Traveller-digest       Tuesday, June 17 1997       Volume 1997 : Number 1432



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Quick Physics Question
Re: PE Starport / Infrastructure costs
Traveller Sector Information and maps
Re: T4.1 Chargen: Increasing Skill points
Psionic Institues Question
Re: [TML] combat question
Re: The Code Duello [was More EA Nits]
Game Design
T4.1 CharGen Feedback
Test - Please Ignore
Re: Learning Mailing Lists
Re: Marc Miller--Please.
Re: Psionic Institutes Errata
Re: T4 Char gen system
Re: Psi Institutes
Re: T4.1 Chargen: Increasing Skill points
Introducing the Planet X Adventure!
Re: Quick Physics Question

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 08:20:17 -0700
From: Mark Bradley <MBradley@gwgate.swrcb.ca.gov>
Subject: Re: Quick Physics Question

In response to the question:

<<<Okay.  Now suppose this cargo hauler flares its engines, say about
5G for about 1.5 seconds.  What will be the effects?  >>>

One effect that has surprisingly not been mentioned are the torsional
effects that would set the station to spinning.  Depending on the moment
arm involved (how far out the cargo hauler is from the center of mass of
the station), the station velocity may be very little affected and the station
may begin to spin.  Until the spin is corrected, the effects could be rather
dramatic for station inhabitants, depending on where they're located.

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 17:54:16 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: PE Starport / Infrastructure costs

>But how playable is a system that makes the bulk of your planets lousy
>investment prospects and a very few of the planets amazing investment
>prospects? How many of your playtesters actually invested in anything
>except the high-population planets in their pocket empires? The example in
>the book details an investment that will take 213 years to get back. How
>many pocket emperors will make such an investment instead of building
>warships?

Agreeing with the quoted poster about the infrastructure weirdness I'd like
to add another questionmark:
When generating Resources for systems you get bonus for Industrial and
minuses for NonIndustrial. IMHO either Ind/NonInd is irrelevant to
resources or you should give NonIndistrial a plus and Industrial a minus.
Industrial planets consume huge amounts of resources and should therefore
generally be lacking in those while NonIndustrials have small populations
who cannot yet have made an impact on the planets resources. Beside realims
the rules as stated makes it even more unlikely to get the population
distributions as seen in Traveller - why would I want to live on a NonInd
world? Could someone responsible for those particular rulings please
explains their reasons (I might have gotten it totally wrong here of
course).
Note that the trade class modifiers are applied to worlds that already are
Ind/NonInd and not to those that eventually will become such types of
worlds.


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 12:18:28 -0400
From: "Scott Spieker" <scspieker@ncweb.com>
Subject: Traveller Sector Information and maps

I have visited a sight that contained all of the sectors ever produced for
traveller, but unfortunately I have lost the ability to think, and I have
also lost the URL.  In addition to the sector information, this site also
included information for every star system within those sectors.

I have also found a map of the sectors (Image in Gif or JPG) format. the
image was 17 sectors across by about 8 sectors high (landscape).  And again
I have lost my marbbles so I did not make a link to the URL.

If any one may be of any help, that help would certainly be appreciated.

Scott
scspieker@ncweb.com

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 18:19:38 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: T4.1 Chargen: Increasing Skill points

>This means that one's skill level has little effect on how "good" you are
>at doing things. For example, which do you think would be a better sensor
>technician; a scout trained in the use of every known sensor technology
>backed with years of experience, or some kid who took 1 course in college?
>Answer: you have no idea. You have to know their Intelligence attributes.
>The variability between different characters' Int is so large is swamps
>any difference in training. I am not saying Int shouldn't count, I am
>saying training should be an important factor and right now it isn't.

My take on this issue (used in my own system) is:
Dex, Int, Kar are used in 2 ways.

1 The unskilled DM depends on the characteristic. The lower the
characteristic the higher the penalty. This cover innate ability etc.

2 The most important use of characteristics is when improving skills. In my
charGen system and experience system characters get eligible for skill
advancement for various reasons (rolling on tables in the former, using the
skill in the latter) and this allows them to roll versus their
characteristics for improvement and this roll gets harder as skill levels
increases.

The advantage with this is that that two equally skilled characters have
equal chances of suceeding at a task but the one with higher characteristic
is more likely to gain a high skill level and is also better at unskilled
tasks. Whenever an NPC is to be used only as a pilot all I need to know
about him is his skill level which simplifies the game a lot. As my skills
have verbal names: Unskilled, inexperienced,fair,good,expert and master
these terms compleately describe the abilities of tha character in that
area. What about damage to characteristics? Simple, whenever a controlling
characteristic goes down by 3 the skill levels of all skills controlled by
that attribute drops 1 lvl.


