Traveller-digest      Thursday, June 26 1997      Volume 1997 : Number 1487



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

FS Data Correction
Johnny's Grade Report
Off the List!
Re: TL of ramshackle empire
Doing Things Differently(Was Deckplan Questions)
Re: TL of the Rule of Man (Don't call it Ramshackle!)
Vacation
Re: Battledress and heroism
Re: The Jyhad in progress
Re: Generic Task Descriptions
Apology to the List
RE: The Jyhad in progress
Re: Task Debate
Re: The KBv2.0 Challenge
Can Stat + Skill Be 'Broken'?
Re: Yet another Vote Count, 26th of June, Call to vote included.
Stat vs Skill. A reprised, reprise.
Re: Meta-facts?
T4.1 Task System

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 16:03:00 -0400
From: Bill Prankard <BPRANKARD@theiia.org>
Subject: FS Data Correction

Greetings,

I was wondering if there were still people on this list who were working out 
problems with the M:0/FS sector data.  It seems the Great Task Debate has 
preempted it somewhat.

In any case, I submit for your approval, my own unofficial personal changes 
to the Core Sector Data, to make it somewhat reasonable to play with the M:0 
Book.

In preparing for my campain, which takes place in Core, I did
some major homework.  Using Imperial Atlas, 1100 data off of ccjoe's
archives, and what MM e-mailed me, and then trying to fit it with the
M:0 background info,  I came up with a reasonbly useable Core sector.

Here are the changes I made.

First of all, Core sector needs Naval Bases, Cleon and the 3rd Imp DO
have a navy right?  I based my judgements on the aforementioned sources
and if the world had a "A" or "B" starport and if the TL was 10+.  Those
seemingly "barren worlds" with high technologies (TL-D+) I red zoned as
Naval hi tech research and other FNORDY type things, but officialy the
navy states that they are just "military training and target ranges".

Here are the systems I think should have Naval bases:

0416 Sanches
0624 Giirud
0806 Gaage
1123 Guurik  (Red Zone)
1124 Imkhasham
1134 Aursis
1518 Uungii <-- Future site of Core Depot!
1524 Shibashliim
1539 Dimanaam
1724 Guurma Sa
1736 Mished
1821 Shar (Red Zone)
1822 Anga Ke
1921 Kamiila
2008 Khekaa
2021 Shaashsha
2115 Zimiin
2118 Sylea (they should have a scout base too)
2136 Kiir (Red Zone)
2209 Nimluin
2401 Erkiim
2624 Idas
2640 Dishadshii
2709 Kimule
3028 Duuguu
3033 Ashmelam
3040 Unlakhar
3218 Kaskii (Red Zone, TL-14?)

Some worlds mentioned in the background and history of M:0 need to be
addressed.

The worlds mentioned about the Interstellar Confed are fine.

The Capital of the Chantestin Kingdom is NOT Keshi, It is obviously
CHANT!  In the 1100 data there is a Chant sector and a world called
Chant. This is one sector rimward of core sector and makes logic sence, as 
this is how it is mentioned in the M:0 text.
In the data it is 2224 "Kuula Iish" B160323-B 203.  I changed this to
2224 Chant B160664-B 203, yes it is a captured world, captured by the
Imperium!

Fornol and Shudusham, two worlds involved in the historic Shudusham
Concords, need to be addressed.

1715 Fornol was changed to another random name in MM e-mail data, change
it back.  Fornol in 1100 is an important hi pop world, and I believe it
would be in year 0 as well, and even before in circa -100 when the bomb 
killed the premier.
I used my system to change it.  It should be

1715 Fornol C5819CB-8

What is Shudusham in the M:0 book is not right.  The correct location is
2214 "Laruursha" just change the name as the UPP data is fine.

"Shudushamm" in the M:0 book should be "Nimluin" and was corected by MM

I am still trying to figure out where Santry and Cordova are supposed to
be, they don't seem right where they are in the M:0 book, mind you with
Keshii no longer the old Chantestin Kingdom, it makes it easy to place
them where they are in the M:0 book.

