Traveller-digest      Thursday, June 26 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1481



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Why the MT system _is_ a good choice, pt II (retort to KB)
Re: Why the MT system _is_ a good choice, pt II (retort to KB)
Re: Why the MT system  _is_ a good choice
Re: TL of ramshackle empire
Oxygen was (Re: Deckplans)
Re: The KBv2.0 Challenge
Re: Charecter Generation (was Re: Character Generation Pages in WFW95)
(no subject)
Re: Why the MT system is not a good choice
Re: T4.1 Task Suggestions
Re: TL of ramshackle empire
Re: T4 Task Rational
Re: Meta-facts?
Re: Deckplan Question?
Re: The KBv2.0 Challenge
Re: Task System, Game Design, etc.
The Real Vote

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 08:29:04 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Why the MT system _is_ a good choice, pt II (retort to KB)

>Also it would be a possiblity to make ExSuccess Easier for those who
>are closer to the next "switch". Taking a three-based system, someone
>who has Edu 6 would be right on the switch, getting +2 on his task
>and +0 on ExSucc. Someone with Edu 8 would get +2 on the task and +2
>for ExSucc! That would take into account the difference in ability!

Well, someone mentioned that simplicity in tasksystem was important too ;)


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

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

Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 23:28:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: "John R. Snead" <jsnead@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Why the MT system _is_ a good choice, pt II (retort to KB)

Kenneth Bearden wrote:
 
>Show me a way that KBv2.0 fails in the game mechanics.

Well that's pretty darn easy:

A PC with a skill of 5 and a stat of 11 is quite skilled, but also quite
easy to generate.  Such a character has a target number of 26.  The
average of 7 dice is 24.5.  This character has over a 60% chance of
succeeding at an impossible task, and will succeed 90+ % of the time with
all other task levels.  In MT impossible tasks were difficult for even the
highly skilled. Why make a PC with this level of skill roll tasks at all.
A very similar result would be obtained by simply saying "You succeed in
all tasks you attempt with this skill".  KB 2.0 makes tasks *far* to easy. 
In many ways its even worse about this that T4.1 (under the system
described in the game screen the same character has a target number of 16,
the average of 5 dice is 17.5.  The PC has around a 40% chance to succeed
at an Impossible task.  This is IMHO still too high, but not insanely so
(unlike KB 2.0). 

Under MT, the same character would have a 3% chance of succeeding at an
Impossible task.  That does not seem unreasonable to me, especially since
taking double the time needed for the task (ie making a cautious attempt)
would lower the level to Formidable and allow the character to have a 42%
chance of succeeding at a cautious attempt (Impossible tasks are damn
hard, so cautious attempt make sense under MT) Even if they were allowed
in KB 2.0, why bother. 

Comments?


- -John Snead jsnead@netcom.com

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 08:24:43 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Why the MT system  _is_ a good choice

<snip>
>i didn't like that either, but that could be changed. I am not just
>advocationg ther pure MT-System, but any variation of it!

First of all my post about MT weaknesses dealt with the fact that a lot of
people say they prefer MT before T4.1 or KBv2.0 but the question/answer
become meaningless if the preferrential tasksystem has to be remade before
being useable. I could say that I prefer T4.1 but that it has to change a
bit rolling only 2D6 etc etc. Marcs problem was that he wanted our input as
to what task system to use of EXISTING ones.

>-> 3. The time roll. Whenever you roll a task you should be told by the
>-> referee BEFOREHAND how long it will take as the task roll is done at the
>-> end of the task attempt. Joe Bazooka is trying to disarm the bomb before it
>-> goes off (5 minutes). He succeeds at the task but he fails to do it in
>-> time?
>The time roll, was in my opinion, an exellent idea! You know how long
>something wil take on average, but might take longer or less. Just
>like real life! If you have only five minutes to do something and
>fear the time won't be enough, better make it a hasty task. Don't
>want to risk hasty? Take the risk of taking too long. These are the
>choices you have to make in real life, as well. I loved that!

Yes time is a factor but that should be figured INTO the task roll. You get
into all kinds of timetravel like strangenesses when a guy succeeds at a
task despite not having the time to complete it. What has really happened?
Did he spend as much time as he had and stopped there but miracolously
knows that IF he had had the time he'd succeed. In order to use the time
roll it had to be rolled before the task began and then the player could
try a hasty task NOT rerolling the time but cutting the time in half or
something.