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 12:03:56 -0500
From: "Joul, Christopher" <JOUC1@Aerial1.com>
Subject: Psionic Institues Question

I bought 'Psionic Institues' yesterday, and resultatly spent most of
last night reading through it.  I must say that this product continues
in the high standard set by EA and PE, and I'm sure I will use it in my
games.

But I have one question ,and since some of the designers are on this
list i'll ask it.

In the description of the psionic institues, What was the intended
purpose for the rating given to the individual psionic disciplines?
There are no rules which relate to the rating (other than level 0
diciples are not taught), and although I'll probably develop my own
rules I'm curious as to what the intended purpose of these levels were?

Thanks in anticipation.

Chris Joul

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jun 97 18:25 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: [TML] combat question

In-Reply-To: <l03102802afb7ff3d82e6@[207.194.197.114]>

Richard,

> My first suggestion is that TL 12 medical treatment should probably be
> advanced enough to put anyone whose pieces are all there back together. My
> second suggestion is that your characters were using the wrong weapon; in
> any close-range combat they should be using waterknives (EA, page 68). I
> had a squad of Imperial Marines attack a pirate crew with them and WHOA
> BOY! There were enough body parts flying around to stock a Monty Python
> sketch!

The Dead Pirate Sketch, presumably...?
______________________________________________________________________
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: Tue, 17 Jun 97 18:25 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
Subject: Re: The Code Duello [was More EA Nits]

In-Reply-To: <v02140b01afb83c0b8825@[192.121.125.201]>

Anders,

> >IMHO, women are officially equal, but are often treated specially. Men
> >are less likely to challenge a woman than another man, for example.
>  
> Why is that actually. Marc seem to imply that in 1100 at least women are
> equal member of Imperial society and as fencing is more a test of dex than
> strength they'd match men. Were the M0 era less equal by itself or is this
> a leftover from the ramshackle empire whose Solomani influences could look
> down on women?

Actually, I feel the Solomani are *more* equal.

> Just curious if there's any canon (that ugly word again) supporting your ideas?

Nothing specific that I can think of, although I get that impression.
______________________________________________________________________
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: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 12:26:32 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Joseph E. Walsh" <ransom@connect.iconnect.net>
Subject: Game Design

Hi,

Regarding all the discussions of various rules that are "broken," from 
task systems to design systems to Infrastructure costs, to everything 
else, I don't quite know how to respond without further inflaming the 
issue.  I've stated the reasoning for the stuff I was involved in, so 
I'll just speak my peace here and leave it at that.

Given infinite resources and infinite time, anyone could come up with the 
perfect role-playing system.  But, like anything else, game design isn't 
done that way.  You have a deadline, you have a certain amount of people 
you can pull in to the project to lend advice and playtesting (the limit 
being the number of people you have time to listen to, of course), and 
you get the work done under those conditions.

We all like to come up with better rules; that's part of role-playing, 
and always has been.  I can't think of a single rule in Traveller that 
has been universally accepted as the Right Thing.  That's good; that's 
how things improve.  Nothing is ever perfect, but we can make it closer 
to perfect if we keep working at them, even after they've been published. 
I'll hate it if RPGs ever become like modern-day programming, where the 
average person no longer has input into the process and is no longer 
able to change things for him- or herself. 

But, I think it's counter-productive to complain to the designers who 
read the mailing list.  By the time the product is released, it's too 
late for the designer to do anything about it.  The decisions have been 
made, the die has been cast, it's over.  The why's and wherefore's are no 
longer important; either the product stands up on its own, or it 
doesn't.  No amount of discussion, here or anywhere else, will change 
that.  The marketplace will determine whether that designer's work is 
good, and, indeed, whether that designer will be allowed to continue 
designing.  Either way, the message will be loud and clear.

To me, the right thing to do if one isn't happy with the rules as 
published is to come up with something better, and share it around.  Back 
before T4, I shared around several rules, including some new Advanced 
careers for CT, some equipment, new experience rules, appearance 
generation rules, and a bunch of other stuff.  I got some good feedback 
on some of those rules, and was able to change them and make them better, 
not only for my own CT campaign, but for others here as well.