Hopefuly this is a start in the right direction :-)

Commander X

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 97 14:23:45 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Johnny's Grade Report

I didn't see the original of this, but I'm always happy to help fellow
teachers. ;->

>At 04:05 AM 26/06/97 GMT, you wrote:

>>Oh yes, I'm filling out failure reports.  If anyone can think of a tactful
>>way to say "Your offspring failed because they are rude obnoxious twits who
>>do no work, talk continuously, and handed in a nearly blank final exam."
>>_please_ email me -- I'm getting desperate :-/

John, exhibited good ability to communicate in informal situations with
peers, however he was much less adept at socialization skills required to
successfully compete in class or work environments.  John shows a good
understanding of personal stress-reduction techniques and leisure
activities, and works to provide challenged learning and work environments
for those around him.  During the term, John produced such small quantities
of work as to make it impossible to ascertain his true comprehension of
required course material, and this trend continued through his presentation
of a near pristine Final Examination. Therefore, I strongly recommend John
remain in this class for another term so his comprehension can be better
discerned.

In summary, I believe at this point, John is best suited for a career in
Government Services consumption, but with continued growth and application
of his displayed life skills he is a likely candidate for early
incarceration and frequent recidivism in our fast growing Penal System.


Hope this helps...<wink>,

Eris

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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 20:38:19 +0100
From: Bruce E J Lewis <bruce@legend.ftech.co.uk>
Subject: Off the List!

Hi,

	Sorry to bother you all with this, but I've been off the list for a few
days, and I thought it was because it was down. But I've just been informed
that it's been fine all that time, and so I've basically missed over two
day's worth of postings ;-( I have had to resubscribe as it appears I was
removed from the list for some reason.

	So, could some kind chap please tell me where I can get the archives from,
or failing that, could someone please email me anything really interesting
that came up, like decent web links, library data, orginal stuff etc,
whatever you deem possibly interesting, thanks.

	See ya...


Bruce E J Lewis - mailto:bruce@legend.ftech.co.uk
Telephone - 0956-506527

	From Barkingside, within the London home county of Essex, E N G L A N D

Spurs Ticket Info can be found at - http://web.ftech.net/~legend/fixtures.htm

	Tottenham Hotspur - "Everybody will be singing..."
	Paxton Road Stand - Block R, Row 14, Seat 58

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

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 07:44:09 +1100
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>
Subject: Re: TL of ramshackle empire

Harold Hale worte:

SNIP

>    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.  

I believe I said this a week or two ago :) I feel the chance of the 
3rd Imperium find any relic technology of TL13+ before they move into 
the Solomani Rim sector and old Terran Confederation space should be 
low to zero. 
 
>    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.

Especially a Vacc Suit, as there are a lot of different systems in 
one, and IIRC TL14 is a big break-point for materials tech, and O2 
storage tanks, and self-sealing, and skin-suits. Thus to make even a 
TL14 suit implies (to me, anyway) a full range of TL13 readily 
available to the manufacturers, and a wide range of this new TL14  
stuff. All you need for the spaceship is a shiny new TL14 Jump-5 
drive.
R. Boleyn <gtrupert@iconz.co.nz>

TNE to the Core

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 15:29:43 -0400
From: "Paul D. Owensby" <pauld@athens.net>
Subject: Doing Things Differently(Was Deckplan Questions)

>Eris,
>  yes, I guess I do *everything* differently. <sigh>

So, do you put your pants on two legs at a time, or just pull them over
your head? :)

**********************************************************
Paul Owensby (pauld@athens.net)                   
CEO and Chief Bottle Washer of ValuJump Lines
"So Economical, You'll Think You're Part of the Crew" (tm)
Pan-Imperia: http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Paul_Owensby/

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 13:23:11 -0700
From: Chris Griffen <cgriffen@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: TL of the Rule of Man (Don't call it Ramshackle!)