>-> 4. The Exceptional success thing. Most of the time a Exceptional success
>-> was more common than a regular one! What does Exceptional really mean?
>That might be changed as well! Make it 3+ for example! Be Free!
>Exeptional to me always meant: better than average!

I suggest looking it up. Exceptional is the exception to the norm, out of
the ordinary etc and should therefore NOT occur more often than regular
success. The reason DGP did it was that when they were doing the combat
system taskbased it didn't "feel" right with 4 above required as they
originally intended, 3 above was wrong for aesthetic reasons(!) and so 2
above it was.

>No, the task system was a stroke of genius as well, not perfect, but
>better than todays!
>
>Ad Astra,

As a final note: I use and have used a task system similar to MT with 2D6
rolls, no characteristics factors at all, the progression 1+, 4+, 7+, 10+,
13+ etc and Total fail on miss by 4 or more, Fail result on miss by 1,2 or
3, Fair result on success by 0,1 or 2, Good result on 3,4,5 and Very Good
result on 6+ above. Whenever a 2 or 12 is rolled I let the player roll 1D6
and if 5+ add 1 to result and continue rolling (2- and subtract 1 for low
roll) thus getting away from the automatic success/failure thing. One could
say that I use MT system but I wouldn't vote for it as the standard MT
system is only slightly better than T4.1 - not enough for IG to change the
rules.


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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 08:32:02 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: TL of ramshackle empire

>I would argue that the Terran Conferacy would have wildly different tech
>levels, but lets face it, the ROM was a vilani government with a veneer of
>Terranism over it.
>
>Darryl

I don't really think you could have "wildly different tech levels" as TL is
extremely interrelated. A reasonalble variation of +1 to -1 is OK but more
than that seems both unrealistic and Trecky (if that isn't exactly the
same).


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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 08:39:22 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Oxygen was (Re: Deckplans)

>Oh, about 70% Nitrogen, 20% Oxygen,some CO2, and few piddling other things
>for flavor, depending on where I live. Higher Oxygen concentrations can
>harm or even kill me, depending on the situation. We NEED that nitrogen
>for a diluent, even though it's toxic, too, at higher pressures. Running
>pure O2 at low pressures isn't toxic but it's one heck of a fire hazard.

Isn't it the partial pressure of O2 that does it. 1 ATM air (20% O2) is the
same as 0.2 ATM pure O2 both for breathing purposes and fire hazards.


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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 16:39:43 -0900
From: Harry <paharris@postoffice.newnham.utas.edu.au>
Subject: Re: The KBv2.0 Challenge

At 10:23 PM 21/06/97 +0000, you wrote:

>If you think you have a better system, then challenge me on it.  Pick 
>a clear game related example and compare your system to KBv2.0.  
>Show me how it is better than KBv2.0.


<g> Roll a formidable pilot task on 2d6 modified by education :)


Harry

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

Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 22:39:05 -0800
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@alaska.net>
Subject: Re: Charecter Generation (was Re: Character Generation Pages in WFW95)

Glenn Hoppe wrote 

Scott Ellsworth wrote:

> > One of my players brought this point up - regardless of background, > > it is pretty likely that a Sylean will   have a higher EDU than any > > person from a TL9 or less culture.  The resources it costs to give  > > every Sylean the equivalent of a modern day PhD in information is > > likely too trivial to notice - witness the section on poverty - they > > all have wallscreens, and have been using databases to look stuff up > > for a very long time.

> Yes, but, that assumes two things about the high tech society:

> 1. The populace actually use the wallscreens for educational purposes,
> and don't spend all their time watching the latest holovid soap opera,
> or playing Duke Norris Nukem' in 3D. Brain candy does not an EDU
> increase make.

