Traveller-digest      Thursday, June 19 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1441



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Task System 4.1...
Re: Task Vote Quorum Call So Far
T4.1 Task System Proposal
Re: Skills and Attributes - A CT Hang up?
Re: A Plea to Marc Miller
Task system...
Re: Costa Rica y Traveller en Espanol
[none]
Task system fix. A unified front is necessary!
Anomalies stuff
Skill System and Stuff
DS#3?
Ops..
Task system Vote
Spanish version of CT
Re: A Plea to Marc Miller
Re: Anomolies stuff...

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 07:26:42 -0500
From: "Andrew Akins" <igor@netins.net>
Subject: Task System 4.1...

Let me add my vote for a new/revised task system...

My only complaint: I stand by the argument that a Dex 7 Medical-4 doctor
should beat a Dex 11 Medical-1 EMT...the balance needs to be shifted a bit
towards making skills more important.

The 1/2 die doesn't bug me...although it wouldn't bug me if it went away,
too...

+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Andrew Akins                                                       |
| Home: igor@netins.net - http://www.netins.net/showcase/theakins/   |
| Work: andya@cms-gt.com - http://www.cms-gt.com/                    |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| May your villages remain ignorant of tax collectors, and may your  |
| sons be many and ugly and strong and willing workers, and may your |
| daughters be few and beautiful and excellent providers of love     |
| gifts from eminent families that live very far away, and may your  |
| lives be blessed by the beauty that has touched mine.              |
|                    - Number Ten Ox, "Bridge of Birds"              |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Fri, 20 Jun 1997 00:32:27 +1200
From: Andrew Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Task Vote Quorum Call So Far

At 05:37 AM 6/19/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 00:17:51 -0500
>From: Sam Thomas <sinbad@dfw.net>
>Subject: Task Vote Quorum Call So Far

Mark me down as an against change. If you
rerate skills as being more important than attributes
you have to change the generation system to
make aquiring skills exponential. 2300 springs
to mind as a good example.

  Andrew etc.
    a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz

****************************************************************************
The longest distance between two points is with children.
****************************************************************************

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 08:41:40 -0400
From: Andy Brick <exeus@compuserve.com>
Subject: T4.1 Task System Proposal

Hi all,

I think that for T4.1 we should scrap the multiple dice system and go bac=
k
to the CT/MT 2D
task system. I have never seen why it was abandoned in the first place ; =
It
works, it's simple
and it does not have any of the annoying problems of either T4 ( half dic=
e
) or KBv2.0 ( too
many dice ). =


I posted my humble version of an updated MT task system for T4 some weeks=

back. I have
playtested it without a hitch ( to no great surprise - after all, it had
worked for MT for years ).

Would anyone like to tell me exactly why they find the new T4-derived
systems better ? Or,
to put it another way, can anyone tell me why they think the MT task syst=
em
is unworkable and
a new task system is necessary ? =


It seems to me that if ain't broke, you don't fix it. MT may have had its=

flaws, but the task system
_DID_ work. So let's not abandon it - and let's not waste bandwidth
discussing something we've
already got right first time.

Andy Brick
exeus@compuserve.com

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 08:40:18 -0400
From: Roderick Darroch Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Re: Skills and Attributes - A CT Hang up?

Andy Lilly wrote:

[snip]
>QUESTION:
>
>Can I ask how many players any of you have inflicted the original, or
>proposed T4.1 task systems upon?


	Just thought I'd jump in here.  I'm a newbie Traveller GM, coming
to the game after getting rather burned out over White Wolf's tragically
hip undead.  I inflicted the T4 system on 4.5 players (player 5 developed a
bad case of grad schoolitis halfway through) over my first Trav campaign
(which I posted to the list under the title: Traveller: a Long Day's
Journey...).

	4 sessions were sufficient to convince me that the stock T4 system
sucked great big rocks.  I might be able to dig up and repost the game
transcripts, especially the one from the last session, in order to show you
the sequence of events that led me to this conclusion.  And my players
_loathed_ the 1/2 die.