Ethan Henry wrote:

>IIRC, the "capitol" of the RoM moved steadily away from Terra,
>going coreward as the war front pushed farther and farther away
>from Terra. At one point, the capitol of the RoM was about halfway
>between Terra and Sylea, again, IIRC. No doubt the corridor between
>Terra and the current capitol would contain a lot of worlds that had
>signifigant high TL production capacity. In the end, at least some
>of these worlds would be closer to Sylea than Terra.

IIRC it only moved twice. First from Terra to Dingir. And then later from
Dingir to Hub/Ershur in Massilia sector.

Best,

Chris Griffen

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

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



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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 16:31:04 -0400
From: Rob Miracle <rwm@MPGN.COM>
Subject: Vacation

I am taking a vacation!!!!

Dave Brooks (dbj@tansoft.com) will be dealing with list issues in my
absence.  I doubt that I will have the ability to check my email while I am
gone.

See ya back on 7/7.

Rob

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 13:32:07 -0700
From: Chris Griffen <cgriffen@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Battledress and heroism

Douglas E. Berry wrote:

>At 09:48 AM 6/25/97 -0700, Chris Griffen wrote:
>
>>If you are highly skilled enough at certain tasks, say Gun Combat, you can
>>achieve impossible tasks that simply should not be possible. For instance,
>>you have good marksmanship skill, say Combat Rifleman-5. If you roll high
>>enough on your task roll, using a gauss rifle or whatever, you can
>>penetrate battledress and wound or even kill its wearer with one shot or
>>burst.
>
>Chris, as a former sniper, I was able to put 3 rounds through a half-inch
>target at 150m.  Doesn't it stand to reason that someone with a phenominal
>level of skill could find the weak point (visor, joints, etc..) and put one
>round where it counts?

Yes, but the MT rules allow you to make that shot while the individual in
battledress is moving at full speed. No sniper can make that shot without a
*serious* amount of luck. Now if the battledress wearer is moving slowly or
perfectly still, sure, a shot could be made at a joint.

Consider the shot that felled that first bank robber in L.A. a couple of
months ago. The sniper nailed him in the head because he had virtually
stopped moving. If he were running or even trotting, all the sniper could
hope for would be a lucky shot.

>Plus, the game is supposed to be *heroic*.. I don't want to have to have to
>tell a player that it's impossible to stop the charging Consular Guard.. I
>want him to know that he has a 1-in-a-hundred chance of making the shot.. I
>want to see sweat on those dice..  :)

I hear ya, but the odds with the MT system, unfortunately, are much better
than 1-in-100.

As for the game being heroic, what about when the *PCs* are the ones
wearing the battledress? They're subject to the same rules. This whole
scenario that I brought up was from a real gameplaying experience. One of
my players back in the MT days worked very hard to save up enough credits
to buy a suit of light battledress. Once he acquired it, he soon became
frustrated with the fact that he was still getting hit and seriously
wounded with great frequency.

The game can be heroic and realistic at the same time, but what's the point
of heroism if it wasn't earned? If you're facing a guy in battledress, you
better have some form of heavy weapon or man-portable high-energy weapon at
hand or the best form of heroism should be to run like hell! <g>

Best,

Chris Griffen

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

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


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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 13:28:20 -0700
From: Scott Ellsworth <Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu>
Subject: Re: The Jyhad in progress

At 09:44 AM 6/26/97 -0700, you wrote:
>Am I the only one who is beginning to find the level of discussion on the
>task system revision rapidly sliding into a personal war between factions?

Nope.

>I have reached the point where I am about to set a filter to remove *any*
>mention of KBv2.0, and send it to the trash immediately, because I am so
>offended by Kenneth's tone.  Mr. Bearden, I don't need to justify what I
>like and use in my game to you, Marc Miller, or anyone but my players.  I
>have played and run Traveller since 1977 and I resent your constantly
>insisting that yours is the only way.

While I do not think I am as annoyed as the above paragraph implies, I am
starting to get a bit tired of the evangelical tone of Kenneth's posts.
There are a few on the MT side as aggressive as well, so I am not trying to
single Kenneth out, but can we let this debate die?  Everyone knows the
sides, and now Marc has to decide what he will do about it.