Given declining educational standards in US public schools lately maybe
charecters at TL 6 to 7 have the best education and as TL increases the
educational standards go down.  This could also explain Travellers
(vilani influenced) very slow rates of increases in technology.  Many
people who could increase technology if well educated are not educated
enough to do do. :)

Many ( most ?) people today pursue higher education not for the sake of
learning but because college graduates earn more money.  As the TL
increases and standards of living improve with it maybe fewer people
bother to go.  The increasing number in the number of people who go to
college will not necessarily continue forever, and many colleges do not
provide much in the way of education bonuses but instead teach skills. A
college education also seems to increase SOC in todays society (although
not nearly as much as it used to), as the nature of SOC in society
changes (Nobles at the top of the SOC scale in the 3rd Imperium as
opposed to 20th century Americas movie stars, politicains, and very well
paid professionals) maybe these removes another incentive to go to
college.

> 2. Is being able to look info up on huge databases condusive to
> encouraging EDU increases? The arguement could be made that High Tech
> people become dependent upon their Knowledge Bases, and don't bother
> actually absorbing factual content.

Maybe INT becomes more important for remembering where to look it up.

> I guess a lot depends on the definition of EDU, but it seems to me    > that there are factors in a high tech society that might impede the   > advance of EDU.

>As an aside, in TNE, higher tech citizens received an EDU bonus during
> character generation...

I miss these modifiers to charecters stats based on homeworld.  They
were one of TNE's better touches.  Who else would like to see them again
?

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

Date: Fri, 03 Jan 1997 00:36:49 -0800
From: Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@concentric.net>
Subject: (no subject)

> Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 09:55:30 -0700
> From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
> Subject: Re: New mailing list member...may I introduce myself?
> 
> At 12:24 AM 6/25/97 -0400, Harold drooled:
> 
> >JumpSix@aol.com writes:
> >
> >>Ya know I am REAL happy to see Traveller alive and well. I was just looking
> >>at material I used to use when I started playing in high school (1979 or so)
> >>I thought Id hit search on the internet and found yall! 
> >
> >   Fresh meat!  Somebody get the charcoal, I'll get the Weber and the
> >lighter fluid.  :-)
> 
> Vilani Beach BBQ!!!!!
> 
 
Hot Damn, Just made up a couple of liters of Hot & Sweet BBQ Sauce!!!
Got some pickled K'Kree hocks in the root celler.

Hey Harold, NO Hiver corndogs this time..

8-p Mmmm, Mmmm, Good I just loves BBQ.

Evyn.
- -- 
Buddas Palm met Rilley's Oak,
The Tibetian mugger met
the Louisville slugger.

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 16:54:37 -0900
From: Harry <paharris@postoffice.newnham.utas.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Why the MT system is not a good choice

At 10:04 PM 21/06/97 +0000, you wrote:

>My point is that the Med-3 doctor should beat the Med-1 NPC in all 
>three areas--by SS, by regular success, and by total success.

I don't understand, of the Med-3 doctor has a smaller chance of regular
success, and a greater chance of overall (and spectacular) success, what's
the problem, this is not a problem as far as I am concerned.

>Why are we forcing a system that has so many loop holes in it when we 
>can go with a T4 tweak, like KBv2.0, and have EVERYTHING fixed?

Because I ***really*** want a 2d6 system, and bugger the bell curves, stats
and any other mathematical, probabalistic approach, it feels less
complicated. :)

>It doesn't make sense to me.  It seems that we are trying to 
>institute another system that has to be tweaked as well.
>
>Why not just tweak the one we have?
>That, it seems to me, is the easiest approach, and I have already 
>done all of the work with KBv2.0.

OK, can you mail me a copy of KBv2.0, I'll check it out.


>
>T4 is not MT.  T4 is CT with tweaks.
>
>T4 is to CT like MT is to CT.  But, T4 is not to MT like either T4 or 
>MT is to CT.

... and TNE is to T4 like MT is to CT but CT is to MT but is nothing like
MTV which is like really bad. And if all penguins are black and white, and
also some old movies are black and white, then some pengiuns are old
movies..... ooh, how did I get here? :)


Harry

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 08:57:26 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: T4.1 Task Suggestions

>2) Instead of specifying difficulty, specify the skill level where this is =
an
>average task, then roll against attribute (or using attribute as modifier).
>Possessing more or less skill changes the difficulty.  Might be a closer
>model of reality, but invalidates a lot of books.

Look at Eris (and mine) system.

