Traveller-digest     Saturday, December 28 1996     Volume 1996 : Number 794



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Water on Starships
Re: Traveller PBM
Personal Message
Re: Grass Root Uprising
Re: Jump drives & Redundancy
Re: Psionic Lovers
Re: Water on Starships
Re: Water on Starships (long)
Problems with Starships
Laundry, Freshers and Water
Traveller on a soap box?
Re: Starliner Sourcebook?
Re: Psioinic lovers -- this should be a blues song
Re: Starliner Sourcebook?
Re: Art & misanthropic geeks
Re: Interstellar Psionics, Canonical Use Of
Re: Laundry in the Far Future
Interstellar taxes

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

Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 14:54:21 -0800
From: "David P. Summers" <dsummers@mail.arc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: Water on Starships

Fri, 27 Dec 1996 10:22:56 -0800 (PST), Douglas <douglas@teleport.com>
>I totally disagree with you on this.  If you are not carrying a 100%
>breathables reserve, you are begging for trouble!

>Once we have agreed that this type of reserve exists, it is not too
>difficult to imagine the O2 reserve expanded to included reconstitution of
>H20.

Actually it is.  The amount of oxygen necessary to repressurize the
ship a few times is a lot less than contained in sufficient water
for drinking, washing, shooting out of squirt guns, etc.  It would,
in fact, be easier to get your emergency oxygen by pulling water
out of the water recycling system.

>While I tend to believe that water usage is more limited aboard a ship, I
>do not believe it is so limited as to require some of the more extreme
>methods of conservation that have been suggested.  As everything that is
>consumed, and eventually excreted, aboard the ship is available for
>recycling, only losses into space (and the big spaceport-down party when
>the ship hits port) need be replaced.

I don't think water usage would be all the limited at all.  If you
have 5-10 gal of water per person and could recycle it in less than
an hour, you could take showers, cook, etc. and have a good reserve
for emergency oxygen.

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

Date: Sat, 28 Dec 1996 00:44:24 +0000
From: Garry Ward <Garry.E.Ward@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller PBM

At 03:48 AM 12/26/96 +0000, you wrote:
>Has anyone tried the "Traveller the New Era" play-by-mail game by Eclipse 
>Entertainment?  If so, please tell us what you thought of the game.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Armand
>
>

Well, last word I had, as of October 15th, was that the game now belongs to
CyberLemur Enterprises. I was in game 10; but I haven't seen a turn since
October 15th. Eclipse had sold the game earlier to another group, brought it
back, and sold it to CyberLemur. To date, it seems to be following the IG
business model. 

I like the game in general. Ship design is not a real tight match to any
form of traveller (CT, MT, TNE or T4); I.E. everything occupies 'spaces' as
opposed to displacement tons. UPPs are used to define the planets; most
stars have multiple planet systems; Gas giants are needed to refuel.
Strategic orientation rather than individual ship, somewhat more like the
VGA planets game without the on PC graphics and thinly disguised pop culture
races (Evil Empire, Rebels, Colonials, Fascists, Birdmen, etc). 

Would be nice if they operated on a regular basis. 

Garry  
   

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

Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 19:35:42 +0000
From: "Tim Reynolds" <tim@premier1.premier.net>
Subject: Personal Message

Hey, people  I am writing this to say that the message to JD was 
mismailed so please ignore it.  Hey, but now I know how to post to  
the list  so it was not a total lost.

This has been a test if this had been an actual 
message then it would have contained imporatant information, like the 
solution to why  there are  no bathrooms on board starships,  but this 
has been only a test.

Tim Reynolds

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

Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 23:37:28 -0500
From: "Harold D. Hale" <hdhale@siscom.net>
Subject: Re: Grass Root Uprising

J.D. Burdick writes:

>There comes a time when one must stand up and be counted.  This is one of
>those times.  I walked into 5 stores looking for CSC and Aliens today.  Not
>only did none of the stores have them, but 2 of them didn't know that
>Traveller had been re-released by IG.

