assume that all the oxygen that can combine with hydrogen already has.
>
>Thad Coons
>http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/sapience/

        Indeed; otherwise Shoemaker-Levy impacting Jupiter might have
resulted in the sort of conflagration that's too big even for a Niven story
(does anyone else here get goosebumps over Pluto igniting in World of
Ptaavs?)

*-------------------------------------------------------------*
| Roderick D. Elliott... rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca              |
|                        elliot_r@lsa.lan.mcgill.ca           |
*-------------------------------------------------------------*
| "...an imperfect plan implemented immediately and violently |
| will always succeed better than a perfect plan."            |
|                        -Gen. George S. Patton.              |
*-------------------------------------------------------------*

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

Date: Sat, 14 Dec 1996 23:56:23 -0600 (CST)
From: Joseph "Chepe" Lockett <jlockett@io.com>
Subject: Useful Criticism (long) (was Re: Starships)

My apologies ahead of time for the extensive quoting in this piece.  I've
tried to slim things down as much as possible.  The whole thing rather
crosses the line into flaming in the early portions, but I promise to
write constructive thoughts instead of repartee later in the piece.  :-)

Kenneth, I was extremely disappointed by your post.  It seems to me just
the sort of ill-thought-out negative nattering that has plagued the
mailing list all too much of late.  In place of actively trying to help
define this bugaboo of "Travelleresque" art, it just stoops to low attacks
without making any attempt, most of the time, at explaining your evident
dislike.  Thus it comes across as simple petulant whinging. 

I thought about two of your comments were useful:

> 11)  Scout/Courier:  No.  Hmm.  It's not so much that I don't like the
>        design, because I think it would be good for some type of science 
>        or industrial use, but it is just not a scout looking ship.  If its 
>        function were more appropriate, then I may change my opinion to yes.
> 24)  Large Armed Freighter:  No.  If it wasn't so curvey, I'd count
>        it as a yes.

I rather like the Scout picture, aside from the sillouhettes marking it as
utterly the wrong size for a 100-ton craft and the fact that it doesn't
look much like the deckplan (unless you try _real_ hard....).  If you'd
bothered to say what a "scout-looking ship" would be like, your post might
have been more useful yet.

Anyone swimming this far through your scrofulous prose might guess from
your second lucid comment that you don't like "curvey" ships.  Except
your positive comments, equally sparse in detail, don't seem to bear this
out: fully half the ships you approve of also seem to be "curvey".  So
what's a poor, misguided art director, if he bothers to collate and
cross-reference it like this, going to do?

>  1)  Cover pic:  Yes.  Acceptible for Traveller, but that ship, or 
>        whatever it is sure is long and borders on the non-Travelleresque.
>  2)  Rescue Ball:  Yes.  Yeah, I can accept that one.
>  3)  Launch:  No.  But, I could be persuaded on this one.
>  4)  Ship's Boat:  Yes.  I actually like this one.
>  5)  Slow Boat:  Yes.  It's OK.  I consider it on the border.
>  8)  Modular Cutter:  Yes.  I can accept that one.
> 17)  Subdized Liner:  Yes.  It's OK.  I can accept it.
> 28)  Light Fighter:  Yes.  Hey!  One I really like!

Then we get to the really useless part of the "comparison."  Evidently you
got bored with simple negatives, but instead of trying to explain yourself
just went searching for fresher and longer invective.  I usually hear
better from the middle-school students in the local game store.

> No.  Dumb looking....  No.  Again, dumb looking.....  No.  Dumb, again.... 
> No.  Absolutely not.  Crappy drawing....  No.  If I were Lewis Roberts,
> I'd be upset that they drew my ship like that....  No.  Again, what a
> crappy design....  No.  Poor Joe Walsh.  I bet he cried when he saw
> that his ship looked like a shoe....  No.  If this was a Buck Rodgers
> game, then maybe....  No.  I expect to see 1930s sparks flying out
> of the back of this one.  Flash Gordon all the way....  No.  It's a 1955 
> T-Bird!....  No.  This reminds me of third grade, when the art teacher
> drew a line on a piece of paper, and you were supposed to draw something
> from it....  No.  I hope the mercs in that ship are real bad asses,
> because as soon as they land, they're going to be laughed off the planet....
> No.  Looks like my radar detector....  No.  Ever see The Spy Who Loved
> Me?....  No.  I want to like it, but I just can't....  No.  Just don't
> like it....  No.  Just don't like this one either....  No.  Looks like
> the close up of the head of a bug....  No.  What's the deal with the
> smiley face sticking its tongue out in the rear of the craft?....  No.
> This is the epitome of the 50's retro style that Foss is being accused
> of by members of the TML.  Looks like a soap box racer.