Let me put one more plug for what I really really really want, far more
than a ne task system - player/ref background color.  It looks like Marc is
going to do that, but I want him to know that this gets unalloyed approval
from me.

1.  Definitions like the one Marc posted for EDU, expanded for all six
stats.  I liked it when he did it, and I think it is a great thing to have
as a ref or a player.  This tells someone just what their stat actually
means.  Note: in examples in the following, use whatever numbers work out
for your task system.

e.g. EDU A is a chap with a master's degree, or other work representing
several years of dedicated adult study.

2.  A similar list for skills.  Once again, it helps playing if you know
your Pilot-3 should act like a seasoned flyer, but not a Blue Angel.

e.g. Skill 3 is a professional level.  Most doctors, lawyers, brokers, and
so on, who have passed beyond an entry level are going to be this good.
They will be very impressed by 4s, and will consider a 2 as an entry level
slot, or a trainee, but someone who can perform the job in normal times.

If it is not obvious, a third list for task difficulties, IN WORDS.

e.g. An average task is one that a professional faces regularly, and they
rarely fail at it.  (This implies things about the rest of the system, but
words can be vague enough that minor fiddling is not needed.  For example,
rarely fail could be 80%, or 90% with a careful task, or 70% with two
attempts.  All up to the system designer how he or she wants to play it.)

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

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 97 14:49:25 -0500
From: eris@pen.net (Eris Reddoch)
Subject: Re: Generic Task Descriptions

On 06/26/97 at 01:51 PM,  "J." <Jonathan@hccm.co.uk> said:

>So the constants are Skill names, stat names and difficulty levels,  my
>suggestion is whenever a task is printed in an adventure or supplement or
>in JTAS print it only using these things, for example:

>        To put on a Vacc suit
>        Average, DEX, Vacc suit
>        increase difficulty level if in a confined space
>        decrease difficulty level if another character is assisting

>It's easy to understand and it's not specific to any task system. It's
>usable by everyone regardless of rules system without modification (I
>haven't had chance to check the details).

J, it looks good to me.  The GM can take this description and put it into
the format required by a specific task system very easily. It makes tasks
much easier to use across systems and with house rules.


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

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

Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 21:28:17 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Apology to the List

> I have reached the point where I am about to set a filter to remove *any*
> mention of KBv2.0, and send it to the trash immediately, because I am so
> offended by Kenneth's tone. 

Douglas, I think that you are right in this comment.  I get so tied 
up in what I believe that I come across too strong.  If I were saying 
these words to you in person, you would see that there is no malice 
in them.  It's just an honest passion for something.

I do recognize that I have become tiresome to some people and am 
being percieved as a jerk.  Not all list members feel this way, and 
I've gotten some private support for the comments I make.

But, for those that are offended by my tone, I apologize, and I 
promise to make more of an effort to come across more polite when I 
make my posts.

We should agree to disagree on some topics--not let the conversation 
devolve into a personal attack.  Although this discussion is not 
there yet, I fear that it is headed that way.

I guess it is a good thing that I cannot be on the list for a while.

> A few facts as I see them:
> 
> 1>  Neither KBv2.0 or MT is going to be the new task sytem.

> 2>  The new task system has to be compatible with what has gone before,
> since there are several thousand Traveller players who are not on the TML
> who need to be able to use T4.1 without invalidating all their prior
> materials.

These two statements are more correct than you probably know.

Again, I apologize to anyone who has perceived me as being a jerk.  
I'm really not, and I will try to prove that to you with my future 
postings.

Thanks, Douglas, for a good post.

Kenneth.

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

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 1997 09:07:52 +1200
From: Brody  Dunn <brody@intersol.co.nz>
Subject: RE: The Jyhad in progress

On Friday, June 27, 1997 4:45 AM, Douglas E. Berry
[SMTP:dberry@hooked.net] wrote:
> Am I the only one who is beginning to find the level of discussion on
the
> task system revision rapidly sliding into a personal war between
factions?