[snip]
>RESULT:
>
>For new players, the system is exceptionally easy to learn and understand.
>They have little or no problem with D3s after you've taken then through a
>few example tasks, and they understand the stat+skill target number and the
>principle that the more dice they have to roll, the harder the task.
>


	Little or no problem with D3's?  You should meet my guys :).  And
the problem I have with T4 is that the tasks aren't that difficult: a
fairly talented character has a 43% chance of success on an Impossible
roll.  That, IMHO, is inacceptably mediocre design, and a particularly
egregious example of what was wrong with original management IG products.

	And everything you write above applies to KB 2.0, which is what I'm
using currently.  Furthermore, unless Marc comes up with something better,
I'm going to continue using it.  For my group, the T4 task system is as
dead as the last brontosaur.  Nailed to its perch, pining for the fjords,
resting.


>DISCUSSION:
>
>I feel that a lot of the arguments about stats biasing tasks too much is
>simply because the CT and MT task systems (which everyone with a long
>standing in Traveller seems to hark back to) placed the greatest emphasis on
>skills - i.e. it's a system that we're all familiar with.


	I never played CT, and have had only minimal exposure (3 sessions)
to the MT system.  I personally think that WWGS's StoryTeller is a superior
system to any Traveller system I've seen to date, but I use KB v.2.0
because it sorta feels Travellerish...

[snip]
>
>QUESTION:
>
>So, why is the current task system considered inadequate?
>

	Unrealistic balancing of stat and skill (in my subjective opinion).
I'm probably approximately INT 9 or A, EDU probably B or C, LAW 3 (or so; 4
years of Law School anyhow).  I don't care how smart or educated you are,
without any law skill you aren't going to be able to tell someone whether a
given contract is a valid emphyteutic lease under Quebec law or not as
easily or quickly as I can.

	Yet T4 allows this to happen.  Strike 1.

	It goes far too easy on players and NPC's.  Impossible rolls are no
such thing.  In fact, they're far too easy.  Again, I can repost a series
of event outcomes from my last campaign to demonstrate what sort of
ridiculous effect this can have upon a game.

	So high attributed characters (in fact most characters) can get
away with pulling off unbelievably difficult tasks far too frequently.
Strike 2.

	The D3: my players hate it.  I only keep one around for use for
damage rolls for some old-FF&S designed weapons that do 2.5 or 11.5 dice of
damage respectively.  Strike 3.

[snip]

>
>QUESTION:
>
>How does T4 compare with other systems?
>

	Out of the 4 task systems I've roleplayed with, I'd rank it third.
Here's the ranking:

1) WWGS's StoryTeller system.
2) KB v2.0
3) T4
4) Basic Set D&D circa 1980 or so.

	And there's a big gap between 2 and 3.


[snip]
>CONCLUSIONS:
>
>* Plenty of people, particularly new players, can use the current system
>once it's been explained to them (the only qualifier is that I've not stuck
>strictly to the T4 difficulty levels - I use whatever number of D6 and D3 I
>think appropriate to reflect the difficulty of a task).


	So basically, you've already homebrewed a patch for one of its most
glaring inadequacies...  And, as I've pointed out, KB 2 is just as easy as
the T4 system to pick up.  My guys have been using it just fine for several
sessions now, without _any_ system-related complaints.  This was not the
case for T4.


[snip]
>SUMMARY:
>
>After all, unless someone can prove that T4 is bad for new players (which
>I've not found to be the case) then why are we trying to change it? Why
>change T4.1 so much from T4 that anyone who bought the T4 book will *really*
>be pissed off to find that all subsequent products are totally incompatible
>- - remember, we (CORE) were asked to use T4.1-ish task rules for PE, TLWH,
>Gateway, etc. Given the investment already put into T4.1, is it really
>absolutely *critical* to change it?