Is there any useful content whatsoever in the above mishmash?  I don't
think so, and I doubt most IG staffers would bother to read past the first
two or three lines.  To the probably relief of many a digest-reader, I'm
not even going to touch the similarly content-free puffery about the color
plates.  (Besides, I don't care for many of them either... thoughts on WHY
below :-)

And now, at the risk of being hoist by my own petard, I'd better toss in
my own two metaphor-mixing cents.

The more I look at the Foss art, the more it grows on me: not as the
be-all and end-all of Traveller (I, too, was a great fan of many of the
DGP publications' "look"), but as a good try at a different look for
Milieu 0.  If the designs look "old-fashioned..." maybe that's what the
designers were _trying_ for, to provoke the right image in all we die-hard
fans brought up on the Spinward Marches in 1100-1200!

One thing that bugs me about the Foss line-art, especially, is the large
number of puzzing openings on the ship's hulls.  "Okay, they're fuel
scoops," I thought at first... but there are a hell of a lot of them, and
they often show up on the sides of vessels as well as the front.  Pop
turrets?  Didn't think so.  They're evidently Foss's way of trying to give
more "texture" to his drawings without having to specify any of the
technology with hatches, valves, pipes, etc.  And I don't care for art
which evades the technology rather than displaying it: that, to me, seems
"un-Travelleresque."

Rocket engine placement is another big bugaboo.  Look at the Shuttle on p. 
20.  (Why, by the way, does the text refer to it as being "the smallest
effective space-worthy vessel [before TL12]," when the preceding twelve
pages have been devoted to just such ships?  Bad editing -- I suspect they
mean the smallest ship to be able to operate beyond contra-grav's natural
limits).  Sorry -- back to rocket cones.  The two largest engines are the
furthest from the apparent center of gravity/mass of the vessel!  Again, I
suspect Foss put them there to give "balance" to the large plane of the
wing surface (is that a hypersonic waverider wing?  If so, cool.  But
probably not....). 

In short, Foss seems to love the art more than the technology.  Obviously,
you can have really boring art which emphasizes the technology while
totally ignoring artistic considerations.  I think the genius of classic
"Travelleresque" art is to _balance_ the two.  Objects are handsomely and
actively displayed, but they also look like they work and are designed
with an eye to utility, not just presentation and appeal to book-browsers.

Why the elevated bridge on the Far Trader?  Why the elegant wasp-waist on
the once-stodgy standard subsidized merchant, forcing irregularities in its
cargo bay?  Indeed, as many have said, why the furled wings on the lab
ship?  Don Perrin fell down on the job, certainly, by totally neglecting
"flavor text" for the ships -- again, on the "Travelleresque" front, ships
are not just gadgets, they are _homes_, constant companions, even, in many
a campaign, _characters_ in their own right, balking or succeeding in
hindrance or help of their crew.

So, to me, for Traveller's art as well as its text, to be "Travelleresque" 
it must be both technical/pragmatic/practical AND humanistic/stirring/
adventurous.  Foss errs to much to the latter, Perrin to the former.  And
that's why we all feel such a crying dissonance in the appearance and
"feel" of the new Traveller.  The happy medium is a hard row to hoe, but
that's where True Traveller has always lain.

> So, what are all of your opinions?

If opinions are what we saw above, let's have FEWER of them.  If we're all
to be of the opinion that "art is what I like", then we can table this
discussion along with feudal technocracies and near-luminal lifeboats: 
it's all heat and no light.  But if posters are willing to put some
thought and reasoning into what they write, maybe we can actually give
some positive and useful advice to IG -- which was, after all, what the
whole thread was _supposed_ to be about in the first place.

- ----------------------------*------------------------*------------------------
 Joseph L. "Chepe" Lockett  |"Nullum magnum ingenium | GURPS fan, Amiga user,
http://www.io.com/~jlockett | sine mixtura dementiae | Shakespearean scholar,
  Email: jlockett@io.com    | fuit." -- Seneca       | actor and director.

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

Date: Sat, 14 Dec 96 23:14:14 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: RE: Ship Design Formulas

On 12/14/96 at 02:13 AM,  That Computer Guy <darkstar@UDel.Edu> said:

> : I don't know if this has been mentioned before, but I for one would
> prefer to : see 2 pages of formulas rather than 18 pages of tables. 
> Maybe with some : samples so I know that I am computing things correctly.

> This was done in Fire, Fusion, & Steel.  

No it wasn't.  Sure there might have been 2 pages of formulas, but they
were spread out across 100 pages in a more or less haphazard pattern.  If
the formulas had been grouped together in a logical way I might have liked
them better.

