Traveller-digest       Monday, June 23 1997       Volume 1997 : Number 1462



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: T4.1 tasks
Re: Birthdays
Re: Task System: Four Simple Proposals
Re: T4.1 Char Gen Checklist
Re: T4 Task Rationale
Re: (LONG!) Re: Task System Revision/Choices
Re: T4 Task Rationale
Re: Deckplans
A few task musings
Re: Meta-facts?
Re: Hardware, firmware, software
Re: Anomalies stuff
PE PBEM
Re: Skills, task systems and all that
Re: Metator Update
Re: Imperial recruitment practices
Re: Task System: Compromise Solution
Re: T4 Equipment Sheet
RE:Skills and Attributes - A CT Hang up?
Re: Stuff..
Re: I agree that skills should be more important...
Re: Hardware, firmware, software
Re: ancients

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

Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 21:51:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: VolantZep@aol.com
Subject: Re: T4.1 tasks

In a message dated 97-06-21 13:56:05 EDT, you write:

<< Now I know I am not going to change everyones=92 minds to one of the s=
everal
 possible systems, but I am looking very deeply into this matter (which a=
ll
of
 your votes have encouraged me to do).
=20
 Marc
=20
 >>
We are just happy that you are taking another look Marc.  Thanks again!

Todd Moody

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

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 11:52:14 +1000
From: Jason Anderson <midnight@kagi.com>
Subject: Re: Birthdays

>> "Tonight on Weird Unsolved Mysteries:  Six times as many babies are born
>> on day 6 of each year than on day 1, six times more on day 77 than on day
>> 72...why?  Scientists are baffled, and there are hints of an Imperial
>> cover-up..."
>
>So? The system I was suggesting it as an alternative to used 2d6-2 to
>generate the 10s and "units" digits of the birthdate, and something
>"sort of" linear for the hundreds. That gives even *screwier* results.

Well, if you want a linear distribution, you could always use

1st diget: 1d4 - 1
2nd diget: 1d10 (treat 0 as 0, not 10)
3rd diget: 1d10 (treat 0 as 0, not 10)

[ducks behind any and all available cover] =)

Cheers,
Jason

- -------
Beyond Midnight Software                               <midnight@kagi.com>
                                      <http://www.vision.net.au/~midnight>

             If it's not on fire then it's a software problem.

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

Date: Sun, 22 Jun 97 20:30:50 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Task System: Four Simple Proposals

On 06/22/97 at 03:37 PM,  "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu> said:

>>Proposal 1:  No Characterictic can be advanced beyond 12. Additionally, to
>>advance a Characteristic requires successfully completing a roll on 2d6
>>equal or higher than your current level

>Reasonable if you want to retain a variable dice system.

I'm presenting this as a compromise position to two systems that both
use variable dice systems, so I'm proposing a variable dice system.  ;->
If multiple dice methods are decided against then we can concentrate our
attentions on something else.

>>Proposal 3: Base the Target Number on Char+Skill+DM's.

>I would not combine DM's and variable dice.  I would either
>go with one system or the other.

I need to explain what I mean by "DM's."  I'm talking about modifiers
for having artifical aids, tools, and environmental benefits or
liabilities.  An example would be:  task is to Pick a lock, Target
Number composed of DEX+Intrusion...(+1 as a DM because you have a good
lockpick set or -1 as a DM because you are having to pick the lock while
wearing a clumsy Vac Suit) Those kind of DM's have nothing, really, to
do with the skill or the stat, but they do make tasks easier or harder.
Of course, GM's are going to want to be able to use those kind of
modifiers in *any* task system.


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

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

Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 21:58:30 -0400 (EDT)
From: VolantZep@aol.com
Subject: Re: T4.1 Char Gen Checklist

In a message dated 97-06-21 12:39:36 EDT, you write:

<< Or conversely, isn't the problem
 that anyone who can will pursue an advanced education if they get a chance?
 
 Marc >>
I would beg to differ with this, as a military man that has thousands of
coworkers that have excellent oppuritunities to continue education, at a
major discount, and simply don't.  I think people will pursue continuing
formal education if their career advancement depends on it.  Some will do so
because they have ample time to do so.  There are always those that MAKE
time, but they are not in the majority IMHO.