Everyone here on TML is very capable, and very willing to kick ideas 
around and find ways to improve them.  I encourage you to find 
improvements for the published rules, and share them around for comment 
and criticism. Someday, those rules will be, if not _the_ Right Thing, 
very close to it.  Then, either publish those rules in JTAS, or offer 
them the next time the product comes up for revision.

That way, everybody wins.  It's just a suggestion, but it might work.


Anyway, I have to get to work; a new project has just come up, and the 
deadline is extremely tight.  I'll be reading TML as usual, but I won't 
be responding until much closer to GenCon, I fear. :(


May your Travelling be happy,

- -Joe
______________________________________________________________________________
Joseph E. Walsh  |  Game Designer for Marc Miller's Traveller
_________________|  Atari 1200XL and Apple IIGS User and Programmer

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 10:20:12 -0700
From: scharlto@ifsna.com
Subject: T4.1 CharGen Feedback

OK,  I've looked over the T4.1 Character Generation rules, created one of
each type of character, and found the following issues.  Overall, these
rules are very nice; they flow smoothly, and have a good sense of internal
consistency.  I really like the education skills rules, and like the
Character Template concept (very useful for NPCs).

1.  Education bonuses for schooling are (per your earlier response) fixed
EDU values depending on the school attended.  To avoid the issues and
inconsistencies of natural 12 EDU characters, perhaps you should consider
using 1d6 for initial EDU generation, which will then be modified by formal
education or life/career experience.  You have all of the elements for this
in the current rules, other than the initial 1d6 value instead of a 2d6
value.

2.  Mustering Out benefits need some clarification.  The money is clear, as
are items like High Passages, but some clarification needs to be given for
Lands (noble), Weapon and Gun (are these the same thing?).  Also, the terms
of Ship Ownership from mustering out need to be addressed; what if multiple
ships are rolled, etc (I assume the old CT/MT rules are still in place, but
they are not stated.

3.  I like the World Determination piece quite a lot.  I am currently going
through the sector data file you had sent to try and create a list of
possible candidate worlds for these entries.  I was hoping to get at least
one per Sector, but some of the entries do not have a counterpart in the
sector data; I guess they will have to be defined in the "Free-Form"
sectors by each individual GM.

4.  In the Skills Available Through Education table, a number of skills
(Camouflage, Pilot, Ship Tacticss, Tactics) are underlined, but no
explanation is given.  These all look military (except for Pilot), so is
this a Military Academy only limitation?

5.  Important dates - very cool!

6.  Low Passage Effects - The column for a roll of 1 should be removed, as
this is a 2d roll with no modifiers.  Why do some entries have a '-' in
them, while others are blank?

7.  Character Cards - Again a nice thing.  In the file I got, the Str, Dex
and End checkboxes were not right-justified, whih I think is the effect you
were looking for.  This may be a word-processor foible, but I thought I
would point it out.

8.  Nobles - Why is this '02' instead of '01'?  All of the careers are
numbered one higher than intuitively expected.

9.  Entertainers - The speciality note is unclear.  Is this Specialty skill
in addition to the normal skill received, or in place of the normal skill
received?

10.  Rogues - The Masquerade rules have a small glitch, in that a Rogue
might be masquerading as somebody else when he fails his Continuance roll.
Would this require the Rogue to serve one additional Term as an Open Rogue?
Also the Cluster/Cascade skill headers were not in Bold in this sheet.

11.  Marines, Navy, Army, Merchants - Does time served in the service
academy count as a Term for mustering out?

12.  Scholars - related to the item above.  The Going Back to School note
says a scholar may substitute attenedance in school for years in the
scholar career.  I assumed this meant the Scholar could attend school and
receive school skills in place of Term skills, but it could also be
interpreted that the scholar's beginning education is counted for Mustering
Out calculations.

So that's it.  As I said, these rules worked out pretty well for me; they
generated fairly balanced characters, and did not cause me a lot of grief
and confusion.  Granted I've played Traveller for quite a while, but I did
not find myself making too many assumptions based on past Traveller
rulesets.

I am very much looking forward to Traveller 4.1

Steve Charlton

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 18:39:27 +0100
From: "Silburn, Luke (Exchange)" <SilburnL@logica.com>
Subject: Test - Please Ignore



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

Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 10:18:27 -0700
From: Scott Ellsworth <Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu>
Subject: Re: Learning Mailing Lists

At 08:25 PM 6/16/97 -0600, David Golden wrote:
[many facts]

>Perhaps I should get my bile levels checked, but this is a minor annoyance
>that for some reason really rubs me wrong.

I can understand that.  I note that the Be developer list appends a blurb
at the end of each message explaining how to unsubscribe.