   Locally, two of the four game stores that used to carry Traveller
products have the T4 sourcebook (similar to J.D.'s report, one of the
stores hadn't gotten the word about Imperium Games).  One of the two
stores that had the T4 sourcebook also had Starships (it's possible that
the other had simply sold out its copies), and neither had CSC or
Aliens.

   This sounds like a problem at the distributor level.  Most game
companies have a hate-hate relationship with their distributors.  That's
because most distributors routinely screw small to medium-sized game
companies for as much as they can get out them.  Distributors do this
because they know that they can get away with it--IG needs the
distributors (and their ability to get product into gamestores) far
worse than the distributors need IG (to the distributors, Traveller is
just another product line).      

   Dave Nilsen is quoted as saying that he knew the end was near at GDW
when they finished up the Regency Sourcebook and virtually no
distributors would pick it up.

>This is the sad state of affairs that we find ourselves in.  You might ask
>why I am concerned about this.  I am concerned because every one of us that
>loves the game of Traveller should be concerned.  In a time that the gaming
>industry is waivering, and the future of our game is in question; someone
>must take steps to ensure our game of Traveller survives.

   Even if you think T4 sucks, it is important that some form of
Traveller stay in production.  That's because even with Internet
availability, if a game goes out of print, it becomes virtually
impossible to replenish the population of those who play it.  What's
left is a slow death--unless somebody else picks up the publication
rights, and with the failure of two major revisions of Traveller within
a year, it is unlikely that anyone with adequate capital will want to
pick it up.

>What can we do you ask?  You are thinking that you are only one gamer or a
>small group that meets once a week.  What can you do?  The answer is simple.
>
>A grass root uprising in support of our game.  Marc might own the copyright,
>IG owns the publishing rights; but it is our game...yours and mine.  We play
>it.  It is our hobby, we have helped make it into what it is today.

   Quite simply it is a question of demand.  We can create a certain
amount of demand amongst our little on-line band and among our friends,
but ultimately it will only prolong IG's suffering unless a significant
number of new players are brought in--players that have never heard of
Traveller before--and are kept around.  That's IG's department.  Yeah, I
know what IG and others have *said* with regard to recruiting, but
gaming (particularly RPGing) for most of us is time to be spent with
friends.  Few of us have the money/time to routinely go to conventions
or to demo games in stores, and even fewer of us actually have the
ability/desire to referee games.

>You are probably wondering about IG about now.  To tell you the
>truth so am I.  They should be leading the way in this fight.  Don't be
>fooled, there is a war on and our game hangs in the balance.  IG should be
>in the lead in this campaign but they are not.  They are AWOL.  So what do
>we do?  Do we let them ruin our game by their lack of leadership?  I say
>no..NO..NO!

   Yours are noble sentiments, but the fact is that ultimately it is the
responsibility of Imperium Games to make T4 successful.  It is up to IG
to send people to conventions to sell product and demo the game (or
recruit people for this task).  It's up to IG to advertise in industry
trade papers.  It's up to IG to advertise in gaming magazines and on the
Internet (and keep their site up to date).  It's up to IG to suck up as
required to distributors and larger game store chains.  It is up to IG
to put out a product that will attract potential customers and will keep
current ones.  If they are unwilling or unable to do these things, then
it is up to Marc to decide to pull their license and find somebody else
who can.

   By all means though, rally the troops.  It can't hurt.

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 19:51:31 -0900
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Jump drives & Redundancy

> From: "Phillip McGregor" <aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au>
> Subject: Jump Drives & Redundancy
> 
> Some comments have been made to the effect that Starships would never 
> want to carry out yearly maintenance at a type B Starport because said 
> Starport cannot make J-Drives ... and that any *major* problem with  
>said ship's J-drives would immobilise the vessel until a new drive 
>could be brought in from outside.
> 
> A couple of perceptive replies have pointed out the obvious -- any    
> Engineer worth his salt will have detected the warning signs of such a 
> major problem well before maintenance was due and would have made     
> arrangements to do *this* maintenance stop at a Class A Port.