Regards

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

Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 22:00:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: VolantZep@aol.com
Subject: Re: T4 Task Rationale

In a message dated 97-06-21 12:39:40 EDT, you write:

<< 
 I also think some of this is a reflectionof inadequate task specification...
 to what extent do modifiers for tools, rehearsal, training, experience,
 qualifications, team support, and other variables make someone with years of
 training more likely to be successful than someone with Char-11 and Skill-1.
>>


I think you are on to something here!  Curious to see the task system that
evolves from this.  

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

Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 22:25:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: VolantZep@aol.com
Subject: Re: (LONG!) Re: Task System Revision/Choices

In a message dated 97-06-20 16:22:42 EDT, you write:

<< Of the various features of the T4/KB systems, these are my thoughts:
 
 Stat division: I can live with it, I guess, *if the character sheets 
 and rules are set up to make it easy*.  After all, MT used it 
 successfully (or did you all just fudge it a bit - be honest, I'm 
 curious).
 
 D3's: Well, I kind of like them, now that you mention it.  They're a 
 little out of place being only used for difficult tasks, but they add 
 a certain 'je ne sais quoi' to the game that sticks in people's 
 minds.  Perhaps they should be propagated throughout the system?  
 (Where did I leave my asbestos underwear?).
 
 Multi-dice: Well, it's OK actually.  I don't mind having to roll 4 or 
 5 dice (although 4 is better than 5).  6 or 7 is right out though, 
 sorry Kenneth. >>


Here's a simple thought...why not make the stats lower at the outset and the
skills higher at the outset and no multiplying or dividing is necessary.
 Just set you DMs based on straight numbers and multiple dice for
increasingly harder tasks.  I haven't taken the time to work out numbers but
perhaps Kenneth could devise a new plan that would actually fix the system
without having to adjust anything...nows yer chance!  

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

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 12:41:18 +1000
From: Jason Anderson <midnight@kagi.com>
Subject: Re: T4 Task Rationale

>>Effectively, the spread in the target number due to attribute means that a
>>skill-3, stat 10 character is twice as good as a skill 3 stat 7, because
>>their attribute difference accounts for a 100% of the skill value.
>
>I'm not sure you you come to a target number of 13 being "twice"
>as good as a 10.  In any case, Dex 7 is such a clutz I wouldn't
>be suprised if he didn't mess up most of the time.

Just one point I wanted to comment on. Dex 7 is *average* for humans -
hardly a clutz. PC's are likely to have a higher Dex level (depending on
how you let them generate their stats of course).

Cheers,
Jason

- -------
Beyond Midnight Software                               <midnight@kagi.com>
                                      <http://www.vision.net.au/~midnight>

             If it's not on fire then it's a software problem.

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

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 12:51:12 +1000
From: Jason Anderson <midnight@kagi.com>
Subject: Re: Deckplans

>	Noticed a minor inconsistency straight away; on the back it says
>there are
>nine adventures when I found ten inside.


Errr, no. There are nine adventures, and one ship description (the Raptor).
I agree it would be nice to have the deckplans for the ship.

Cheers,
Jason

- -------
Beyond Midnight Software                               <midnight@kagi.com>
                                      <http://www.vision.net.au/~midnight>

             If it's not on fire then it's a software problem.

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

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:54:44 -0400
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: A few task musings

OK, so I've been a bit out of touch; just thought I'd stroke my own ego by
pontificating about what I'd LIKE to see in a task system:

	1. Fixed number of dice--as somebody pointed out, when you don't want to
reveal exactly how hard something is because it would give away too much
information, it's nice to be able to tell the player "Roll vs Int and Med,
and tell me what difficulty level you WOULD have succeeded at."

	2. Variable skill/characteristic connection, depending on the nature of
the task--Med+Edu to diagnose an illness, Med+Dex to perform surgery, etc.

	3. Different weighting for skills vs characteristics--again, I don't like
the idea of high Dex automatically making a person even reasonably
qualified in a wide range of tasks (i.e. everything controlled by Dex). I
kind of liked the idea somebody presented about skill modifying the task
difficulty, and characteristic setting the target number. So a skill
level-2 would reduce the difficulty two levels, but the final roll would be
based on characteristic alone. That would require more granularity in the
task system, though.

	4. Simple--the entire task system should fit on a single page of the book,
and the basics should fit on a single 3x5 index card.