>3) Keep the present task system, renaming it the "space opera" style.
>(Because a character can be good at everything with high attributes.)  Make=
 a
>new system that can use the same task descriptions (in terms of
>skill/attribute/level) but has a different balance, and call that the "hard
>SF" style.  BOTH systems would be official, and which one is used would be =
up
>to the gamers.  Then gaming groups can pick a task system to match their
>style, and it will still be Traveller.

Hurray, applause. As Marc asked us to come up with alternatives to the
broken T4, T4.1 systems instead of bickering about this and that and
dreaming wishful dreams about MT (the PERFECT systems if we only change
that, and that, and that=8A)
I'd say keep T4.1 as the Space Opera system and add KBv2.0 as the Hard SF
system.
This should be the end of the discussion except the endless
bickering/flamewar that will drag on until something new to bicker/flame
comes up.


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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 03:00:05 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: TL of ramshackle empire

Anders Backman writes:

>Someone asked about the canonical max TL achieved by RoM and I knew I 
>had seen it somewhere, it's in the Megatraveller Referee Companion and 
>it is rated at TL 12.

   This is the second reference I've seen to this.  So I pulled out my
copy and sure enough, there it is on page 34.  I officially stand
corrected (I had previously indicated that the TL of the RoM had been
strongly hinted at, but not actually stated).

Below is a chart of the tech levels achieved by the major interstellar
powers.

THE FIRST IMPERIUM

Imperial  TL  Comments
- -9235      9  Vilani discover Jump1
- -8900     10  Vilani sphere reaches about 10 parsecs in size
- -5430     11  Vilani discover Jump2

THE SECOND IMPERIUM
(Originally the Terran Confederation)

Imperial  TL  Comments
- -2431      9  Terrans discover Jump1
- -2408     10  First Terran/Vilani Interstellar War ends
- -2398     11  Terrans discover Jump2
- -2210     12  Terrans discover Jump3

THE THIRD IMPERIUM
(Originally the Sylean Federation)

Imperial  TL  Comments
- -1776     10  Syleans maintain minimal interstellar trade
 -650     11  Sylean Federation established
 -150     12  Robot manufacturing reestablished
  300     13  Vargr Campaigns taking place (210-348)
  700     14  Xboat system being built (624-718)
 1000     15  Solomani Rim War taking place (998-1002)


Further analysis:  Now, it is considered canon (a dirty word to some
people around here) that TL 16 worlds existed in the Imperium c. 1117. 
Given that it took 450 years to go from TL 12 to 13, 400 years to go
from TL 13 to 14, and 300 years to go from TL 14 to 15, a time frame of
about 250 would not be out of the realm of possibility for the advance
from TL 15 to 16.  However, it is only a little over 100 years from 1000
to 1117.  What happen?  Well my theory is that the Imperium was able to
import higher tech from surrounding societies (electronics, robotic
components, and computers from the Hivers, a variety of items including
ship building technology from the Darrians, medical technology from the
Solomani, etc.) which accelerated the process on some worlds, allowing
them to cross the TL 16 threshold just as the Rebellion was starting to
heat up.

   In the case of the Terran Confederation/Second Imperium, we have a
planet (Earth) desperately trying to catch up technologically with a
vast empire that could swat it like a fly if the empire could bring its
muscle to bear on the situation (fortunately for the Terrans, it doesn't
do it until it is too late).  The Terrans had previously rapidly
progressed through TL 5-7 (20 years each level), stalling briefly at TL
8 (claim is 20 years, more likely 50) before advancing to TL 9 and
stalling again prior to first contact (c. -2431).  After first contact,
they achieve TL 10 in about 20 years, and TL 11 in about 10 years after
that (undoubtedly benefiting from captured Vilani technology, and crash
development defense programs).  It is another 188 years before TL 12 is
finally achieved.  For the 400 or so years, there is basically no
further advancement of technology within the Second Imperium.  

   Why?  For one, with the war won, there simply isn't the pressure to
advance that there used to be.  For another, the Terran
Confederation/Second Imperium proceeded to absorb billions of sentient
beings, the vast majority of which were very conservative about
technological development.  This undoubtedly had a significant impact,
as did the new rulers desire to broaden the narrow base of technological
development that had been created during the war years.  While there
were new discoveries, new inventions, and basic R&D going on, the
efforts of Rule of Man were toward horizontal rather than vertical
technological development.  