	We cannot assume that EVERY problem with the Jump Drives would 
be obvious to even a_very_good_Engineer.  Yes most of them probably 
would be but many real world machines will fail unexpectedly even when 
maintained by an expert (& these real world machines do not have to be 
capable of moving hundreds of tons of metal into another universe & 
bringing it back out) .  Sometimes you have to take machines half apart 
to discover that a problem exists.  It could very well be that this is 
part of the reason that routine maintenance takes two weeks, maybe the 
Jump Drive has to taken apart, inspected, cleaned to clean room 
standards, realined to minute tolerances, subjected to sophisticated 
computer diagnostics, etc.  The ships engineer may not have_time_to do 
this, because the ship is typically in Jump 1 week & in port for 1 week. 
 Even the most dedicated ships engineer who is willing to skip her 
liberty cannot do in 1 week, by herself, what it takes a starports yard 
crew 2 weeks (probably operating around the clock) to do.  (The military 
crew of a naval ship probably could though.) 
 
	Moreover it is possible, even probable, that the annual 
maintenance of a ship requires diagnostic tools that are not available 
on the ship.  It could well be the case that Jump drives require 
sophisticated (ie large & expensive) diagnostic tools for their yearly 
maintenance, while you could theoretically put these on the ship it does 
not make economic sense to do so.  Without these tools even the best 
enginner might not be able to_tell_that a problem existed.  Yes you will 
usually know that there is a problem with the Jump drive - but sometimes 
you will_not_know that it has a problem untill the yard crew opens it up 
for maintenance.  This is why I said that I would not schedule the 
annual maintenance for_my_ship at a B port.  I don't think it is a big 
deal however, I'm just being cautious. 
> 
> However, the problem set me to thinking. 
> It brought to mind something I read a while ago about a particular    
> model US groundcar with EFI and how, unlike *earlier* models (lower  
>tech?) black box controllers which, when dying, took the whole engine 
>down with them (as I can attest from personal, and recent, 
>experience!), immobilising the car until replaced, these new 
>controllers actually had at least one level of "default" setting that 
>was absolutely rock-bottom simple ... maximised chances of operating 
>(to 100%, in fact) at the cost of running *very* "rich" (and guzzling 
>fuel). According to the article, mechanics often had real trouble 
>convincing the owners that there was anything wrong -- a common comment 
>was evidently "Its never run better, but the fuel consumption has gone 
>up."
> 
> So, what's the relevance of this? Well, with something as vital as a
> J-Drive, surely there would be more than one level of circuitry built 
> in? Surely there would be redundant levels that would allow full 
>functionality when the primary levels die? Almost certainly at least 
>one level on civilian starships and more than one on military vessels.
> Beyond these initial levels of redundancy, what is there likely to be?
> Well, I would suggest that each level of "failure" beyond the main  
>backups would simply be set to allow the vessel to do something like 
>what the EFI blackbox did ... in other words, each level of failure 
>simply drops the J-Rating of the Drive one level. Since a considerable 
>number of vessels have a J-Drive greater than J1, this also allows 
>backup. So a J3 vessel which loses both its main circuitry *and* its 
>secondaries then falls back to J2 - and if this level fails, it drops 
>back to J1 -- perhaps with the catch that *fuel* consumption remains 
>*unchanged*. In other words, the vessel makes a J2 at the fuel cost of 
>a J3!
> 
> Since such problems are assumed (so it seems) *never* to happen in
> Traveller, there may not be a *huge* need for this sort of suggestion, 
> but it *does* make some sort of sense, so I'm offering it for your
> consideration.
> 
> Phil McGregor

	This is a brilliant suggestion ! 
 