	I'd say yes.  I think that T4 may not neccessarily be bad for new
players, but it does make for bad games.  And I don't think that anyone out
there is going to be using T4 for very long.  It's sadly, woefully
inadequate, and people are going to start homebrewing patches for it, even
if they don't get totally turned off Traveller because of it.

	 And, here's the kicker, using KB 2 instead of the T4 system causes
_zero_ compatibility problems; all it changes are the number of dice rolled
for the different difficulty levels.  So nobody gets burned...


	But anyhow, those are just my opinions...

R.D. Elliott <rellio@po-box.mcgill.ca>

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 08:50:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Joseph M. Saul" <jmsaul@us.itd.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: A Plea to Marc Miller

Marc -- first, let me thank you for reading and responding to player comments
on this list.

I'd like to add my vote for Kenneth's system, or at least *some* system that
weights skills more heavily than stats.  I'm not particularly thrilled with
half-dice, either, but the heavy stat weighting is by far the worse of the
current T4 system's sins.

Joe Saul
jmsaul@umich.edu

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 07:45:48 -0500
From: "Andrew Akins" <igor@netins.net>
Subject: Task system...

Okay, here's a perfect of example of why you should read all your mail from
a list before posting back to the list...

As I was reading the posts of others, someone (Dave Golden, I believe...I
apologize if I'm wrong) mentioned the MegaTraveller task system...I thought
for a moment...ran and grabbed my MT referee's manual and looked it up...

...and remembered how much fun we had when we played MT. I really liked
this task system. The core rules fit on one page - extended rules took only
four. The concept of safe/hazardous/fateful/uncertain was quite cool...only
two six-siders...characteristics and skills had roughly equal weight, since
characteristics were divided by 5...

And I know it's nit-picky (I admit it)...but psychologically I feel better
when I roll high - there have been a few times in T4 where a would roll a
bunch of fives or sixes and go "Alright, I mean...shucks..."

I would like to "alter" my vote - I belive T4 needs a new task system, but
I look fondly upon MTs system and would love to see a return to something
like it...

...sorry for the repost :)

+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Andrew Akins                                                       |
| Home: igor@netins.net - http://www.netins.net/showcase/theakins/   |
| Work: andya@cms-gt.com - http://www.cms-gt.com/                    |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| May your villages remain ignorant of tax collectors, and may your  |
| sons be many and ugly and strong and willing workers, and may your |
| daughters be few and beautiful and excellent providers of love     |
| gifts from eminent families that live very far away, and may your  |
| lives be blessed by the beauty that has touched mine.              |
|                    - Number Ten Ox, "Bridge of Birds"              |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 08:59:51 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Joseph M. Saul" <jmsaul@us.itd.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: Costa Rica y Traveller en Espanol

Marc Miller wrote:

>Meanwhile, did everyone know there is a Spanish version (hardcover) of
>Classic Traveller?

Yes.  And I want one!  Any idea where I could lay my hands on a copy?

Joe Saul
jmsaul@umich.edu

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 09:59:00 -0400
From: Bill Prankard <BPRANKARD@theiia.org>
Subject: [none]

>Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 20:58:01 -0600
>From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
>Subject: Re: A Plea to Marc Miller

>        I think part of the reason is we kind of burned out on "task wars" 
a while
>back, and people just don't want to get involved in this But I do think
>there is a significant sentiment that _skills_ should still outweight
>_statistics_ regardless of how. No, not everybody wants to see KBv2 instead
>of the current system. But there are many people still using it; others
>still using MegaTraveller's (my personal favorite for its simplicity);
>still others using homebrewed kludges to get that effect.

"A small black disc shaped starship comes out of Black Globe..."
<LURK MODE OFF>

>        Perhaps we should ask a simple yes/no question of the list: Do you believe
>skills should count more than attributes? I think the answer will come down
>heavily on the "YES" side.
>
>        My personal vote is YES, with preferences for a simple, 2D
>MegaTraveller-style system.