	5. Balanced--Impossible tasks should be just that: well-nigh unobtainable
for most "average" persons. Michael Jordan should have a chance at making
an Impossible basket; I should have a miniscule chance. Rolling against an
Impossible task ought to be a desperation maneuver, a time of high tension
and breath-holding all around the table; making it should be cause for
jubilation.

	6. Better integrated--the task system, whatever it is, needs to flow
through the rest of the game better. Some people have argued that it's a
fallacy to try to compare CT/MT skill/characteristic weighting to T4
because they're completely different, and yet are ignoring all the DMs and
other skill-related stuff throughout the book that are straight out of CT/MT.

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

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 00:40:41 -0400
From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
Subject: Re: Meta-facts?

At 11:41 AM 6/22/97 -0400, you wrote:
>   Hi.
>
>> Date: Sat, 21 Jun 1997 17:34:47 -0400
>> From: "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>
>
>>>But who is to say that the adventure cannot be reinterpreted?  I tend 
>
>> 	I'll have to vehemently disagree with you on this one.
>
>> 	The "meta-facts" were not presented as something the players discovered,
>> but were given to the referee as the "absolute truth." And, as a _referee_,
>> having the "true underlying facts" of a universe are important if I'm going
>> to run adventures in that universe. I HAVE to know the facts around which
>> future adventures are going to be run, so that I can stay consistent.
>> Otherwise, I won't waste my time and money on the standard
>> universe--instead I'll either take the time to create my own or, more
>> likely given my lack of time, give up Traveller. That's what I hated about
>> the proposed fix to FS.
>
>   There have never been meta-facts in Traveller.  The entire gaming
>   philosophy behind Traveller background has always been since day one
>   that nothing is as it seems on the surface.  Beneath the surface, the
>   real truth has often been presented in adventures and background as
>   being ambiguous --- the referee has free reign to interpret the data
>   as he pleases, or better yet, not to interpret the data, but keep the
>   players hanging.  

	There's a difference between things presented in the course of the
adventure to the players, and "Referee's Facts." Sure, if it's in the
Library Data or anything available or given to players, reinterpret the
"behind-the-curtain" truth freely. Traveller has done that.

	But when the information presented to referees, marked as such and given
as the absolute truth, changes, there are problems. If I'm told, in
"Referee's Info," that A=B, it better stay that way. The whole reason for
giving me that information is so that, if and when the players come to a
point where they peel back a layer and I give them more information, I
_know_ that the future storyline will back me up. But if, in one adventure,
I present "A=B," the players will be very upset if, in a future adventure,
I vehemently maintain that "A=C." Now, if there's a good explanation,
that's one thing. But the ongoing storyline becomes worthless if it occurs
too often, or for no other reason than that a later author either wasn't
familiar with Traveller, or chose to ignore it simply because it was the
easy way out.

	If you're running a "Star Trek" style campaign, consistency becomes less
of a problem. By ST-style, I mean a campaign that's basically a series of
minimally-related episodes, glossing over what happens between sessions,
and not worrying about an ongoing storyline. Much like the original Star
Trek series.

	But if you're trying to run an internally consistent ongoing campaign,
where the players are EXPECTED to learn from and remember what happened in
an earlier episode because they tie together, they *damn well better tie
together.* If the "official setting" no longer even tries to support that,
it becomes worthless to both new referees and old ones alike. The new ones
probably won't run into inconsistencies quite as early as those who've got
stuff going back to the original Supp 4, but they will. And it's really the
old guys who are going to keep Traveller alive in the short term, both by
buying supplements IF THEY'RE USEFUL, and by pushing Traveller. How many of
you have run games in your FLGS or a local con?

>   One of the things I always enjoyed about CT was that the canon
>   allowed me, a referee, to `adventure' just by reading the rumors,
>   information, and Library Data and trying to puzzle what was in store
>   for the Traveller Universe.  I certainly hope that T4 products will

	Agreed. But all the puzzling I do is WORTHLESS if the authors don't stick
to a consistent story. Because how can I "puzzle" about an arbitrary and
constantly changing universe? There's no logical consistency for me to
unravel...

>   do the same.  I haven't seen Anomolies yet, but already this talk of
>   `tech level' (now that's an artificial construct if I've ever seen
>   one) being violated has already got me scheming and planning up ways
>   to rock my players' world!  And I'm tingling with anticipation to see
>   how the next generation of adventure writers will rock mine.