	There is some previous cannonical evidence that Jump drives can 
in fact operate in this manner.  In High Guard & MegaTraveller starship 
combat one of the results of interior dammage to the ship is the 
"Jump-n" result where the Jump drives factor is reduced by the indicated 
ammount.  I had always assumed that this ships dammage result was due to 
the fact that the dammaged drive was no longer capable of attaining its 
full Jump potential but was capable of making a shorter (& easier) Jump. 
Phils suggestion explains this result.  Since the sytem is 
_not_performing properly it will not operate at full potential & 
therefore the suggestion that a Jump require as much fuel as the next 
higher Jump number is an elegant & simple way of simulating this.

	Phils suggestion seemed to be refering to decreeased performance 
due to wear & not due to combat dammage but the results could easily be 
the same in reality & assuming they are the same would make things much 
easier without much loss of verisimilitude.

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

Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 20:19:02 -0900
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Psionic Lovers

> From: "Glenn M. Goffin, Esq." <sudet@well.com>
> Subject: Psioinic lovers -- this should be a blues song
> 
> >From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
> 
> > >On the other hand, with clairvoyance and teleportation, they can   
> > >easily cheat on you and still know when you're on the way home and 
> > >get there before you. 
> 
> >But no Zhodani would ever even *think* about cheating on you!
> 
> Well, it depends, I suppose.  Although Zhodani are honest to a fault  
> within Zhodani society, they might not be when living in the Imperium. 
> ("When in Rome, act as the Romans do.")  For example, in wartime, 
>Zhodani forces make use of surprises and ruses just as well as anyone 
>else (maybe better, hence the scenario's title "Perfidious
> Zhodane" in Azhanti High Lightning), and these surely require 
>dishonesty.  If they can lie in war, surely they can lie in love.
> With non-Zhodani psionic significant others, you certainly run the described risk.
> 
> - --Glenn

	A Zhodhani significant other might think that there was anything 
wrong with infidelity.  We know that in todays society many people are 
unfaithfull to there mates & many others think about it.  With their 
widespread telepathy the Zhodani would probably have concluded long ago 
that infidelity is "normal" & not abberant behavior.  Therefore they 
would accept it.  It is entirely possible that the Tavrchedl' would come 
& talk to the spouse of the "cheater" & talk to_them_about their 
unrealistic assumptions about human behavior, not to the "cheater" 
themselves.
	However the Zhodani would probably also have concluded that 
human beings who know about their spouses infidelity will be hurt & 
react negatively.  Therefore the Zhodani spouse might well hide their 
infidelity to spare your fealings.  They might very well use their 
Clairvoyance & Teleportation to be home before you.  But remember you 
should not be angry at them, they are just attending to ther "normal" 
human need for affection YOU are not giving them.   Maybe you need to 
think about_your_unrealistic assumptions of fidelity.

P. S.	The above thoughts are not necessarily intended to promote 
infidelity in the "real world" but rather to suggest what the Zhodani 
viewpoint might be.

	Peter

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

Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 20:22:53 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Water on Starships

In mail you write:

> I don't think water usage would be all the limited at all.  If you
> have 5-10 gal of water per person and could recycle it in less than
> an hour, you could take showers, cook, etc. and have a good reserve
> for emergency oxygen.

One cubic meter of water is 264 gallons. One "displacement ton" of
water is 3566 gallons. 

I rather expect ships to have a *lot* of water. For one thing, it helps
you balance the load in the ship by pumping it between tanks. Tanks for
this can be stuck in all those odd little bits of space that are
useless for anything else. Water is also ideal for shielding against
things like solar flares, a few meters will do just fine for civilian
ships. And you can use it to equalize heat load by pumping between
tanks just under the "skin" of the ship. 

And water makes a good source for both oxygen for breathing, and
hydrogen for fuel. Excess oxygen can be stored in small amounts of
space by using LH2 to freeze it solid. 