This is what I have changed over to, IMNSHO it was, and is the best task 
system in any incarnation.

>- -- Dave Golden                  http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj --
>   goldendj@pcisys.net                       finger for PGP key
>    *** USE OF THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR SOLICITATION PROHIBITED ***

Yes, I must agree here as well.  I have given the T4 task system a chance, 
but people at both my home game and at a convention game I ran say that 
stats are too heavily weighted against skills and experience.  Some ol' 
timer even quoted the "Age, Experience and Treachery over Youth and 
Skill(read: education/book learnin')" adage :-)

My vote is for YES to skill over attributes, and more importantly a return 
to the old MT system or something akin to it.

"The small black disc shaped starship re-engages its Black Globe"
<LURK MODE ON>

Commander X

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 15:04:03 MET
From: "Volker A. Greimann" <GREI5001@uni-trier.de>
Subject: Task system fix. A unified front is necessary!

I think that the best way for us to convince MM to fix the Task 
system is to speak with a unified voice. At the moment, everybody is 
pushing his pet system(myself not excluded, i admit), but that way, 
the issue gets diluted. I propose that we go the democratic way:

1) One week of discussion on the merits of the different systems.

2) After that, the issue is put to a vote:
the Task system that wins is the TML-official system, officially 
the system we ALL support. After the vote, no more bitching about 
anygiven system being better. 

3) We then present the result of the discussion to Marc as our 
choice. That way Marc will not have to choose between the 5-8 systems 
currently proposed by the list, but be faced with a unified front of 
supporters of one system. Everybody who voted will be assumed to 
accept the choice of the majority and counted for support 
furthermore. 

What do you guys think? I feel that this is the best way to convince 
Marc.


Ad Astra,
V.A.G.       
- ------  Volker A. Greimann, also known as: Grei5001@uni-trier.de  ----
- -- Am Weidengraben 86,C6 - 54296 Trier - Germany - T+F: +49651148846 -
- ------- check out: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Vault/4061 --------
- ---- Student of Law, Gamer, Illuminatus Primus, Slayer of Windows95 --

- -----  "Don't hold me up: I am just barely ahead of insanity!!!" -----

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 10:15:49 +0000
From: "Janet and Ron Dawson" <rdawson@cgc.ns.ca>
Subject: Anomalies stuff

On 18 Jun 97 at 23:06,: "vanya" <vanya@partyline.net>
> > From: NUELOW@aol.com
> > And as far as canon goes, where is it we get the fact
> > that Grandfather successfully killed all his
> > offspring? Who is it that's giving us these reliable
> > facts about the Ancients? (That's not an excuse for my
> overlooking
> > anything in research... is just a comment on how I
> > view some of the
> "facts"
> > I've been finding in "Traveller" material.
> 
> Actually, Yaskodray killing off all his young'uns is a
> 'meta-fact' of Traveller.  This is information that is
> completely true, given through the game to the referee
> (usually in 'Referee's sections' of adventures), and not
> through any 'library data' entries.  We know of
> Yaskodray's pocket universe through this data, not
> through TNS or lib data entries.

But who is to say that the adventure cannot be reinterpreted?  I tend 
to share Steve's view on the "facts" of Traveller.  I like a more 
flexible take on facts that allows room for ambiguity and differing 
inerpretations.  The idea of the secret of the ancients as being 
revealed and carved in stone was a big let-down for me, and one of 
the reasons why I preferred TNE to MegaTraveller.  At least they 
reintroduced the unkonwn and ambiguity into the known universe.  

- - Ron

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 23:26:21 -0700
From: Ian or Katts <ianw@zed.com.au>
Subject: Skill System and Stuff

The skill system in T4.1 should reflect skills more and stats less.

Something on the lines of skills+(stat/3)+2d6 vs task number is
IMO the way to go.