	As things have been presented, the 'tech level' violation is more than
just an artificial problem. A real-life example: archeologists are fairly
sure the Aztecs (IIRC--or was it the Incas?) didn't use the wheel except in
a few child's toys. The evidence (or lack of evidence) about wheels is
overwhelming. Now all of a sudden some adventure writer decides to create
an adventure which hinges on a widespread use of wheels. You *cannot*
reconcile or patch that in. Too many archeological finds would have to be
magically changed.

	Likewise, if in the 1100+ years between the founding of the 3rd Imperium,
and the CT era, there's never been any evidence of widespread technological
capabilities commonly classified as TL13 having been in use in the
Ramshackle Empire, it strains the credulity to have adventurers in the
first few years of the 3I finding repeated evidence otherwise. What, every
single archeologist was an idiot, and blindly overlooked the figurative
wheels scattered around their sites, and the historical records littered
with references to higher-tech, and a government conspiracy suppressed
everything? This isn't trying to reconstruct things about a pre-literate
tribe like the Anasazi. In addition to the physical evidence, there will
still be historical records as well.

	If you're going to ditch the entire existing body of Traveller lore,
that's fine. But if you're trying to maintain some level of consistency,
you cannot suddenly reverse things. That was one of my problems with
reports about EA, as well, and that's why I chose not to purchase it.

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

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 15:51:31 +1100
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Hardware, firmware, software

John Wood wrote:

> I was wondering what computers/operating systems people here use?  I've
> seen quite a few mentions of Macs and only a few Unix/Windows/Dos.
> 
> If you *do* answer this, can we please be careful to avoid any OS wars.

I use a P133 with Win95 and (increasingly as I get it running) Linux.
R. Boleyn <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>

TNE to the Core

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

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 15:51:31 +1100
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Anomalies stuff

Bruce Johnson wrote:

> R. Boleyn <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz> said
> 
> > That's another problem - if the Syleans are finding TL14 relics, even 
> > in only small quantities why did it take them until 300 to get to 
> > TL13 and 700 to get to TL14? That's at least as long as the RoM existed, 
> > and the Syleans have these relics to help them.
> 
> Because, #$@%^!$@ IT, finding a few TL-14 relics does _not_ mean that you
> can take them and press on to TL-14 right away. Finding a TL-14 Vaccsuit
> isn't going to help you make TL-14 computers, or Jump 4, or a lighter
> Gauss rifle, or a PGMP, after all.
I'm aware of that, but there seems to be quite a lot of this TL13+ 
relic tech out there, so it seems highly unlikely that the Syleans 
would get no benefit from it - like going up TL's somewhat faster 
than their predecessors. 

> Here's where the TL systems is being abused...the TL of an ITEM does NOT
> mean that the overall TL of that region is the same!
> 
> > 
> > However the biggest hurdle is that the new 3rd Imperium is expanding 
> > into old Vilani space, and I can't see how any of their worlds 
> > would've been able to provide the climate for innovation and TL 
> > advancement. The high TL worlds (and thus the relics) will be in the 
> > areas the Terrans settled, and mostly around Earth.
> > 
> > Mind you, I think that the canon history has Vilani culture embrace 
> > TL progress far too readily, and badly under estimates the value of 
> > espionage and reverse engineering in keeping up with your neighbours 
> > - in 1100 both the Solomani and the Zhodani somehow stay 1TL behind 
> > the Imperium, even though there are millions of TL15 Traders and 
> > Scout ships that can be purchased or stolen and disassembled.
> > 
> > 
> 
> Espionage and reverse engineering are only minor factors of TL
> determination...if they were all that counted, China, for instance would
> be the same TL as the US, which they manifestly are not.
Helped the Soviets quite a lot, though.
 
> TL is determined more by resources and economics than anything else, or
> else FOEX, Earth would be TL8 throughout, instead of a probable average of
> about 4 or 5, or even less.
> 
> So what if I can disassemble a TL-15 scoutship...I can go to outer
> Mongolia, and disassemble a PC, and maybe even figure out how it works,
> but I'm not going to be making more any time soon! If I can't make the
> parts to make the tools to make the factories to make the ships,. I'm
> screwed! Having a finished product only gives me hints of the
> infrastructure needed to make the thing.
>
> Espionage and reverse engineering will only work if the two parties are
> separated by one TL at most, and it'll be very hard then, they work best
> at getting secrets from places with the same TL. 
Yeah but that's all we're talking about here - given that there would 
be TL13 relics, as well as the more glamorous TL14 finds.
 