Nope - I'm deleting a lot of mail esentially unread at the moment. 
Can't wait for it to be resolved for good ;)

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

Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 21:36:47 +0000
From: "Kenneth Bearden" <dreamer@weck.brokersys.com>
Subject: Re: Task Debate

> Kenneth Spewed forth yesterday, and amongst his war of words by spamming
> the list, put forth the following:

> Obviously, Kenneth has been totally *B*L*I*N*D* to the goings on of the
> past 2 years on TML

 and ken is
> rabidly ignoring reality.

> I can follow it, but I wholly disagree with the line of spam ken is serving.


William, 

It is people like you who degrade debates into personal flame 
wars.  There is no call to make personal attacks against me.

You are more than entitiled to disagree with what I say, but you need 
not try to get under my collar with this type of verbage.

I haven't been attacking anybody personnally.  There is no call to 
start that now.

Kenneth.

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 14:36:16 -0800
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
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.

Well, "mine" is GURPS (I play GURPS Traveller).  However, I, in fact,
basically agree with the posts advocating T4.1 and MT as both better.

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 14:45:08 -0800
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Can Stat + Skill Be 'Broken'?

Thu, 26 Jun 1997 08:54:09 +0100, "Silburn, Luke (Exchange)"
<SilburnL@logica.com>
> <<Exactly, it makes stats harder (more costly) to get.  I amazes me that
> some claim that any system that uses stat+skill must be "broken" since
> so many very decent systems work this way.>>

> But other systems that use Stat + Skill have the two factors
> contributing roughly equal portions to the target number. For example in
> Ars Magica 3rd, stats ranged between +/-5 and skills generally went up
> to about 4-5 (unless the character was very focused).

Well, this is true.  First let me point out that this still contridicts
those who say that any system that lets stats and skill have equal
weight
is "broken".  Also, I will point out that there are also such systems
where the stat is based on a bell curve (like Hero and GURPS) where they
work because the "effective" range of stats (ie the range among a
typical
group of players) is comperable.  For traveller you need to compare
the effective range, rather than the 2-15 range so often quoted.
If you just teak the character generation so that you stats are
harder to get than skills, then thing will work out.

> I don't think anyone went so far as to say that ArM3 was 'broken', but I
> saw plenty of comments (both within the online ArM community and over on
> rec.games.frp.misc) to the effect that it undervalued skills.

Well, yes.  I've seen posts like this for GURPS to.  And, in fact, you
see
posts on both sides and it becomes clear that each side is arguing their
own gaming preference and not some objectively demonstatable postion.
______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 15:13:17 -0600
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@sk.sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Yet another Vote Count, 26th of June, Call to vote included.

Volker A. Greimann wrote:

> No concensus has been reached so far, maybe the undecided
> voters could now choose between the main contenders and cast their
> votes with the faction most desireavle to them.....

Consensus will *never* be reached, so what's the point of keeping track?

This whole "faction" bit is reminding me too much of MegaTraveller. Is
this some kind of task system civil war? Coming soon... "T4.1: The
Shattered TML."

In any event, the whole vote tallying is pretty moot. Marc was looking
for opinions and input, reasons for the dissatisfaction of T4.0. He
wasn't looking to decide what Task System T4.1 will have based on our
vote!

Newsflash: MT task system will *not* replace T4. Neither will KBv2.0,
though it *might* influence it -- Marc seemed to indicate that he might
nudge skill levels into the 1-15 range somehow, to give skills more
weight. I also suspect he'll change SS & SF, too. (The Swami speaks! ho
ho ho... heyo!)


When news of the final decision on T4.1 reaches us, some people will be
happy, some will be disappointed, but I for one will be relieved. People
who don't like it will "roll their own" and life will go on.

Lets stop this Task Warz stuff. Discussion is welcome. But silly vote
tallying and flamefests aren't constructive and are a waste of
bandwidth.

Glenn Hoppe,
Task System Agnostic :)


PS. I also think these emotional religious crusades, without logical
reasoning, against non-2d6 systems, and the insistance that skill levels
should stop at 6 like the good ol' days are silly. Lets move on you
crazy Luddites! ;-P

Whew! I'm glad I got all that off my chest.