Ok, I *could* have spent the time to gather up all the formulas and lay
them out myself, but I didn't. <g>

> I think only three or four of us actually like it, the rest of the
> world found it cumbersome and unwieldly.  

As they were presented, they were.

> The tables came about because they really are a more digestable
> and easier way of designing ships.

Maybe, I haven't done much with SSDS yet.  QSDS *is* pretty easy to use.

> The formulas are thought out enough.  The only problem is that all the
> components are integrated to the 5000t limit.  You'd probably be better
> off purchasing a copy of FF&S and going through that.

There will eventually be the _Naval_Architect's_Handbook_ for T4 (or
whatever name they end up with).  Work on that is occuring, sporatically,
over on the Beta-List.


Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Sat, 14 Dec 96 23:51:16 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: [T96#748] Wierd Place Names

On 12/14/96 at 04:22 PM,  jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com (JEFF ZEITLIN) said:

>  There used to be a "6" in Kentucky (yes, spelled exactly that
>  way).

>  There is also a "North Pole" in New York.

>  "Hoople" can be found in southern North Dakota.

>  "Tar Heel" is a well-known town in North Carolina.

How about Two Egg, Florida? <g>

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)    using MR/2 ICE #245
- -----------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1996 13:11:02 +0000
From: "Tim Reynolds" <tim@premier1.premier.net>
Subject: My .02cr worth

Douglas E. Berry writes

Liz is a great artist.. and she's joined at the hip with Mike
Stackpole, who has written the backstory for BattleTech for almost 15
years now.  If you haven't read the "Warrior" Trilogy, find it now. 
You will *never* be able to attend a wedding reception wiyhout
grinning your head off again.
(grin)

Be nice if he wrote some Traveller stuff....

I did not know Liz did the art, but as far as Stackpole goes it would 
be nice if he could right for T4.  I have enjoyed everything he has 
written, espically the Warrior Trilogy.  I think he could add lots of 
live to the game.

Oh I got my Starships from my UFLGS today.  Dont have much to say 
that has not already been beaten  into the ground.  Though it does make 
 great reference for all the complaints. 

I think we should give IG some more time with their products.  They 
are not MS or GDW  its going to take time.  If it was easy to write 
rules for a new T4 and put them out we all would have done it ourselves,
 but its not.  On top of that they have had to find things like printing and 
shipping companies and Lawers which is an on goeing process for a new 
company.This takes time, money and wares people down., cause long weeks
 with no sleep. The best we can do is encourage them and even buy their products
 we don't like, to keep their doors open, because we know Marc, IG, and
 Sweetpea can do this if given  more then what 9 months  total 5 since T4
 came out.

Lets move on.  I have talked to JoeW  about more background material for T4 so 
we can tear that apart and not the same old stuff.  I like Tony Lee 
asking for rumors this will help start the new T4  background era, 
and gives us the players a chance to give input.  Kenneth has the 
right idea too lets help each other and IG out with new ideas.

T4  T4 ra ra ra

Stops being the chearleader

TimR

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

Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1996 02:06:29 -0500 (EST)
From: pawn@CAM.ORG (Glenn Grant)
Subject: Re: Joe's List

>> That Computer Guy wrote:
>> > That said, I will mention that hands down, bar none, Rob Caswell *is*
>> > Traveller art.  Everything he did was simply beautiful and well laid
>> > out.  And his equipment drawings were spectacular to boot!
>> 
>> Add Blair Reynolds to the list of artists that ARE Traveller
>
>Am I the only one who liked Liz Danforth's work?
>- -Joe

'Fraid so, Joe. Just like I'm (apparently) the only person who thinks Donna
Barr's Traveller Book cartoons were brilliant.

But then, I only went to art school for several years and have worked as a
commercial illustrator, so what do I know about art? :)

Glenn G.

- -----------------------Glenn Grant-----------------------  
                      <pawn@cam.org>
Web: <http://helios.physics.utoronto.ca:8080/ggrant.html>
    "That which does not kill us makes us stranger."
                  -- Trevor Goodchild

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

Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1996 02:06:35 -0500 (EST)
From: pawn@CAM.ORG (Glenn Grant)
Subject: Re: Foss art, etc. (longish)

Robert Beck asks,

>Some of the pictures actually do inspire me to think Traveller, but is
>it too much to ask that Traveller ships, vehicles, and equipment be in these
>ever so intriguing paintings?
>IG wants color art? Fine, but throw us a bone. How about some designs we
>would use in those pictures? Heaven forbid, how about a classic Traveller
>ship in one of those masterpieces? Maybe that would placate a few angry
>voices and lighter wallets, eh IG?