I also note that the list is plagued with people who insist on copying that
bit of fluff into every reply.

Scott
Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu   http://users.deltanet.com/~fuz
"When a great many people are unable to find work, unemployment 
results" - Calvin Coolidge, (Stanley Walker, City Editor, p. 131 (1934))
"The barbarian is thwarted at the moat." - Scott Adams

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 10:40:15 -0700
From: Chris Griffen <cgriffen@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Marc Miller--Please.

Kenneth Bearden wrote:

>Marc, please fix the task system before T4.1 comes out.  You're
>doing such a fine job on the new book.  Let's make it perfect by
>fixing this glaring flaw in the most basic game mechanic in T4.

Hear! Hear!

This is a key point that keeps me from converting to the new rules and
buying rule-based (rather than background-based) products from IG.

Please, Marc and IG, don't waste this opportunity. At least take a look at
Kenneth's KBv2.0 for an example and then make your own if necessary, but
don't pave the road for an eventual T4.2. Take care of business now and fix
the task system instead of presenting us with another broken one.

I know you're getting darn close to printing time on this, so don't waste a
minute!!!

Best,

Chris Griffen

===================================================
Keeper of the Flame. Traveller player since 1980.

http://www.cris.com/~Cgriffen/traveller/deneb.shtml


- --------------------------------------------------------------
Christopher Griffen                      Phone: (408) 527-7189
Cisco Systems, Inc.                      Fax:   (408) 527-0452
NMBU Technical Publications              cgriffen@cisco.com

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 10:33:42 -0700
From: Scott Ellsworth <Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu>
Subject: Re: Psionic Institutes Errata

At 06:15 AM 6/17/97 -7, Stu wrote:
>Thank you.  Actually, most of the specials were Guy Garnett's.  He 
>originally wrote them as house rules for CT/MT.  I modified some of 
>them, came up with the rules surrounding their use in T4, and 
>added a few more.

I liked this section, and the whole Psi institutes supplement a great deal.
 I especially liked the mail order Psi school.

>> other versions of Traveller, I wonder about just how game- breaking
>> Invisibility is.  It's always been Canon (at least for the Droyne), but
>> it's pretty powerful too. 

I have played it, and by making it a bitch to use and learn, so it cost a
lot, it became fairly usable.  Essentially, it gave the character the
equivalent of a cammo suit from a couple of tech levels higher, and one
that he was never sure worked.

>> As a final note, Psionics is the only aspect of T4 where I prefer TNE's
>> method of execution.  The TNE style of psionics, w/o Psi Points and
>> similar nonsense is, to me, much superior to T4 psionics... 
>
>Psionics Points are what, IMO, prevents Psionics from being a game  
> breaker, especially in a situation (Milieu 0) where ANY PC or NPC 
>potentially has developed psionic powers.  I shudder to think what M0 
>would look like without such a limiter.

It does change the picture, but in a way that I kind of like.  I just
_hate_ point costs for anything, unless it is a rarely used thing that
merits some serious role playing.  For example, I give people with high
tactics or weapons skills a few points of "combat luck", much like the
tactics pool, and they can call in their markers at any time, but the
quantity is both limited and unknown.

For Psionics, I view it as like any other stat - a high strength means that
you have a maximum power level you can work at, but not for long, and a
lesser power level, which you can reliably use, but you will tire fairly
quickly.  A point system works fine here.)  You then have a low level that
is essentially always available.

For example, I can do something like 70 dips on a dip machine at half my
body weight.  I can do perhaps a few dozen at 80% of my body weight, and I
tried doing some at double my weight, and just barely did one.  Note that I
get bored before getting tired at 10%.

Psionics are a lot like that - a grade 12 telekinetic can lift, with
effort, about 200-300 kg.  He is going to be pretty useless after that.
The same telekinetic has a parlor trick of holding up a 5 kilo weight for
hours.

I raise the costs significantly, BTW, if the Psion in question does not
have an appropriate level of skill.

Rule summary: if the target number is enough below the base difficulty,
they do not pay at all, but if they do not have the prerequisite skill, the
difficulty is raised, which raises the target number.  A grade 12 holding a
10 gram weight is virtually never going to pay anything.

I am working out how I want range and power to affect usage of Psi for
decent game balance, but someone with a Psi of 12 is going to be bloody
dangerous regardless of how few skills he or she knows, just because he or
she can go on forever for small stuff - like lie detection for a skilled
and powerful telepath.