> Don't forget, in 1100 the Solomani had just fought a punishing war with
> the Imperium, and lost their capital. From all accounts the Solomani
> sphere was also a widely varied place, and much of their resources had
> been focused to rimward...we don't KNOW what the TL of the far rimward
> Solomani sphere was, only the TL of their military during the rebellion.
> 
> The Zhodani are working very hard to appear to be a threat enough to the
> Imperium to keep them from invading, but not enough of a threat to provoke
> them into doing so. On TL (on the surface) behind the Imperium makes them
> a nasty place to invade, but unlikely to be a huge threat. Most of their
> attentions, after all were really on the Core Expeditions, all that the
> Imperium ever saw of the Zhodani sphere was their frontier regions. 
> 
These last couple of points make a good deal of sense - like the 
strange claims of Soviet competence/incompetence that the Iron 
Curtain caused. I've never really liked the way the late I3 with the 
strong Vilani influences has consistently higher TLs than almost all 
its neighbours, especially the Solomani and the Zhodani - both of 
which have been shown (very long range space exploration) to have an 
active interest in long term research.

R. Boleyn <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>

TNE to the Core

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

Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 23:08:17 +0000
From: twolf@unix.tfs.net
Subject: PE PBEM

Sorry for this momentary intrusion.  I will be brief and then gone 
again.

Players Wanted:
Pocket Empire PBEM: Out of the Night

Players are planetary rulers expanding back into the 
Stars, each trying to build their own Empire.

Rules: T4 and Pocket Empire.
Number of Players: Only the GM knows.  All players start with only 
limited information for planets in their subsector.  Players don't 
know where other players start.

Required Materials: PE
			    Galactic 2.1 (optional, but highly recommended)
			    Desire to build an intergalactic empire

Players interested email Twolf@tfs.net.  Included a concept for your 
ruling family along with your personal info.  Players will be 
notified of further requirements, after initial selection.

Game starting in two weeks.

JD
Twolf

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

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 01:05:14 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: Skills, task systems and all that

Eris Reddoch wrote:

>Harold, I would suggest that surgery would be a case where you'd want to
>break the task into several parts, forex:
>
> To diagnosis the medical problem; 
> (INT+Medical) + (Medical Database)DM + (Diagnositic Equipment)DM <
> Difficult, 30min.

   Much longer for a complex case, but that's about right here.

> To plan the proper surgical procedure;
> (EDU+Medical..Admin/2 may substitute)  < Difficult, 120min.

   Admin?  Perhaps Biology instead?

> To repair the heart valve;
> (DEX+Medical) +/ (Operating Theatre/appliances)DM + (Surgical Team)DM <
> Formidable, 90min, Fateful.
> 
>...or something similar.  We wouldn't do this for *every* task, but I do
>diagnosis problem, solve problem tasks with different characteristics all
>the time.

   As do I.  TNE breaks the Medical cluster down into three seperate
areas rather than two as is done in T4.  Also, whereas generic Medical
skill would allow you to do all of the above tasks in T4, you would need
each seperate Medical-related skill in TNE to do the steps above, and
they would naturally be handled as three different rolls, rather than
the referee arbitrarily breaking it down that way.

>BTW, in the above series of tasks, you'd want the *smart*, but sort of
>clumsy internist diagnosing and setting up the operation, but your want the
>*very* dexterious surgeon and her *highly* trained TEAM actually opening
>your chest...and that's how it works too.  ;->

   True enough.  Marc might want to re-think the way Medical skill is
handled in T4, but then he does have a lot of other things on his mind. 
:-)  This would also be an example of where having a modifier for an
assist to a task would be useful.

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 01:57:55 -0400 (EDT)
From: VolantZep@aol.com
Subject: Re: Metator Update

Still waiting for the PC version   ;-)

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

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 01:57:55 -0400 (EDT)
From: VolantZep@aol.com
Subject: Re: Imperial recruitment practices

Anybody read "Bill, the Galatic Hero" by Harry Harrison?  Great stuff.

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

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 02:05:50 -0400 (EDT)
From: VolantZep@aol.com
Subject: Re: Task System: Compromise Solution

In a message dated 97-06-23 00:27:24 EDT, you write:

<< hese changes are minimal, easy to implement, don't violate the feel of
 Traveller, and give Target Numbers I think can live with.
 