Would it have been too difficult for the authors to draw at least deckplan
that seems to match the configuration of one of Foss's ships? I haven't yet
seen Starships, but surely they can't all be illustrations of zillion-ton
freighters with claw-hooks and cranes?

I'm a Foss admirer, I must admit. I used to actually carry the book _20th
Century Foss_ to my games club - for ship design inspiration, and to
*illustrate* Traveller adventures ("Your Scout Courier is being hailed by a
megaton cargo hauler that looks like....this!") Yep, I'm probably the only
person on the list who thinks that Traveller ships should look *more like
Foss illos*, not the other way around!

Well, okay, clearly some of his images are wrong for the game, usually
because they're too crazy. One of the things I've always liked about his
work is its sense of humour; many of his designs are clearly absurd -
impossibly huge, layered with ridiculous details, often appearing to serve
no sensible purpose. That's part of the fun; you stare at something like
that finned monorail thing in T4 and wonder, "What the hell is *that*?"

BTW, I love Joe's idea for the "Explain the Foss Art" contest. I was going
to suggest something along the same lines to the list, but more as an
exercise than a contest: consider each illustration as a challenge to your
imagination, in the tradition of Seemingly Impossible UWPs, and try to come
up with a Travellereque 'explanation'.

Let's consider, for instance, the color plate on page 54 of T4: a typical
Foss scene, illustrating a patently absurd 'Islands in the Sky' motif.
Those big floating rocks are definitely not free-floating belt asteroids.
They're far too close together, they bear structures that rise only on one
side, all of them sharing the same up-down orientation! And the farthest
rocks are disappearing into the haze of distance - an effect known as
'aerial perspective'; it's caused by nitrogen in the atmosphere (think of
the way hills become more pale and blue with distance). Foss uses aerial
perspective in most of his space paintings, though of course he knows
there's no air in space; it's a familiar way of providing a sense of great
scale and distance (something he's really good at).

But if we take this painting literally (more literally than Foss himself
would), we might guess that these asteroid installations are floating in
the atmosphere of a planet - indeed they're designed to do so. Heavy duty
contragrav lifters are keeping them up. I think they're some sort of gas
giant atmosphere refineries, down-market cousins to the 'Cloud City' of
Bespin in _The Empire Strikes Back_. The asteroid rock provides cheap
radiation shielding, not to mention cheap armor; clearly defensibility was
an issue in their design. Perhaps the operators are enforcing their
monopoly on gas giant skimming against potentially well-armed opponants
(rival refining companies? Pirate skimmers? Invading fleets?)...

Sounds pretty damned "Travelleresque" to me.

I agree that Foss was the wrong guy to do the equipment and small vehicle
drawings, or indeed to illustrate existing ship designs. Maybe those
assignments should've gone to Elmore: notice the relative realism and
restraint of the guns in his combat drawing on page 22.

Elmore's problem is that he clearly lacks a science-fictional imagination.
Though the figures and technique are very professional, everything in his
drawings is boring and mundane, from the compositions to the clothes. Even
his 'alien' looks like someone I might've gone to high school with. On page
114 there's a guy wearing what looks like *prescription glasses*  - in a
Tech 12 society??

But I do applaud Elmore and IG for eschewing the mindless and sexist
cliches of SF rpg illustration. These drawings communicate a little story
that encapsulates the essence of a typical Traveller adventure. But all
together they don't provide even a fraction of the mind-stretching
inspiration of one of the better Chris Foss paintings.

I'm not counting the small B&W ship illos, though. Those suck, as everyone
has pointed out already. If I'd been art directing T4, I'd have sent them
back to be re-drawn. I know Foss can do very good, hard-edged technical
illos: check out the _Alien_ preproduction work in _21st Century Foss_ (if
anyone out there has a copy). There are some stunningly detailed  concept
sketches of the Nostromo, and very clear line drawings intended to direct
the model builders. Too bad the T4 and Starships illos don't look like
that. (Mind you, I have no doubt that Ridley Scott was paying Foss much
more than IG ever could....)

Consider this my vote *for* the color plates - but some attempt should be
made to integrate the content of the art with the content of the books.

Glenn G.