In my opinion, it's *definitely* worthwhile to have the ship set up to
store water in those odd nooks and crannies, plus have a couple of fair
sized tanks of it. And it's also a good idea to be set up to turn water
into LH2 and LOX, as well as the reverse. The conversion gear doesn't
take up a lot of space, and it simplifies water purification. You just
make it a point to *always* run water/wastewater thru the purifier and
convert it to hydrogen/oxygen and back to water. This essentially
*eliminates* any contamination problems.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 20:46:57 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Water on Starships (long)

In mail you write:

> So we need 2,160 cubic meters of air.  Checking the WWW (don't you love
> the 'net) I find a single dive tank at TL8 that holds 120 cu f. or
> (convert from another web page) 3.399 cubic meters per tank.  Lets double
> that once for TL12 and round to about 7 cu. m per tank.  Wow! we need
> about 300 dive tanks for just *one* atmospheric replacement!  Each tank
> (scribble scribble) is about 0.023 cu m giving a compression ratio
> (ratio of space taken up per cu m of air held) of 304; that is, 1 cu m of
> tank space holds 304 cu m of replacement atmosphere.  That means
> (scribble) we need 7.1 cu m of space for each atmospheric replacement.
> This will be spread throughout the ship in nooks and crannies, but still
> will take up significant space; 4 replacements is 28.4 cu m or about 2
> tons.  

Dive tanks are pressure limited because they tend to get banged into
things.  Stationary tanks can run at higher pressures safely. Larger
"industrial" tanks will hold air at 1000-2000 atmospheres. That means
one cubic meter of tank will hold 1000 cubic meters of air. Liquified
gases make more sense on shipboard as you already need the ability to
handle cryogenic gases for the LH2. You'll also likely keep the
nitrogen and oxygen *seperately*, as you'll rarely need to add
nitrogen, but frequently need to add oxygen.

> The measures mentioned for conserving water do not seem to me to
> be too extreme.  The sonic showers I suggested are simple, effective
> substitutes for running water showers which, in fact, can use 20-30
> gallons of water at a sitting (or standing) - yes! it can be cleaned and
> reused, but there is bound to be some inevitable waste (water left on the
> bather's body, liberated into the cabin air, etc.)

The water *can't* be "lost". There's nowhere for it to go. You are
forgetting that the ship is a *closed system* while underway. What
doesn't go down the drain winds up in the air (one way or another. Any
excess water in the air *will* be recovered by the air recirculation
equipment. And that puts it back into the recycling system.

> Also reprocessing the water is not as trivial as some think (see below)
> although the quality needed for washing is not the same as that needed for
> drinking.
>
> Greg Porter's CSC and T4 aside, I think that the means of
> reprocessing all waste in a starship is probably more complicated than
> people here think. Our best 20th century technology requires at a minimum  
> space and time, and in large quantities of each.  It also requires
> bacteria and other microorganisms to break down the solids, and plants and
> animals to reprocess those solids into edible materials (ok, plants will
> do this alone). I don't think Traveller technology (TL 12) is very far
> from ours, and even with another 50 years (a guess of what will get us
> from TL8-9 to 12) of technological advancement there will still be a need
> for lots of space and time to do this job.

That's for reprocessing "solid" waste. Reprocessing *that* will take
space and time (though not as much space as you might think).

But *because* space is at such a premium on shipboard, it makes more
sense to run the sewage and wastewater into something that "roasts"
them to release the water, which is then cracked into hydrogen &
oxygen. The H2 and O2 are recombined into water which is fit for *any*
use. The solids are packed into blocks, and wrapped to be disposed of
or sold (they'll have been sterilized in the process of releasing the
water, so they make good fertilizer). 

Air gets recirculated. Excess water *has* to be removed, so that
accounts for the water that evaporates and gets exhaled. Excess CO2 has
to be removed too. There are many possible methods. One of the easier
on shipboard might be by liquifiying the air and distilling off the
C02, O2, and nitrogen. Or you can just filter out the CO2 with things
like LiOH canisters. 

The distillation method is nice because it doesn't require extra
consumables, just the ability to liquify gases (which the ship needs
anyway). 