   While it is possible that a few worlds achieved TL 13 at some point,
these worlds would have been located in the Solomani Rim or in an
adjacent sector, away from the central region of the Second Imperium,
and their impact of the overall economy of the Rule of Man would have
been rather insignificant.  It is also possible that they would have
been the object of fighting between various factions at arose in the
latter stages of the empire, and their technological supremacy been
relatively short-lived.  

   Still, the Rule of Man would have likely achieved TL 13 at some point
(perhaps c. -1600) had the empire's economy held together, and that
would have opened the door to further experimental technologies even
approaching TL 14 (as in the infamous vacc suits).  But the evidence is
clear that the Rule of Man was well on the way to disintegration by
- -1776, and the likelihood that items could be mass produced even in
small quantities at TL 14 is simply outside the realm of possibility for
the Rule of Man.

   Comments?

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 23:58:47 -0700
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: T4 Task Rational

[OK, a lot of this hyperbole to try and poke holes.  The fact is
that if you get down to specialties that are below the level that
skills are subdivided at you are going to find things that might
seem odd, even with characters with skills.  Also, general reading
is not skill-1.  (I'm not sure a CPR class is Medical-1 either,
but we will let that one pass).  Since the post talks about
extemes of training I feel it is OK to similarly address extemes
of talent.

Actually this is pretty much a rehash of "the trained guy should
beat the talented."  "Not he shouldn't"  "Yes he should".  I
probably won't respond to the reply.  We can trot out "examples"
and argue them for ever.  The bottom line is that then relative
utility of skill vs talent is just as much a case of opinion in
Traveller as it is in every other game.]

Wed, 25 Jun 1997 20:18:05 -0600, "David J. Golden" <goldendj@pcisys.net>

>	Arguing about which characteristic to use wasn't my main point,
>although
>it was my starting point. Going back to my argument ... again, in the
>real-life example I stated the greatest contributor, in my perception, to
>the various medical tasks undertaken by the ER staff, was their medical
>training. Not dexterity, although that would have aided in any surgery. Not
>intelligence, although that helped them pull together the relevant bits of
>their training. Not education, which I've always viewed more as the breadth
>of a character's knowledge (as opposed to the depth represented by a
>skill). It was their medical knowledge, pure and simple.

Well, I simply don't agree.  I have met a lot of people I would
_never_ want to treat me in an ER.  A smart guy with a minimum of
training will know enough not to do something that will kill me.
I'm not sure I have the same trust in an incompetant who will messed
up what he never really got down in the training. The point is that all
that training was applied to people who already had some ability.
Sure, the training wasn't important.  Nobody disputes that.  But
so is talent.

>	Now, I've got a reasonable education, even though I'm not one of the
>renaissance men on the list. I had a childhood fascination with history,
>biology, rocketry and computers. I have a degree in aerospace engineering,
>various technical training courtesy of the USAF in systems engineering,
>R&D, acquisitions, and contract law, repeated first-aid and CPR training,
>half a masters degree in CS/systems engineering, and a breadth of
>continuous reading. Nevertheless, I would never expect that my Medical-1
>(first aid training, CPR, buddy aid & self care, etc.) combined with my
>education (C according to the test at GenCon; probably more around A
>according the the scales bandied here) would grant me a gnat's ass chance
>of performing open heart surgery. The medical skill MUST be the primary
>weight here.

Well, the problem is that you have skill-0 in heart surgery.  You
could also be a highly trained dermatologist and not be the person
to perform heart surgery.  Also, you could be take someone with
shakes in his hands and who couldn't even handle high school
and give him training heart surgery and I still wouldn't want
him to do it.  I certainly would pick a first year med student
or an EMT over him.

What you are doing is poking holes based on the fact that, as
in any game, you have to generalize skills.  This can lead to
problems but there is not really any way around it and leave
the game playable.

>	Likewise, simply by virtue of my reading Scientific American, Science
>News, Aerospace America, etc., the flat "Skill+Attribute" says I've got
>decent chances of succeeding at:
[Gratitously long list of intellegence based skills deleted...]