- -----------------------Glenn Grant-----------------------  
                      <pawn@cam.org>
Web: <http://helios.physics.utoronto.ca:8080/ggrant.html>
    "That which does not kill us makes us stranger."
                  -- Trevor Goodchild

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

Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1996 02:20:06 -0500
From: "Harold D. Hale" <hdhale@siscom.net>
Subject: Re: I'm not anti-Foss...I'm pro-Choice :-)

My first and only comments on the subject of Chris Foss art:

   I own a book entitled "Space Wars: Worlds and Weapons".  I bought it
during the Middle Ages (known to some as the early 1980s).  It is
copyrighted with the date 1979, and features art by a number of artists,
including Chris Foss.  In fact, he wrote the Foreward for the book. 
There is a description of his art on page 31 which I think is of
interest:

   "It's hard, though, to look at a Chris Foss space ship and see a
symbol of anything.  Jagged, deformed, weird, suspiciously reminiscent
of items of household furniture, they stand apart in sf art as probably
being far more practically realistic than any streamlined stellar
crusier, too big to cope with gravity, and yet still fashioned with
aerodynamic precision, presumably ready to cope with those gusty solar
winds.  Foss has made an artform of the hideous; he has painted a sense
of wonder from the epileptic combination of bits and panels and frames
and pipes.  It is really difficult to choose between his totally
individual vision of the fantastic future of hardware and, say, Chris
Moore's precision paintings of Pan Am space craft approaching the
towering, stratospheric navigation buildings of his future space port."

   In other words, Foss has his own particular style.

   Presumably, the people responsible for recruiting him to do art knew
that what they were getting was not going to be in a style that was
anything like previously published Traveller material, and that much of
what they were getting was going to be recycled stuff he had previously
published elsewhere.  Frankly, IG/Sweetpea Entertainment probably
couldn't have afforded the price for Foss originial color illustrations
anyway.  You could question the wisdom of bringing in an artist with
such a unique style into a situation where there was already an
established style (one that is pretty dissimilar), but then we don't
write the checks.

   If I ran the circus....

   I would have went to Marvel Comics, or one of the smaller comics
houses, and recruited one of their younger artists to do some stuff for
me on a freelance basis.  Ideally, this person would be able to draw
stuff that at least comes close to the "Official Traveller Style" while
adding his or her own special flare to it.  When the 16-24 year old
crowd sees Traveller "featuring the art of Sam Smith" (or whatever) of
Malibu Comics, who has worked on X-Men, etc. and they recognize his
style, you've just made a sale, even if the kid buying it is only
vaguely interested in playing the game itself.

   The art in T4 is for the most part well executed and thought
provoking.  It also bears little resemblance to the "Official Traveller
Style", and has little appeal to anyone under the age of 30 (no knock on
Chris, but let's face it, he was a cutting edge illustrator in 1979--he
is no longer cutting edge in 1996).  While this in and of itself will
not cause the 16-24 year old crowd to be discouraged from buying
Traveller, it won't convince them to buy it either.  For T4 to be
successful and increase its base of support, it has to have greater
appeal to that demographic.  You do that, in part, by featuring cutting
edge art.  While it may be too late now to change the artistic style of
T4, it is something that should be given some consideration,
nevertheless.

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1996 01:30:01 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER NAVIGATOR NOW FREE

On 14 Dec 96 at 17:57, Susan M. Shock wrote:

> A friend of mine clued me in to the fact that the Traveller Navigator's
> sectors produced by Planet III software (which has changed it's name to
> Davtech or some such) are now available as freeware. 

Thanks.  I found out about this by calling Planet III about six 
months ago.  They hadn't gotten it all up as freeware yet, but the 
guy told me to keep looking for it.

Kenneth.

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

Date: Sun, 15 Dec 1996 01:30:02 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Useful Criticism (long) (was Re: Starships)

On 14 Dec 96 at 23:56, Chepe wrote:


> Kenneth, I was extremely disappointed by your post. 
> I thought about two of your comments were useful:

Sorry to hear that.  I try to write useful posts.


  So
> what's a poor, misguided art director, if he bothers to collate and
> cross-reference it like this, going to do?

I think that you are missing the point of what I was trying to do, 
and that was to simply give my opinion on what ships pictured in the 
Starships supplement were Travelleresque.

And, I wanted to compare my thoughts with everyone else's to see if 
we all have a consensus on what is Travelleresque.

Joe got me to thinking about this when I read his list of things that 
the Traveller fans want.  It is hard to describe what is and is not 
Travelleresque, and there have been so many flames on Foss' art.  My 
intention with the post was to actually go through the pictures in 
Starships and get TML reactions for IG eyes to see.

This would tell them what most of us think Travelleresque is.

My ramblings on the specific ships were just that--ramblings about 
why I liked or disliked something.  It should have given you a little 
more insight into why I did or did not like something (I originally 
was just going to indicate what I thought was or was not 
Travelleresque).

Kenneth.

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

End of Traveller-digest V1996 #756
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".