In any case, the main reaction involved in people eating, breathing and
excreting is this:

6 O2 + C6H12O6 -> 6 CO2 + 6 H2O

So if we can crack the CO2 (easily done given the fusion reactor!) you
get back *all* the oxygen, plus we *accumulate* water.

Consider that if we *don't* try to recycle, we *still* want to dry the
sewage and other wastes so they'll be easier to store. So we need to at
*least* distill the recovered water so as to avoid needing a *seperate*
set of tanks for "dirty" water.

And we *still* have to be able to remove excess water from the air. So
we wind up recycling water whether we intended to or not! All it takes
is a *small* amount of space, and a moderate amount of power. Power we
have. 

So water recycling uses *less* space than not recycling it. Extracting
C02 uses space one way or another, and frankly, which do you think uses
more space: filters that have to be stored and changed. or an
extraction system that just removes the CO2 and either stores it (dry
ice or tanks of liquid CO2), dumps it overboard, or "cracks" it to
carbon powder and O2.

Recycling *food* requires a *big* ship or nanotech. Recycling air and
water merely requires power. 

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 19:41:21 +1100
From: "Phillip McGregor" <aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au>
Subject: Problems with Starships

I'm sure everyone already knows of the problems with the designs in
Starships - there are several other problems that I *could* comment on, but
the following really reached out and grabbed me by the throat, so to speak!

Luxury Line (pp. 26-27)

514 High Passage Cabins - 100 of which are stated to be double size = 614
effective HP Cabins, @ 4 tons per cabin and 1 ton dedicated cargo space (it
says this comes as part of the ticket price - check it out!) = 3070 tons.

185 Crew Cabins assuming single occupancy of a Small Stateroom @ 2 tons
each = 370 tons.

699 total crew and passengers, requiring a 5 ton "Rescue Ball" (read the
description on Page #6 - its *required*) for every four = 699/4 = 175
(approx.) = 175 x 5 tons (no allowance for launching mechanisms) = 875 tons

Total so far = 4315 tons

Add 2000 tons for Jump Fuel (J2), 150 tons for the J2 Drive itself; around
90 tons for the M1 Drive, and we get another 2240 tons - and thats ignoring
the Bridge, Sandcasters, Sensors.

Total = 6555 displacement tons ... all in a 500 displacement ton hull!

Obviously the Syleans have discovered the ability to use Pocket Universes a
la Grandfather! Which was TL16+!

I am *not* impressed :-{

And note that the idea of a Luxury class passenger sitting in a notionally
4 (or even 8) displacement ton cabin - is laughable (its 3 x 6 meters, and
that doesn't allow for the 1 ton supposedly allocated to general passenger
spaces rather than cabin space - leaving that out, its 3 x 4.5 meters)!

Phil
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@.curie.dialix.oz.au
Have Game Designer, Will Travel

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

Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 19:25:31 +1100
From: "Phillip McGregor" <aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au>
Subject: Laundry, Freshers and Water

As I commented when these threads arose originally, issue #2 of Dark Star
has some *floorplans* for a TL12 Scout-Courier and for the modular cabins
that it uses ... all done with one of those el cheapo Home Design programs,
with furniture and fittings to scale. So you can see what you actually can
fit into a High Passage Cabin --

* A foldaway bed rather like those in the old Pullman Cabins -- a la North
by Northwest -- but full size), a Foldaway Table (with built in standalone
computer and related gear), an in-ceiling Tridee entertainment projector
unit, a Closet (with room for several hundred liters worth of personal
effects), and a small bathroom/toilet with a full size shower and a
foldaway 'loo and washbasin. All in 3 displacement tons of a 4 displacement
ton module -- the extra ton being for the 1 displacement ton of baggage
that goes with a High Passage ticket, and the 1 "missing" ton being for
generalised general use passenger space (lounges etc.).

Plans for other modular units, like Middle Passage cabins etc. are also
provided. Course, it *does* cost to get DS - but there must be, what,
thirty or forty satisfied purchasers of DS#1 and #2 on the list (and it
would be nice to see comments - good *or* bad - on the stuff in the DS's!)