Also, I agree with the poster as to the FFS2/Traveller Technical
Architecture system having had inadequate playtesting. For
example, a TL12 Light Vehicular Meson Gun (call it, oh, 3m barrel
length) plus a TL12 Indirect Fire Direction Center gives you
a Meson Gun burst anywhere the infantry call it in, with a zero
second delay time, at a 40 kilometer range ... bye bye Mr Grav
Tank. OK, the rate of fire is fairly slow, but given the
complete lack of counterfire possibilities, who cares ?

Ian Whitchurch

PS I know, I know, battlefield meson guns will be defined, along
with particle aqccelerators, nuke det lasers and most everything
fun at all as "nuclear weapons" within the meaning of the 
Imperial Rules of War and thus limited by the force of law and
thus anything the Imperial Navy can bring to bear. But it still
bugs me that it can be done within the context of a "bad war".

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 23:46:15 +0000
From: aspqrz@curie.dialix.com.au
Subject: DS#3?

> From:          owner-traveller-digest@MPGN.COM (Traveller-digest)
> To:            traveller-digest@Phaser.ShowCase.MPGN.COM
> Subject:       Traveller-digest V1997 #1436

> Date: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 11:25:46 +0100
> From: Timothy.Collinson@solent.ac.uk
> Subject: Re: Dark Star and phil the stowaway
> 
> >around, everyone who's ordered DS has received it -- even if the
> >money seems to have gone adrift in the mail.
> I can vouch for A) it's arrival and B) it's interest.

Aw, shucks!

> But when's DS3 coming out?  Please...?

Well, there's a story in that, it was *originally* planned for March 
97 -- but, like IG's Timetable, it's been pretty much behind 
schedule!

Actually, the poor production values of the early IG stuff *really* 
depressed me and I was about to give the whole idea up as it seemed 
(way back then) that IG was probably going to go belly up *soon*.

However, the improvements with CSC, Emperor's Arsenal and (despite 
some major logical flaws) PE, I've decided that I will probably go 
back to it "real soon now".

Unfortunately, in the meantime I've got a "job" to write a Worldbook 
for Highlander Design's "Chivalry & Sorcery III" and, though I 
completed the first draft what, two, maybe three months ago, I 
haven't heard anything more from them (*they* have an even *bigger* 
problem than IG with being behind schedule!!!), so I'm sort of caught 
up waiting for them to send me a list of things that have to be 
changed *urgently*, like, *right now* -- and I don't want to get 
caught halfway doing DS#3.

Then there's another project I'm working on, "Armageddon" -- a 
complete worldbook/rule system that is based on a complete worldbook 
project that I submitted to SJ Games for GURPS a couple of years 
ago, and which they only recently got around to rejecting. So, I've 
got the rulebook (all 88 pages or so at this stage) written and 
almost ready to go, but the Worldbook (200 pages in the GURPS 
version, probably longer in the new version because so much can no 
longer be "assumed" and has to be included) needs to be reformatted 
and some new material added. This will be (hopefully) be available 
"real soon now" (as they say in the gaming industry!) as an Acrobat 
PDF electronic version, possibly sold over the 'Net, possibly by 
mail.

Anyway, that's sort of taking up the rest of my time at the moment. 
But I *do* intend to get back to DS when I have the time -- hopefully 
when FF&S2 and NAH and some other products come out and allow some 
more advanced options for the game. Unless, of course, the new Deluxe 
Hardcover version is a complete disaster :-{

Phil
 
Phillip McGregor | aspqrz@curie.dialix.oz.au
Have Designer, Will Travel
(Co-Designer of Space Opera, Designer Rigger Black Book)

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 16:13:40 +0200
From: Carlos Alos-Ferrer <alos@merlin.fae.ua.es>
Subject: Ops..

Ops... I just wrote there were 400 Draysaskin. They were 400+20=420. Sorry.
Carlos.