 Comments?
 
 
 Eris,
     I didn't *once* bring up Aptitude...aren't you surprised? ;-> --  >>

I was thinking along the same lines...so it sounds good to me!   };-D

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

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 01:57:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: VolantZep@aol.com
Subject: Re: T4 Equipment Sheet

In a message dated 97-05-26 16:16:08 EDT, you write:

<< PS  I've released a few other sheets to the list.  If you want them 
 too, then let me know.  All of them are in Word v2.0
 
 (1)   Vehicle Card (designed by Marc Miller)
 
 (2)   T4 Character Sheet (designed for use with KBv2.0, but can be 
 altered easily for a generic system) 
 
 (3)   T4 Ammo Sheet (originally designed for TNE but can be used for 
 any Traveller edition)
  >>
I'm a little behind on some of the TML and trying to catch up (due to the
flood).  Can you send a copy of this stuff to me at toddmoody@aol.com.  Many
thanks in advance!

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

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 08:11:56 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: RE:Skills and Attributes - A CT Hang up?

>> True again.  I have a minor case of CP so my Dex at most is a two ; ) as
>> well as strength, and from personal experince I know I would love to be a
>> guitar player and have read many books and can even play a little but no
>> matter how much I read I ll never be a rocket star.  SO attributes do mean
>> alot.
>
>Yes they do, but skills matter too.  This is why I advocate that
>skills = attribute in contribution to the target number.

The problem with this tasksystem is (IMHO of course) that not only is the
tasksystem broken but the character generation as well. My view is that for
task resolution characteristics mean little or nothing (yes you read me
correctly) BUT in gaining skills it is EXTREMELY important.
My character generation system works something like this:
The chargen system generates one or several skills that the character can
potentially get that particular year. The character then chooses one and
tries to gain a level by rolling one to several D6 versus the controlling
characteristic, the higher the level the more dice to roll.

This system simplifies task rolls to be against the skill only and the
reason for this is that in my gaming universe the definition of a skill
level is that it is a measure of how good a character is at a specific
skill/group of tasks. That means that all skill level 3 medics are equally
proficient but those with high DEX gains skills faster and can reach higher
maximum practical levels.


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

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

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 08:19:49 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Stuff..

>I'm going to put up my designs Real Soon Now.. I don't have decent mapping
>software yet (saving up for adobe) so the deck plans will have to wait.

By adobe I take it you mean Illustrator yes?


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

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

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 08:23:10 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: I agree that skills should be more important...

>For example, let's assume^H^H^H^H^H^H*presume* <grin> that the average Joe
>should have a 50% chance of success at an average task (regardless of
>whatever you call the actual level of difficulty :-).

Is tat some twisted version of Bayes postulate? I agree though.


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

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

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 08:35:06 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Hardware, firmware, software

>>>2) Import existing settings, using HIWG-standard text files (ESS)
>>I was planning on that for my world-building program (now abandoned
>>because of Dulinor).
>
>I do so wish the Dulinor people would either let me play with the source,
>or would release a Mac/Unix version.  It sounds quite slick, but I cannot
>use it on the machines that I fell comfortable doing so.
>
>I do not dispute their decision to do it where they have, BTW, I just want
>to make use of it. :)
>Scott

Could someone please tell me what this Dulinor stuff is about? At first I
thought it was joke about Dulinar starting the civil war and thus there
would be no worrlds to build but the last quoted post indicate that there
are some people objecting to world building software getting written. Are
they holding some sort of right or what?

(I've got my own starsystem fleshing out software made in HyperCard that
you may use if you're interested. I cannot post it at my work website as we
will start measuring net performance on an internet game there and don't
want bandwidth eating TMLrs, drop me a line)


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

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

Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 08:55:11 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: ancients

>"By the end of the war, Grandfather had beaten all the opposing factions
>and destroyed all of his descendants (he kept careful count)."   (MT
>Imperial Encyclopaedia, pg 48, para 15.)
>
>Either way, it's quite clear that the only Ancient left is Yaskodray.

No no Tsiotstroy is still out there and after having slept for 300 000
years under the Octagon tower at Fulacin he was awakened by Cassandra
Monastera and Ulrika Loke. Right now he is plotting the revenge upon
Yaskoydroy and the players are unknowingly helping him along. That is
totally uncanonical but true in my universe and great fun.


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

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1462
***********************************