If you'd like to get a copy, it costs - US$7 for the print-on-paper version
(includes postage) and US$5 for the PDF electronic version (which does have
the advantage of cutting out return "voyage time" for the reply *if* you
can handle a 400k email attachment!). Anyone who wants more details,
message me and enquire!

Phil
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@.curie.dialix.oz.au
Have Game Designer, Will Travel

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

Date: Sat, 28 Dec 1996 06:47:09 -0800
From: "Brian A. Howard" <Bruadh@earthlink.net>
Subject: Traveller on a soap box?

Greetings,

I found this on th TML this morning (Saturday):

> I step down from my soap box.  I break the box into small pieces.  I
> shoulder my sign "Traveller is Back" and look behind me to see who is
> following....
> 
> JD
> Twolf


Was that a penny whistle I head in the background?

Seriously though, I have been a Traveller player for nearly twenty
years. I have seen the game wax and wane, and yes now is the time for
action! I say this picking up a picket sign and marching right behind
you, brother.

Brian A. Howard

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

Date: Sat, 28 Dec 96 16:39 GMT0
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Starliner Sourcebook?

In-Reply-To: <961226104317_1557371288@emout12.mail.aol.com>

<<  A 96 page sourcebook detailing passage on commercial starliners. The book
would cover a variety of topics, including booking flights, accomodations,
life aboard a deep space commercial vessel, security, starports, and so on.
It would aso include writeups/backgrounds of several commercial carrier
copanies and commercial starliner ship designs (including deck plans). >>

Excellent idea, dudes! (Sorry, Bill & Ted are on TV...)

Something like a passenger version of DGP's Starship Operator's Manual would 
be seriously cool.

    ---------=========oooooooooOOOOOOOOooooooooo=========---------
Andrew M J Boulton                  http://www.compulink.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Sat, 28 Dec 96 16:39 GMT0
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Psioinic lovers -- this should be a blues song

In-Reply-To: <32C2D985.3E84@well.com>

<< >But no Zhodani would ever even *think* about cheating on you!

Well, it depends, I suppose.  Although Zhodani are honest to a fault within 
Zhodani society, they might not be when living in the Imperium.  ("When in 
Rome, act as the Romans do.")  For example, in wartime, Zhodani forces make 
use of surprises and ruses just as well as anyone else (maybe better, hence 
the scenario's title "Perfidious Zhodane" in Azhanti High Lightning), and 
these surely require dishonesty.  If they can lie in war, surely they can lie 
in love. >>

Ah, but your average Zho civilian has been taught from birth - with 
re-education when necessary - that any form of dishonesty is a serious mental 
disorder. Military decisions aren't really the same thing (although spies 
have to be specially trained to lie).

    ---------=========oooooooooOOOOOOOOooooooooo=========---------
Andrew M J Boulton                  http://www.compulink.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Sat, 28 Dec 96 16:39 GMT0
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Starliner Sourcebook?

In-Reply-To: <961226104317_1557371288@emout12.mail.aol.com>

<<  A 96 page sourcebook detailing passage on commercial starliners. The book
would cover a variety of topics, including booking flights, accomodations,
life aboard a deep space commercial vessel, security, starports, and so on.
It would aso include writeups/backgrounds of several commercial carrier
copanies and commercial starliner ship designs (including deck plans). >>

Excellent idea, dudes! (Sorry, Bill & Ted are on TV...)

Something like a passenger version of DGP's Starship Operator's Manual would 
be seriously cool.

    ---------=========oooooooooOOOOOOOOooooooooo=========---------
Andrew M J Boulton                  http://www.compulink.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Sat, 28 Dec 96 16:40 GMT0
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Art & misanthropic geeks

In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSD/.3.91.961226195857.26279A-100000@connect.iconnect.net>

<< [cough]  Uh, you did realize that post of mine which you are 
responding to was a joke, right?  The by line was "Lam Poon." :)  I 
didn't expect a serious response. >>

*No-one* expects a serious response!