Well, no.  Even with reading you still have skill-0.  You need
skill-1 to suceed (in general, of course GM can make exceptions).
 I would rather have an intellegent person who has only 1/4 year
of training (or whatever skill-1 means) than Forest Gump with
several years of experience.

>	I would much rather have an average-intelligence medical school
>graduate
>(Int 7, Med-4) than a genius first-year med student (Int 15, Med-1) get
>ANYWHERE near me with a scalpel, or even diagnose me. Any system that
>doesn't work that way, to me, is fundamentally flawed and unuseable.

Do you really know just how many systems you have just called
"fundamentally flawed and unuseable"?  This maybe your opinion,
but I would consider the fact that much of the gaming world outside
of Traveller before you state your opinion as fact.

>	Oh, BTW, I firmly reject the notion that this will come down to a
>tradeoff
>between playability and believability.

Well, some of you nits are so picky that they do (even for nonskill+stat
systems).  But know, skill+stat based systems aren't sacrificing
believability for playability.  For many of us they are providing
both.

____________________________
Summers@Alum.MIT.edu

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 03:13:50 -0400
From: hdhale@siscom.net (Harold Hale)
Subject: Re: Meta-facts?

Anders Backman writes:

>>        Oh, I don't want to know _everything_ about the plot line for
>>the next five years. But I would appreciate it matching with what I've
>>already learned about the plotline from the last FIFTEEN years.
>
>I agree on that! The trouble with T4 offerings is that the authors seem
>never to have actually played Traveller given the amount of canon >trashing they managed to put in so few volumes.

   I believe I said all this months ago, on this list and
elsewhere...I'm glad to see at least there are other people out there
who are *getting it* too.

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 09:27:21 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Deckplan Question?

>An easy and workable alternative that I use is 1x1x3.5m regular
>parallelipeds mapped to squares, this makes each square exactly 1/4 ton.
>The 3.5m deck height is better than 3m because it gives you good head room
>(2.5m), and a generous crawlspace (1m) between decks.  It also allows nice
>sized double high decks (1x1x7m=1/2 ton per square) for engineering and
>cargo/ship bays.  It *also* allows easy scaling up and down from large to
>small scale maps, compress each block of 4 1m squares down to 1 square and
>you have 1 ton/square and have a summarized deckplan, expand them back and
>you have a detailed one.  This seems to work well for PC sized ships.
>
>
>Eris,
>    yes, I guess I do *everything* differently. <sigh>

The winner is the one that does it all MOST differently. I use dTons that
are 5m3 (1 square = 1x1x2.5m). I changed all Striker I prices to comply
with HighGuard prices and then made my own design system based on that. My
ships are much smaller, lighter than canonical ones and yes, my cars weigh
less than a metric ton. While fidgeting with the design system I did some
TL changes as well

TL     Gravitics
================
9-     No gravitics tech yet
       This was in order to have jump-capable non grav systems so that
       I could play T2300 style campaigns if I wanted to.
10     Gravitic floater. This can only negate gravity but it can be used for
       space launches by centripetal acceleration by planetary rotation, tangent
       vector of planetary orbit etc.
       Floorfield. The rate changes pretty slowly and cannot generally be
used for
       evasion compensation.
11     Gravitic thruster. Produces thrust proportional to local gravity.
       Consumes twice as much power as Floaters. Most gravvehicles have floaters
       for lift and gravthrusters for thrust. This makes it easier to rationale
       the slow Air/rafts: They have floaters for lift and turbojets for
thrust as
       they're available at TL 10.
12     Small gravitic thruster/floater enabling gravbelts.
       Inertial compensators. Fast ratechange systems that can be used to negate
       violent maneuvers.
       Super weak tractor beams that can move dustparticles etc. They're only
       useable in labs until someone discovers that they can be used as
sensitive
       mass detectors. Their power use goes up with the mass to be tractored and
       by measuring their poweruse they can be used as detectors.
13     Impulse drives. Thrustproducing engines that break the conservation of
       momentum and energy.
14     Smaller impulsedrives
15     Short range practical tractorbeams used to deflect missiles and dock
ships.
16     Long range tractor beams. Used to stear ships into planets etc.