I have also abolished the age decay rules - I added it instead to the
standard aging charts, with the same decay as Int.  I also made it possible
to train, but I made it a very uncertain and dangerous task.  I balance it
with the requirement for all of those skills.

So far, it has worked pretty well in play, and my Zhodani Kill Kommando
test group has been reasonably happy, yet not totally superior to the
opposition.  The most game breaking aspect has been teleportation, and I am
experimenting to make it work.

Scott
Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu   http://users.deltanet.com/~fuz
"When a great many people are unable to find work, unemployment 
results" - Calvin Coolidge, (Stanley Walker, City Editor, p. 131 (1934))
"The barbarian is thwarted at the moat." - Scott Adams

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 14:00:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: T4 Char gen system

In a message dated 97-06-17 07:47:29 EDT, you write:

<< 
 I remember a Jack Vance short story where academic standards were so
 different across the interstellar community that this planet's medical
 authorities gave everybody, regardless of academic credentials, a test
 before certifying them to practice medicine. The flip side was that if
 you passed the test, you got the authorisation even if you didn't have
 any credentials at all.
   >>

Which seems sensible (if the test is comprehensive enough) and reflects the
"decoupling" of degrees and Edu.

Marc

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 15:10:00 -0400
From: Bill Prankard <BPRANKARD@theiia.org>
Subject: Re: Psi Institutes

Greetings,

Well I went out and got Psi Institutes this weekend, and I am quite 
impressed!  You Core guys are making quality stuff!

I did take a look at Anomalies, looks like a cool colection of adventures, 
will buy that next time.

I was realy tempted to get LWH, but I'm still a player in that one with 
Allen Shock.  So I curbed my desire.

Anyway I basicaly skimmed over Psi institutes, then did a detailed reading 
of certain sections, particualry the psi rules for T4 and the special 
powers.  I had a few questions.

I see the question of Lighning Calc has been covered, so I won't go there.

It seems to be that if you can find/afford to train at a  five star psi 
institute(QI=5), your difficulty level for any basic task is automatic?  Now 
I see the need for Psi points (personaly I always thought TNE's psi rules 
made them a bit too powerful anyway <G>)

Another question, there doesnt seem to be any description of what exactly 
the levels for the different psi departments are for.  Is the number the 
highest skill level one can learn in that discipline?

Overall the book is rich in detail and explanations of psionics in society. 
 Sociopolitical Ramifactions(didn't think I could spell that did you?<G>) 
and History. Types of institutes ranging from Acreditied Scientific 
Universities, Secret Government Agencies(FNORD!) and Secret Mystic 
Societies(also FNORD!).

Still my favorite psi institute is the "crazy old man in the cave" on that 
TL-1 "Barren" rock ball. :)

KUDOS to you all, fine work on this book.

Commander X
Giving you more insanity
with Cthulhu Chip Cookies
Insanely Delcious!

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 14:18:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: CardSharks@aol.com
Subject: Re: T4.1 Chargen: Increasing Skill points

In a message dated 97-06-17 13:18:47 EDT, you write:

<< 
 <<<This means that one's skill level has little effect on how "good" you are
at doing things. For example, which do you think would be a better sensor
technician; a scout trained in the use of every known sensor technology
backed with years of experience, or some kid who took 1 course in college?
Answer: you have no idea. You have to know their Intelligence attributes. The
variability between different characters' Int is so large is swamps any
difference in training. I am not saying Int shouldn't count, I am saying
training should be an important factor and right now it isn't.>>>
 
 Can you say *Wesley Crusher*.  Now there was a popular character, surely an
inspiration to all Traveller Players.
 
 Now, was Wesley*s teacher*s name spelled with one *L* or two?
 
 >>

Which brings to mind a concept we are toying with in T41: Space cadets...
kids who are maybe 13 to 18 years old, with their homeworld skills, a full
set of characteristics (well, maybe Edu will be generated as 2D minus 5 at
age 13), and they gain +1 every year until 18. Aside from their homeworld
skills, they have access to the whole range of default skills (ie:

x	Acting	Int, Edu  
x	Art	Dex, Int
x	Athletics	Dex, End
x	Bow Combat	Dex
x	Brawling	Dex, Str
x	Bribery	Int, Soc
x	Broker	Edu
x	Camouflage	Int, Str
x	Carousing	Soc, End
x	Computer	Edu, Int
x	Craftsman	Dex, End
x	Dance	Dex, Soc
x	Diplomacy	Soc
x	Disguise	Int
x	Environment Cbt	Dex, Int
x	Equestrian	Dex, Soc
x	Fast Talk	Int, Edu
x	Fighting	Cascade
x	First Aid	Int, Edu
x	Forgery	Dex, Int
x	Gambling	Int, Dex
x	Grav Craft	Dex
x	Ground Craft	Dex, Int
x	Gun Combat	Cascade
x	Heavy Weapons	Dex, Str
x	Instruction	Int, Edu
x	Interrogation	Int, End
x	Intimidation	Str, End
x	Intrusion	Dex, Int
x	Investigation	Int, Edu
x	Knife	Dex
x	Melee	Str, End
x	Music	Dex,Edu
x	Navigation	Edu, Int
x	Perception	Int
x	Philosophy	Int, Edu
x	Pistol	Dex
x	Psychology	Int, Edu
x	Recon	Dex, End
x	Research	Edu, Int
x	Rifle	Dex
x	Shotgun	Dex
x	Stealth 	Dex
x	Streetwise	Int, End
x	Submachinegun	Dex
x	Survival	Int, Str
x	Sword	Dex, Str
x	Throwing	Dex, Str
x	Trader	Int, Edu
x	Vac Suit	Dex
x	Watercraft	Dex, Int
x	Writing	Int, Edu

So, does Int also start as 2D-5 at age 13 and increase +1 every year until
18? Imagine a kid who is Int 3 who gradually gets smarter as he gets closer
to adulthood (I think I've meet some of them).

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 15:25:00 -0400
From: Bill Prankard <BPRANKARD@theiia.org>
Subject: Introducing the Planet X Adventure!

Well folks, I can hold it back no longer.
I am DESPARATELY in need of some Traveller Gaming
all these books and nobody wants to play at home :(

Well I'm gonna do something about it!


<MARKETING SCHPIEL MODE ON>

Introducing the Planet X Adventure!
An IRC game for 4-6 players.
Possible time: Mondays 8pm EDT - 12pm EDT

Journey to Planet X, Home of X-TEK Industries and one of the most bustling 
starports this side of the Sylean Main!

A 5million displacement ton Space Station, alone in Deep Space.  Home to 1 
million beings,  a multi trillion credit starship production industry, and a 
multi billon credit entertainment and trade industry.

But don't think for a moment that every day is business as usual.  Being the 
only official deep space station in the Imperium, it can harbor thieves, 
cutthoats, and especialy corporate espionage agents and terrorists.  It can 
be a dangerous place, but the rewards are grand.

Mystery, Adventure, Political Intreage, and Realy Wierd Stuff!

Regester to play The Planet X Adventure, a Commander X production, by 
e-mailing the Commander:

cmdrx@magicnet.net <home, prefered>
bprankard@theiia.org <office>

Seats are limmited, JOIN TODAY!
<MARKETING SCHPIEL MODE OFF>

well thats it, I'm going to run an adventure based on Planet X, X-TEK, 
CmdrX, etc...
been meaning to do it now I have.  Hope to hear from the prospective players 
soon.

Commander X

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

Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 14:10:29 -0600
From: Jeff Schmidt <jschmidt@netco.com>
Subject: Re: Quick Physics Question

>In response to the question:
>
><<<Okay.  Now suppose this cargo hauler flares its engines, say about
>5G for about 1.5 seconds.  What will be the effects?  >>>
>
>One effect that has surprisingly not been mentioned are the torsional
>effects that would set the station to spinning.  Depending on the moment
>arm involved (how far out the cargo hauler is from the center of mass of
>the station), the station velocity may be very little affected and the station
>may begin to spin.  Until the spin is corrected, the effects could be rather
>dramatic for station inhabitants, depending on where they're located.

Depends on the station configuration.  Given a station of sufficient TL
that has it's own artificial gravity, it is a good assumption that they
have thrusters of some sort to counteract any reasonable force a docking
craft might apply.  If the station spins to generate gravity, the easiest
thing to do is have ships dock as close to the hub as possible to reduce
the change in mass distribution and resultant angular velocity change.
Either way the station is sure to have thrusters to compensate with new
forces and hold stable orbits.  Ideally, a station would be very large in
comparison to any docking craft.  Small stations might require that huge
ships use smaller ship's boats for docking.

- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff Schmidt                         | NetCo Communications Corporation
software engineer, Mac development   | 333 N. Washington Ave. Ste. 102
(612) 519-0878                       | Minneapolis MN 55401, USA
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
  PGP Fingerprint: 375E D56C 57F1 11F2 8ABD  0B78 8BFF A7F6 01E7 4468

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1432
***********************************