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 16:20:07 +0200
From: Carlos Alos-Ferrer <alos@merlin.fae.ua.es>
Subject: Task system Vote

        I'm with the main observation around: Skills have to be at least
THREE times more valuable than attributes. I do not like KBV2.0 for romantic
reasons (I want 2D6), although it seems good. T4.1 system would be OK if I
valued Skills=Attributes. Frankly, I am keeping the MT Task System or using
the 3-task system which is exactly the same but dividing attributes by 3
(not 5) and putting difficulty levels 3+,6+,9+,12+,15+,18+ (multiples of three).
        Carlos

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 16:25:48 +0200
From: Carlos Alos-Ferrer <alos@merlin.fae.ua.es>
Subject: Spanish version of CT

>From: CardSharks@aol.com

>Meanwhile, did everyone know there is a Spanish version (hardcover) of
>Classic Traveller?

        Hardcover, and softcover, and B4: Mercenary, and Adv.1: Kinunir, and
Sup.1:1001 characters, but that's all. The company went out of business many
years ago. Then, we spaniards bought MT ;-)
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carlos Alos-Ferrer                          E-mail: Alos@merlin.fae.ua.es
Dpt. Fundamentos del Analisis Economico     Phn: (34) 6 5903400, Ext. 3226
Universidad de Alicante                     Fax: (34) 6 5903685
03071-Alicante (Spain)                      "Thursuth gha kvaekh?"
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 10:06:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ethan Henry <ehenry@mag1.magmacom.com>
Subject: Re: A Plea to Marc Miller

> From: CardSharks@aol.com
> Subject: Re: A Plea to Marc Miller
> 
> I understand you have strong feelings about the task system. But out of
> perhaps 300 people on this list, no one is championing the cause except you.
> Assume half don't care about tasks anyway. Assume many others don't care
> enough to comment. Are there 50 people on this list who will echo your
> concerns and, having seen my post of the task system and your post of the
> task system, WANT T41 to reflect yours?

It's been said before, but I'll say it again...

I din't think Ken necessarily wants KB2.x to be adopted wholesale,
but he has done a pretty thorough analysis of the existing T4 task
system. He's found what he feels are problems and I agree with him.
I think you have to seriously look at coming up with a definition of
"what does one skill level represent" and making that consistent
with the balance between attributes and skills for tasks.
Also, the Spectacular Success/Failure odds are clearly broken.

While it's true that most players don't give a whit about how or why
the game was designed, I think designers should.

> Your plea needs to have some backing.

While Ken may seem to ramble on endlessly while producing gigantic
task outcome tables that are mostly sopoforic, he has got a point.
T4.1's task system needs to be balanced and tuned.

Ethan

- -- 
ehenry@magma.ca                                  http://www.magma.ca/~ehenry

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

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 16:12:04 +0200
From: Carlos Alos-Ferrer <alos@merlin.fae.ua.es>
Subject: Re: Anomolies stuff...

>Carlos Alos-Ferrer wrote:
>
>>> TWO adventures in Anomalies use TL 14-15 from the RoM. The two are
>from Steve Miller. In another adventure of Steve Miller, he confuses the
>Droyne with the Draysaskin, seeming to imply that there are no Droyne in the
>universe... moreover, he postulates a surviving Draysaskin, but ***canon***
>(flame retardant suit on) state that Grandfather killed them all (he kept
>careful count). The confusion makes me think he is new to Traveller...<<

        Steve Miller replied:

>Hmm... I've run a TNE campaign, I've read all the T4 material published up to
>the point I started work on the "Anomolies" adventures--"Emperor's Arsenal"
>and the "Game Master's Screen" came out as I was wrapping up and moving on to
>other things--and I've read the "MegaTraveller" boxed set and "Referee's
>Guide" (I think that's what it was called... I don't presently have access to
>any of my "Traveller" material, as it's in storage back in WI.) While reading
>that material, I don't recall seeing references to "Drayaskin." Where did I
>miss that reference? All I recall are Droyne and Chirpers.