...er, sorry, wrong sketch...

    ---------=========oooooooooOOOOOOOOooooooooo=========---------
Andrew M J Boulton                  http://www.compulink.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Sat, 28 Dec 96 16:39 GMT0
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Interstellar Psionics, Canonical Use Of

In-Reply-To: <32C2DDA1.293F@well.com>

> 
> >From: David Smart <dsmart@flash.net>
> 
> >I wasn't privy to the discussion but JTAS #5 has an article on "Special
> >Psionic Powers" which includes a power called *Jaunting*. It's described
> >as "The ability to teleport interstellar distances under limited
> 
> Jaunting is the name of the teleportation power that is central to The 
Stars My 
> Destination.

...and the '70s kids SF TV series _The Tomorrow People_.

    ---------=========oooooooooOOOOOOOOooooooooo=========---------
Andrew M J Boulton                  http://www.compulink.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Sat, 28 Dec 96 16:40 GMT0
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: Laundry in the Far Future

In-Reply-To: <96Dec27.000738+0000_gmt.40514-15530+34@mail.u-net.net>

<< Their bi-weekly grunge contests are *legendary* ( in my group anyway !)

They like the TAS (or other establishments) to really earn the cost of board
& lodgings..

Does anybody else have this problem with scouts? >>

Have I mentioned the hydrophobic Vargr ex-Scout ("eek! wet stuff!")? Other 
members of the party would occasionally give her a bath/shower, a task 
usually involving battle dress and heavy artillery (and frequently resulting 
in the total destruction of the hotel).

    ---------=========oooooooooOOOOOOOOooooooooo=========---------
Andrew M J Boulton                  http://www.compulink.co.uk/~fubar/
 "Please allow me to introduce myself, I'm a man of wealth and taste"

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

Date: Sat, 28 Dec 1996 17:44:33 +0100 (MET)
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk>
Subject: Interstellar taxes

Chris Cox writes:
>Hans Rancke wrote:
>>It looks like you've lost track of the previous thread. My original point
>>was that the worlds of Corridor Sector had a big slice of their naval 
>>budget freed in early 1117 when the whole Corridor Fleet went corewards.
>>Suddenly they are not supporting those ships any more.
> 
>Actually I would suspect that the Corridor Sector would still be supporting 
>the fleet even thought it was move out of sector.  IMHO, the taxes collected 
>to support the fleet would just be sent along behind it and would not be 
>available for Corridor to build a new fleet with.

You're making a perfectly natural mistake here, but a mistake nonetheless.
Taxes can't be sent from one planet to another unless you have lots of
cargo ships to carry valuable stuff between them. Bits in a computer or 
pieces of paper isn't wealth unless you can buy something with it. If you
can't eat, burn, or fondle it, it isn't wealth. When Mikesh "pays" umpteen
million credits to the Imperium it dosen't actually send anything more than 
a message saying "We'll do umpteen billion credits worth of work for you for
free". Oh, I've no doubt that come 001-1118 Mikesh is going to owe whatever
planet did the annual maintenance on Fleets 30 and 31 a lot of money, but
what good is that going to do that world until the Rebellion is over (with
Lucan the winner, mind you) and they can buy stuff from Mikesh with the 
credit? In the meantime Mikesh has umpteen million credits worth of sceduled 
maintenance that is not going to be needed after all because the ships aren't 
there any more. If you think the brevet admiral who has been left in charge 
of Imperial forces in Corridor is going to let that capacity go to waste, 
you're sadly mistaken. And even if he is such a chump surely the Mikesh 
government will find good use for the available starship construction 
capacity (Come to think of it, they will HAVE to build more ships unless 
they want a major recession).


      Hans Rancke
University of Copenhagen
     rancke@diku.dk
- ------------
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent
         events based on the individual situation."
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8

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

End of Traveller-digest V1996 #794
**********************************