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 14:51:30 -0800
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu>
Subject: Stat vs Skill. A reprised, reprise.

> <<Yes, but the iteration isn't random.  Players will tend to
> want to have some skills at higher levels and pick them over
> and over.>>
> 
> I think I see a mismatch in assumptions. Are you basing your analysis on
> permitting players to *pick* from the skill lists? IIRC thats an
> optional rule in T4 (and not a great one IMO, since it invites all sorts
> of mini-maxing abuses unless heavily policed).

OTOH, it gets hard to make a rational character design if you
keep getting assigned randomly distributed skills.  In any
case, the fact still remain that his applies equally to
stats and skill and that stats have an additional bell
curve distribution from the roll.

> <<Another way of looking at it is that characters have a
> base of 0 for skills and 7 for stats.  It just that the
> random part of the generation system gives characters 
> a chance of having a bonus or penalty (this will be a
> +2 to a -2 for 2/3 of the characters) in certain types
> of skills to reflect talent.>>

> True. Or +3 to -3 from a base of 8 (if we are being true to the 1 - 15
> range that represents the limits of human possibilities).  But skills
> will still tend to range from 0 to +3 if they are being randomly
> assigned (from groups of six admittedly).

Um no.  I'm talking about the base going into the experience
section of character creation.  This is fixed at 0 for skills.
You get a distribution of increases from that, but that is
true for both skills and stats.

> I agree with you about the
> need to make stat increases more expensive in chargen BTW, although the
> need becomes less pressing if stats are toned down in the task system.

I would say that it is better to change the system where you use
it once (character creation) rather than where you use it every
time you roll (task resolution).
______________________________
summers@alum.mit.edu

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 20:23:01 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Meta-facts?

Dave Golden wrote:

>>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.
>
>	Glad I'm not the only one thinking that ... frankly, it turned me off
>early. I got the distinct feeling they were trying to erase TNE as quickly
>as possible by bringing in new people, but wound up doing worse damage.

1) TNE had some of the best MT supplements ever (Survival Margin and the
Regency Sourcebook), if you get what I mean. Erasing TNE wouldn't work - I
also liked FFS (but gimme Thruster Plates!).

2) The stuff from Core has stuck v. close to 'canon'. CSC/EA seem to suffer
from the same error about the RoM's TL - easily remedied. I bought EA and
CSC, but any references to RoM TL>13 I assume is M1100. Anyway, when you
normally play at TL15 it isn't a problem.

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"You may not recall the moment you asked me, but your
invitation was clear. You'll pretend you never met me,
but it's far too late now I'm here." Hogarth/Helmer

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

Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 20:22:04 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: T4.1 Task System

I will carry on resisting the task debate.
I will carry on resisting the task debate.
I will carry on resisting the task debate.
I will carry on resisting the task debate.
Oh *&^%$, no I won't anymore - a return to the fray...

Rob Prior wrote:

>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.

I agree. That's why I suggested keeping T4.1 and putting KBv2 in the
sidebar... I just want a more skills based system available. How I treat it
is dependent on my game and players.

MT was one of the best games I have ever played, but turning back the clock
is not going to solve the problem. If T4 is trying to attract newbies, it
needs a degree of consistency to be held. Change to MT, and even with the
task names the same you have a fundamentally different system. T4.1 isn't
*that* different...

We need compromise, we need to minimise the changes to T4 (for Marc's sake,
if not our own), and we need an alternative system that isn't skill-lite.
Traveller is the background, and the task system is the physical framework
over which the background is slipped. If we change it dramatically (T4,
T4.1 (PE), T4.2...) we risk losing new players, and with them any future
development of the game if IG goes under.

Unless DGP try and buy it again... <g>

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"You may not recall the moment you asked me, but your
invitation was clear. You'll pretend you never met me,
but it's far too late now I'm here." Hogarth/Helmer

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1487
***********************************