        Simplificating things, Grandfather was a mutant Droyne, with
superintelligence and psionic superpowers. He created 20 children, and each
of them created 20 children. That makes 400 children and grandchildren.
These are called "Draysaskin", and had psionic superpowers and
superintelligence. The droyne were just the original race (without
superpowers and without superintelligence). I recommend reading carefully
the following material that you own: Imperial Encyclopedia (Referee's
section), MT Referee's Companion (not guide)... these things were firmly
established in Traveller, IMHO. Probably, you should seek some CT materials
as Alien Module n: Droyne, which I do not own, but that I think is the most
extensive reference on the Ancients.

>BTW, I'm not sure how I imply there are no Droyne in the universe. Could you
>enlighten me w/o touching off a flame-war? 

        I said "seemed to imply". It is because you speak of the "effects
that releasing a Droyne in the Universe will have", or something similar.
Well, there are thousands of millions of Droyne in the universe...
everything would have been OK have you used a term like "Ancient".

>And as far as canon goes, where is it we get the fact that Grandfather
>successfully killed all his offspring? Who is it that's giving us these
>reliable facts about the Ancients? (That's not an excuse for my overlooking
>anything in research... is just a comment on how I view some of the "facts"
>I've been finding in "Traveller" material.

        Yes, you've got a point, although about who is it who is giving us
these reliable facts about the Ancients, I think it has been stated as a
designer note, that is, not in a supposed document from inside the game, but
rather in explanatory notes from an outside point of view. The bit "he kept
careful count" is in MT, that's for sure, and in some other materials. I'll
check with my collection. IMHO, the problem is that changes to details
related to grandfather and the Draysaskin are prone to have spectacular
effects on the Traveller universe... I mean, releasing a forgotten
Draysaskin in the Universe is something that some people has already done in
their home universes, but it results immediately in an alternate universe
which rapidly evolves into something quite different from the ***canonic***
one. Many have thought about that just for fun, but putting it into an
adventure will *probably* (again, IMHO) spoil any campaign.
        Btw, I like your bit about that Draysaskin probably wandering out to
explore the universe when released...

>>> Obviously, Steve Miller was just given EA and CSC, and he based his
>adevntures on that material, which leads to the errors. I cannot blame him,
>but... <<

>Well, I *did* check other core material, from the discontinued editions. I
>didn't see anything that limited the entire Ramschackle Empire to TL12. It
>seems to me that there would have been widely varying tech levels in the
>Second Imperium... which would further lend reason to historians labeling it
>the "Ramshackle Empire."

        This has been a major thread in this list some time ago. Check MT
Referee's Companion, right after the TL table. It states the dates in which
each empire reached the TLs. Maximum stated TL for the RoM is 12. I
**could** agree with your version, but, in the recent IG material, it seems
that EVERY RoM facility that is discovered is at TL 14-15, and that's a
problem. Some, very scarce, high tech facilities, OK. Every single one, no way.

>I have say this, though... I'm glad I didn't introduce the non-interstellar
>human spin-off race I was *originally* going to put in "The Ancients"
>adventure. What a mess that would have been... :)

        That would probably have been OK. As a rule of thumb, and strictly
IMHO, I think that Ancients have to be used very, very, VERY, carefully,
because they are the origin of the whole Traveller universe, so the whole
game background is very sensitive to what is said about them.

        Anyway, I just wanted to point out that there were some recurring
things that can reasonably be considered as errors, being poublished by IG.
The TL14/15 for the RoM is definitely one of those.

        Best,

        Carlos
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carlos Alos-Ferrer                          E-mail: Alos@merlin.fae.ua.es
Dpt. Fundamentos del Analisis Economico     Phn: (34) 6 5903400, Ext. 3226
Universidad de Alicante                     Fax: (34) 6 5903685
03071-Alicante (Spain)                      "Thursuth gha kvaekh?"
- --------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1441
***********************************