Stop blurting and get back to work (I say to myself)


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

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

Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 08:07:43 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: The KBv2.0 Challenge

> > I strongly believe that KBv2.0 is the answer.  I believe this so much
> > so that I am offering a challenge.
> 
> For example, I would go with T4.1 before I would go with KBv2.0.
> 
> Just because a number of people don't exactly agree with T4 doesn't
> mean they don't have even greater differences with each other.

Put your money where your mouth is, David.  Post your system of 
choice and compare it, with a game example, to KBv2.0.

Let's see how yours and mine stand up together.

Kenneth.

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

Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 08:07:45 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Task System, Game Design, etc.

>
> >Yes, I did agree with you that if we put skills on a 1-15 scale, the  rest
> >of the discussion would be moot.
> 
> That sounds like a reasonable compromise...to me.  Of course, that would
> push the number or dice up wouldn't it? ;->

Yes.  I told Marc that too.  If you have skills and stats on a 1-15 
scale, you're looking at target numbers like KBv2.0 has.  

You'll have to use 2-7 dice to get the percentages where they need to 
be.

Kenneth.

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

Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 08:07:44 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: The Real Vote

I said

> > KBv2.0 doesn't have these problems.  It is simply the best Traveller 
> > task system designed to date.

And Vanya replied

> There aren't many that agree with you.

And he quoted some votes.

> >Voting for T4.1 with revisions or variants thereof:
> >-14( some of these state that it can't stand as it is though)
> >
> >Voting for KBv2.0 (or other KB variants or similar systems) were:
> >-12
> >
> >Voting for a system along the lines of MT 
> >-31
> >
> >TNE-like D20 system
> >-3
> >
> >Other votes generally in favor of change (no specific system)
> >-12
> 
> Seems that quite a few people don't agree with you, Kenneth.  By 2.5x,
> people still seem to prefer an MT variant over a KBv20 variant, and 16%
> more like the MT system than KBv20 and T4.1 combined.
> 
> You've got a lot of convincing to do.

I think you'd better wipe off your glasses.  I kept the first 73 
posts that came in about the task change.  I still have them, and I 
can quote from them if you like.

Here's the break down:

Of the first 73 votes for task change, there were only 8 that voted 
for MT.  Those people were--

8 votes for MT
===============
Andrew Akins
2drapers
Andy Brick
Bill Prackard
Carlos Alos-Ferrer
David J. Golden
Vanya
Rob Dean



Of those same 73 votes, there were a whopping 28 votes for KBv2.0.  
Those people were--

28 Votes for KBv2.0
=================
VolantZep
Alan Huscroft
Bill Hopper
Bob Sanders
Chris Griffen
Craig Berry
Dedly
Don McKinney
Douglas Berry
Erwin Fritz
Glenn Grant
James Lindsay
Jason Anderson
Jeff Zeitlin
Terry Neimeyer
Joe Saul
Kelly St. Clair
Kenneth Bearden
Sam Thomas
Anders Backman
Mark Bradley
Michael Galligan
Paul Dale
Peter Miller
Richard Hough
Robert Beck
R.D. Elliott
SD Mooney



There remaining votes were either unclear, undecided, or voting for 
some other system (withou a majority vote).
Those 36 votes were

36 Vote that are considered "Other"
============================
Timothy Collinson
Tom Trelenberg
John R. Snead
John Wood
Alex Rebsch
Scott Ellsworth
Larry Haldey
Mark Ayers
Martin FC Pickett
Merrick Burkhardt
Michael Peters
Mike Lee
Neil McGurk
Nick Munn
Peter Engebos
Paul D. Owensby
Stephen Johnson
Steven Charlton
Luke Silburn
Simon Turner
Steve Brengard
Victor J. Raymond
Andy Holzricher
Brody Dunn
Bruce Alan Macintosh
Dr. Nik Whitehead
Eris Reddoch
Ethan Henry
Evyn Mac Dude
Franklin Cain
Harry
Ian or Katts
J.
James Brewer
Jeff and Michelle Nort
Jerry Sanders
Joe Block

Now, I know that some of these people have changed their vote or made 
up their minds one way or another.

But, clearly, KBv2.0 has a significant number of supporters--I'd 
wager much more than the MT system does.

Kenneth.

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1481
***********************************
